Book 3 - Page 94

The Battle for Castle Lilith

Book 3 - Page 94
Comic - Book 3 - Page 94
Recent posts... (See full thread)
Sir Dr D wrote:
ManaCaster wrote:
Maybe units function like "living" software. They are hardwired to react to things in a certain way, but with Carnymancy or sufficient willpower can temporarily override their default behavior.


That's how I see it working. It is the only way to make sense of the information we have received so far. Units brains enforce the rules of what happens to them. (falling, taking damage, what happens when you enter a portal, etc) Carynmancy temporarily reprograms the unit, but it only works if the unit is not aware that is happening.

Because of the way Carynmancy is described I also believe a Carnmancer cannot cast Carnmancy on himself. It would be like Jack falling for his own illusions.

Well, we know they can cast upon themselves, because it was directly stated that they do.
Sir Dr D wrote:

Because of the way Carynmancy is described I also believe a Carnmancer cannot cast Carnmancy on himself. It would be like Jack falling for his own illusions.

As Lipkin mentioned, Janis says they cast on themselves in the page Carnymancy is described.

Jack can see through his own illusions, but that doesn't necessarily mean he cannot sense them. I presume a Carnymancer would simply be more conscious of things other units take for granted when self casting.
I see Carnies casting on themselves as general stagemancy. They'd make great politicians. Cast on myself to believe the lies I'm convincing someone else to believe. It's acting the part and becoming the character. With the added bonus of feeling the mark's level of belief, knowing what topics to back off from or knowing how far the truth can be bent before they realize they're being conned. "The great deceiver" has other names. More signamancy? Or am I being Carniemancer prejudiced? A liar is gonna lie.
ManaCaster wrote:
Sir Dr D wrote:

Because of the way Carynmancy is described I also believe a Carnmancer cannot cast Carnmancy on himself. It would be like Jack falling for his own illusions.

As Lipkin mentioned, Janis says they cast on themselves in the page Carnymancy is described.
.


That casting is something different. It seems the first stage of casting a carynmancer spell is to cast something on yourself, which then allows you to cast a carnymancer effect on somebody else. That doesn't mean you can cast the carnymancer effect on yourself. Another analogy is taking a placebo doesn't work if you know it is a placebo.
Quote:
Lipkin wrote:
And no, the bonus is often referred to as just "leadership." Before Parson showed up, few Erflings realized the difference between the bonus, and actual leadership. You can be a bad leader with a great bonus. Bad leader, great leadership.


One thing we should remember is that Erfworld bonuses are based on the system/physics inherent to Erfworld. To a Stupidworlder, these will be essentially arbitrary. Erfworlders understand that leadership gives a bonus to units, but they may not necessarily understand the Signamancy of that bonus (i.e. the traits of inspiration, team-building, being decisive) that any Stupidworlder can due to our different perspective of the same quality (Leadership.)

In other words, every Stupidworlder would see these traits automatically as they are built into our world and be able to recognize them easily. On the other hand, we would have trouble quantifying leadership numerically and precisely. Conversely, every Erfworlder will be able to easily percieve the quantifiable nature of leadership, but due to their reliance on that perception, not be able to easily recognize the traits (or Signamancy to use Erfworld parlance) of Leadership, Side culture notwithstanding.
ManaCaster wrote:

Maybe units function like "living" software. They are hardwired to react to things in a certain way, but with Carnymancy or sufficient willpower can temporarily override their default behavior.


Yeah I considered the "Erfworld is actually a program" approach. So in that sense belief isn't actually changed but behavior is. There is some overlap between the two but they are not identical. Units in this sense are bundles of algorithms, but these algorithms aren't purely psychological or cognitive ones, but physical ones as well.

If this is true, it would mean Janus made a mistaken equivocation between the two. Units might have a some intuition or knowledge of their behaviors or properties, ergo, "belief." But Janus is reversing cause-and-effect. Parson is from Stupidworld, so he has new capabilities but not necessarily the knowledge of them.

Clearly, units like Count Topotato can be mistaken about what they are actually capable of, no matter what they believe.
DVL wrote:
ManaCaster wrote:

Maybe units function like "living" software. They are hardwired to react to things in a certain way, but with Carnymancy or sufficient willpower can temporarily override their default behavior.


Yeah I considered the "Erfworld is actually a program" approach. So in that sense belief isn't actually changed but behavior is. There is some overlap between the two but they are not identical. Units in this sense are bundles of algorithms, but these algorithms aren't purely psychological or cognitive ones, but physical ones as well.

If this is true, it would mean Janus made a mistaken equivocation between the two. Units might have a some intuition or knowledge of their behaviors or properties, ergo, "belief." But Janus is reversing cause-and-effect. Parson is from Stupidworld, so he has new capabilities but not necessarily the knowledge of them.

Clearly, units like Count Topotato can be mistaken about what they are actually capable of, no matter what they believe.


In retrospect: I hate this explanation.

1) Units can believe correct things about their capability.
2) Units can believe incorrect things about their capability.
3) Units can be ignorant of their capability.

Carnymancers can alter capability and belief?
It says a lot of nothing that we didn't already know before.
Guynietoren wrote:
I see Carnies casting on themselves as general stagemancy. They'd make great politicians. Cast on myself to believe the lies I'm convincing someone else to believe. It's acting the part and becoming the character. With the added bonus of feeling the mark's level of belief, knowing what topics to back off from or knowing how far the truth can be bent before they realize they're being conned. "The great deceiver" has other names. More signamancy? Or am I being Carniemancer prejudiced? A liar is gonna lie.


I think Carnymancers could make great mediators and fixers. Dove Barstool did offer to act as an advocate for Digdoug and find him work.

It's not that Carnymancers can't do these things, but that they won't. And as a whole, I despise them.

It's a lot like racism. It can only exist if both parties, inside and outside the race, agree that the construction is meaningful. If you just mindlessly adopt the customs and groupthink of your peers you are proving that construction to be meaningful. That Carnymancers behave this way makes me despise them.

If you had a choice, do you want to adopt a culture of spiteful meanness and an embattled us-versus-them siege mentality, while living hand-to-mouth? But this is precisely what Carnies do. They're shitty and crude people.

MK casters don't expect Thinkamancers to go around scrambling brains or Florists to get people hooked on narcotics for their immediate and personal gain. The fact that people expect malice out of Carnies says to me that they haven't bothered to make a reputation elsewise.
DVL wrote:

It's a lot like racism. It can only exist if both parties, inside and outside the race, agree that the construction is meaningful. If you just mindlessly adopt the customs and groupthink of your peers you are proving that construction to be meaningful. That Carnymancers behave this way makes me despise them.

If you had a choice, do you want to adopt a culture of spiteful meanness and an embattled us-versus-them siege mentality, while living hand-to-mouth? But this is precisely what Carnies do. They're shitty and crude people.

You mind elaborating on this? Because right now it sounds like you're saying, "It's not my fault I'm racist!", which is an excellent example of victim blaming.
almondsandrain wrote:
DVL wrote:

It's a lot like racism. It can only exist if both parties, inside and outside the race, agree that the construction is meaningful. If you just mindlessly adopt the customs and groupthink of your peers you are proving that construction to be meaningful. That Carnymancers behave this way makes me despise them.

If you had a choice, do you want to adopt a culture of spiteful meanness and an embattled us-versus-them siege mentality, while living hand-to-mouth? But this is precisely what Carnies do. They're shitty and crude people.

You mind elaborating on this? Because right now it sounds like you're saying, "It's not my fault I'm racist!", which is an excellent example of victim blaming.


I'm sure that's what it sounds like, but far too often I see members of an oppressed group who think the real injustice is that they aren't the ones doing the oppressing. On top of this, I immensely mistrust groupthink.

If you think, for example, that outsiders are unclean and it's okay to exploit or steal from them, all you're doing is reinforcing a groupthink that's harmful to everybody. As soon as you can build an identity around that, everybody loses. You'd have to be insane to ignore a segment of the culture that thinks that's okay. People inside and outside the group are going to be trained to make prejudgments. And the sad part is that this is actually functional behavior.

In our fantasy example, Carnies are that group. Any other caster discipline can really set out to make your life hell if they wanted to. Florists really really really frown upon weaponising poisons. And for whatever reason, nobody expects Thinkamancers to simply manipulate people with suggestions constantly. Maybe part of the cause is that Carnies are economically disadvantaged, but it clearly is possible to do better for all that. They're not the only "poor" caster type. But people assume by default that Carnies will try and cheat you rather than being restrained by any finer mores or principle.

That's the trouble here. There's a segment of Gypsy culture that thinks that. And makes it a part of their identity. You can say, "well not all Gyspies." Well of course not. But the ones that bully doctors (entirely on their own antisocial terms), seclude themselves and think it's okay steal from outsiders nonetheless exist. (There's a whole episode on House about that too. Which apparently is actually real, given the cultural sensitivity course I was once required to take.)

I can start to see why some black people are seen as "race traitors" when what they want to break group stereotypes. And I'm tired of the crass over-familiarity with other members of my group. It's typically the dumbest people of my ethnicity who seem to assume that I should do special favors for people because "I'm one of them." I want nothing to do with them. They're strangers and particularly dull-witted ones at that.

I'd like to meet the Carny who doesn't want to be a carnival barker or have neighbors that have mean and flinty suspicions about everybody else.

Nobody can be blind to race, and it's why everybody is a "little racist." It's a noble sentiment to claim that "You don't see color." But that's impracticable. And unless you do, there's no way of rectifying racism, since it's a lazy way of begging-off the examination of ones own biasees.

Sociologists have proven that new hires are skewed by small subjective biases. One of these guys developed an association test and no matter how he tried to game his own test, he found he couldn't break negative or positive associations he had with race, even though he never particularly considered himself racist.