Book 4 - Page 195

My read is Parson did try to give a bit of a nudge, but his response on seeing Sizemore's reaction was compassion and insight into his friend which lead to what seems to be a promising conversation - Parson giving Sizemore a conceptual "set of rules" by which he can think about breaking rules.

We have to remember that leadership does involve a wise and judicious amount of manipulation. I had an opportunity for that yesterday at my work - we had a complicated task that needed doing and a lot of people floundering at getting it done. I reframed it by talking about the end goal and getting people off being stuck trying to work out which intermediate step took priority. I can't take credit for the result because once everybody had a shared idea and ownership we got the outcome in very good order. Was it the right thing to do? Yes. Was it manipulation in terms of I analysed people's behaviour and led them to change it to meet my perceived outcome? Sure. It definitely wasn't malicious. (For the record, I am very much not the big boss but do have a supervisor's level of influence which I try to use well).

Big 'M' manipulation will work for a bit too. We all know the friend, workmate or relative who pushes everyone's buttons. I worked for a boss who framed every workplace conversation in terms of "if we don't do it senior management are going to start firing people." Eventually they had basically discredited themselves - for the same reason nobody listened to the boy who cried wolf.

I don't think Parson is this kind of manipulator by nature, but I do think he made the conscious decision to prod Sizemore to get the result his side needed. He does have a tendency to prioritise expedience over the wellbeing of people he cares for, which is why he and Sizemore have had such a rift - turning a pacifist into a mass murderer will do that for you. It will be interesting to see if this newer personal interaction will start a phase of healing between them.

Also, related to my last comment I found a record of the one time Jack tried it on with Wanda:

The sequence in question is most likely Book 3, Page 119. Jack goes into some detail about the difference between normal senses and Foolamancy perception on Book 2, Page 54. I feel that there might be another page where this kind of perception is described, but it will require a more skilled Findamancer to locate.

Thank you so much - you've certainly earned a good whack of Findamancy XP today.

Parson wanted Sizemore to flee to the Magic Kingdom, along with Wanda and Maggie. He couldn't order it because the summoning spell instilled him with duty.

If Sizemore hadn't become a mass murderer (your words, not mine), Gobwin Knob would have ended. Sizemore's duty is as much to blame as Parson's.

A better example would be how Bogroll met his end. He had a relationship with Bogroll. He didn't need to send his lackey on the suicide mission. He had other twolls.

Well spotted, have a schmucker

To be fair, Bogroll did kind of ask for it.

Good point...I'd forgotten those.

What an absolutely delightful update! I love the interaction here, especially between Parson and Sizemore. For me, this exemplifies how Parson is changing Erfword. Getting people to think outside of the 'box' - outside of their discipline, in this case.
I love the last image, where his position -I'm behind you, Sizemore!-, attitude and words show to be a respectful coaching.

And it's great to see how Sizemore's love and respect for Janis impels him to try again and succeed, to prove her wrong. Which completely put the following OOTS comic in mind [by Rich Burlew, who staged the ground where Erfworld got started, too].

I wouldn'be surprised if this helps Sizemore to show some of the development he's been pining for, for so long. It would greatly help his spirit and his faith in himself if he succeeds.

In addition to this wonderful example of character interplay, the comic answers a lot of questions:

• Stanley knows the Amendment was Signed, but he appears not to know what it entails - and therefore ro not know the details


• The fact that Stanley doesn't disband Parson on the spot shows how much his respect for Parson has grown


• Sizemore is almost of out juice… so he won't be able to do much about the sealed portals in the MK or the Battle of the Dirtamancers

It's unlike me to write a post without first reading the thread, but I was too bubbly with warm enthousiasm about this bit of the story to wait posting about it


Which… I did. I never pressed send. And there's a new page that I've just come to read, so I'll just press send and read the thread later.

The issue at hand is Sizemore’s relationship with Parson. I chose the example deliberately and used a term Sizemore himself might use when thinking about it.

The fact that Charlie managed to cast a Thinkamancy spell, which I agree was probably not related to the Arkendish, does not necessarily mean that he is a novice Thinkamancer. Maybe he carnies the rules a little, whenever he needs to cast spells outside of his discipline. if that is how he does it, it may even explain why he has still not gained a novitiate in any other discipline: because he doesn't really look beyond the boundaries of his own discipline.

His insight into 'the central power of Croakamancy' -if correct- need not be even close to enough
for gaining a novitiate in it. As you correctly mentioned, he has never talked about strings. This could mean that he cannot sense them, and may not know about them.

It was the discovery of a different type of string that made Maggie a (presumed) novice Date-a-mancer. I wouldn't be surprised if learning to use a sense other than the senses you were popped with and that form the foundation of your discipline, is a or the prerequisite for learning another discipline.

For Maggie, this happened when her Thinkamancy senses were temporarily unavailable. A rare situation, as we were led to believe. Which may explain why most casters do not gain such insights.