Book 3 - Page 207

Shore thing

Book 3 - Page 207
Comic - Book 3 - Page 207
Recent posts... (See full thread)
I gotta weigh in on the Sizemore battle we have going on.

I think there is a very clear reason why he seems immature and simplistic in his views. He is younger than we expect. We know he created a lot of golems, all day every day, and we know that on days he wasn't doing that he was mostly mining, with Gobwins and probably his golems. He talked with other Mancers in the EmKay, but most of his days have been spent in near or total solitude. He is not as philosophical as he was originally painted by his interest in other disciplines.

He's emotionally immature to the ways of Erfworld because he got to spend his entire young like without a battle. TBfGK was his first contact/first croak, after a life of peace and non-violence.

I think it makes him relatable and and is a completely understandable response to the sudden change... To paraphrase Koenma of Yuyu-Hakasho: "Sizemore lived his life in Black and White. But when he saw the atrocities possible at the Battle for GK, he was suddenly introduced to Grey... Tons and tons of Grey."
DukeofTuring wrote:
Huh, I really had no idea there were so many Sizemore haters out there. Good to see that the forums at least seem divided on the issue.

PleaseDontYellAtMe wrote:
Has anyone guessed that the favor is to get Ivan and Claud to turn to GK and it's Phil's mount sending the Thinkagram to the MKBunker?
Emphasis added. Are you suggesting that Phil the predictamancer is actually the groundhog or am I just confused?


That is exactly my theory. :D

It's never the groundhog that changes. It is the groundhog's mount that changes and people accept the verbal Foolamancy saying it's not actually the same Phil.
PleaseDontYellAtMe wrote:
DukeofTuring wrote:
PleaseDontYellAtMe wrote:
Has anyone guessed that the favor is to get Ivan and Claud to turn to GK and it's Phil's mount sending the Thinkagram to the MKBunker?
Emphasis added. Are you suggesting that Phil the predictamancer is actually the groundhog or am I just confused?


That is exactly my theory. :D

It's never the groundhog that changes. It is the groundhog's mount that changes and people accept the verbal Foolamancy saying it's not actually the same Phil.
And another one of this race of sentient, secretly casting rodents is also controlling Vinny, then. Interesting, they've actually got a lot of pieces in play :).

Noobamancer wrote:
[Sizemore] idealises Janis as a mother figure, rarely questioning her despite the fact that she is clearly involved in some rather... shady things (including summoning Parson). He idealised Parson until Parson didn't live up to his expectations (then "mother" had to step in and tell him to play nice with Parson).

He idealised the MK - it's not that the MK was a more horrible place than most sides, but in Sizemore's mind, it was a perfect place of peace and tranquility because HE wasn't subject to any of it's shortcomings.
You've really got to provide some sort of support for those statements or it's just personal speculation. Can't say much more than that.

Noobamancer wrote:
He vilified Parson because of his actions at the battle for GK and later in the MK, but he doesn't acknowledge his own part in making that happened - he was the one who taught Parson [...] much of what he knows about magic. Sizemore has been an enabler for much of what he resents Parson for, but he takes no responsibility for it, instead projecting it all on Parson.
First off, Sizemore's bound by duty to help Parson/GK. But as far as the early training goes, imagine Sizemore's position when first meeting Parson. He hears about this "Summoned Perfect Warlord" that just joins his side, meets the guy, and finds out that he gets along pretty well with him. Maybe he knows that his mentor Janis helped get the spell worked out and has great expectations for this warlord. Early book 1 Parson isn't adverse to guiding military operations, sure, but he's also treats other "lesser" GK units with unusual kindness and is clearly a pretty cerebral guy. Maybe he can achieve even a longshot GK victory with minimal bloodshed, being "perfect" warlord and all. Plenty of Erfworld conflicts (particularly in the backer stories, particularly particularly with the So-be-it Union) end without bleeding one or both sides dry: sides retreat, negotiate ceasefires, and occasionally even manage to come out as allies in the end. So maybe this Perfect Warlord Parson can find a better way to wage war. Helping Parson learn about magic may well put more of those non-violent or less-violent tools at his disposal, and maybe some of Sizemore's hippieness will rub off on him along the way.

Obviously it hasn't worked out that way. But Sizemore may have genuinely believed that this "Perfect Warlord", whose creation was backed by the Grand Abbie no less, would have some way of waging war thing might be more peaceful.

Noobamancer wrote:
Finally, his outrage seems to be mostly about what he himself loses: HE had to participate in killing, HE lost his status and HIS safe haven. He seems less concerned about the death and suffering in the world, and more about his personal losses.
Sizemore's "only human", so to speak. He's more appalled by violence that he's part of than by remote, abstract violence. If Sizemore (on anyone in Stuipdworld, for that matter) wasn't emotionally insulated from horrors going on out of sight then he'd go crazy from the constant barrage of suffering. It's not intellectually consistent, certainly, but Sizemore's bound by duty and keeping the killing at a distance does let him stay sane.

And he's upset by the effects of the GK force in the MK on his well being, sure, but everyone always seems to forget that, right before he gripes about that, he tries to explain to Parson how offensive his actions have been to most of the MK. He's complaining about personal suffering but its suffering that Parson just inflicted, to some extent, on most of the MK. Had Parson listened more closely to Sizemore, the discontented caster he should have been most able to empathize with, PG might have realized what a looming threat the free casters of the MK were becoming.

Noobamancer wrote:
He feels very human, just not a human I like very much.
Well I certainly can't argue with that :).

Noobamancer wrote:
As far as the MKs "dystopian" nature, I think the issue is that Sizemore's idealised view poorly matches how it is described in other sources. It has a meritocratic side, but heavily influenced by something which comes close to a caste system [...]. We know from backer stories that free casters disband from lack of upkeep with some frequency, and that justice in the MK is essentially a lynch mob of the "haves", where popularity and politics is more important than guilt.
Pretty much like any society without a strong central government, then? I certainly wouldn't say that the MK is a perfect place, but compared to the rest of Erfworld it seems much more peaceful and tolerant of what might be called "personal freedoms". "Breaking" the MK has (or would have?) destroyed a place with some unique virtues.

Noobamancer wrote:
Finally, Parson could well have been the perfect warlord FOR GK AT THE TIME OF HIS SUMMONING. There may be better warlords for the current situation. Parson is not a brilliant diplomat, he's a gamer that seems to specialise in scenarios. It may not be so strange that he's winning battles but having trouble with wars.
Yeah, but that's also kind of what I'm getting at. I can't imagine a "perfect" warlord that wouldn't be fully adaptable to changing circumstances/roles. Maybe they just didn't call it "Summon Perfect Warlord for Your Current Predicament" because the long name didn't market well? :)

charles wrote:
I'll agree with others that Sizemore is emotionally immature.

I think this page shows it somewhat: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book%203/176

but I'll join many of those same people in saying I still like the character in the story setting and think he's a good, well built character with.
I don't see emotional immaturity there, though, it's a philosophical discussion that Sizemore's having trouble keeping up with. It might show intellectual immaturity, or perhaps the subject of "justice" just isn't one that Sizemore's given much thought to.

CarniDollMancer wrote:
I gotta weigh in on the Sizemore battle we have going on. [...]

He's emotionally immature to the ways of Erfworld because he got to spend his entire young like without a battle. TBfGK was his first contact/first croak, after a life of peace and non-violence.
I wouldn't call that emotional immaturity either though. He's certainly been more sheltered than many people we've seen but that doesn't necessarily invalidate his views. Sometimes people can't adjust to the "real world", sure, but sometimes an outside perspective is just what you need to recognize the injustice or perversion of things.
DukeofTuring wrote:
Pointyleaf wrote:
And you guys *know* that we're not going to be told what it is, right
To be clear, you're not suggesting we'll never find out what it is, are you? Keeping the favor a secret from the readers for a while seems like a fair, if frustrating, device for keeping readers in suspense. But I expect we'll at least be able to figure out what the favor was eventually unless, you know, this little sideplot is completely irrelevant :).


Oh, yeah. I mean that we probably won't find out what the task is until the climatic conflict. It'll be part of that climatic unveiling, and this is part of the build-up.

----

Anyways, re: Sizemore's emotionally immaturity, I expect we're about to find out. Sizemore, buddy, don't say "anything" unless you really, really mean it. Did you really think that through? Do you really know what you're willing to do? Do you know yourself that well?

Sizemore's a bit of a woobie. He's kind and lovable and sympathetic, but he's not a guy with strong, independent thoughts and feelings. He hasn't yet come into his own, as such. And it may very well be that coming into his own means that he's going to screw up some first.
DukeOfTuring, I think we are pretty much in agreement about what has happent, we just draw some different conclusions from it. I think most of your explanations regarding why Sizemore acts the way he does are reasonable and quite likely to be accurate. I simply interpret those explanations to indicate a lower degree of emotional maturity than you seem to do. Would be a boring old world if we all agreed on everything though.

As for the state of the magic kingdom, I think you're spot on. The MK isn't a bad place as such (I would rather live there than be part of any side, though I can imagine Noobamancers wouldn't have many employment opportunities) but I think that Sizemore's view of it is extremely idealised.
I'm sorry for abandoning the conversation. I ended up back flat on my back in the hospital for the night so Im back to holding a tablet above my face. Im constantly afraid Im going to drop it right on my nose as I type! So Ill just add a Me too! Thanks for hashing that out!
DukeofTuring wrote:

Xellos wrote:
I don't like him because he's negative about literally everything.
Be careful using the L word there. And, to name one prominent example, his negativity towards Parson breaking the MK rules with increasing boldness seem to have been pretty prescient. Parson might benefit if he though a bit less laterally and stayed a more grounded.

Rest assured, I know what I write :D. When I really can't remember a single instance of him being positive about anything (acceptance doesn't count), I'm free to use "literally" meaning "literally", not "figuratively".
DukeofTuring wrote:
charles wrote:
I'll agree with others that Sizemore is emotionally immature.

I think this page shows it somewhat: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book%203/176

but I'll join many of those same people in saying I still like the character in the story setting and think he's a good, well built character with.
I don't see emotional immaturity there, though, it's a philosophical discussion that Sizemore's having trouble keeping up with. It might show intellectual immaturity, or perhaps the subject of "justice" just isn't one that Sizemore's given much thought to.


I wouldn't even go that far. If you ambushed me with a question like this, you'd have me flummoxed for a good bit. Mostly because the concept of justice is abstract, partially subjective and does little to flesh out concrete policies.
When did Sizemore get so jacked? Guy's in pretty good shape now!
My God the MK is beautiful. I would love to live there if the sky looks like that at night. Also, Sizemore has the same body build as me. I'm not sure how I feel about that.

Oh and he's being tempted to do something that may be against the interests of his side. I guess that might be important. Maybe.