Book 4 - Epilogue 1

Did I leave something running?

Book 4 - Epilogue 1
Comic - Book 4 - Epilogue 1

Recent posts... (See full thread)
Umbrathor wrote:

Why spell Isaac as Issac? I see so many peple do that. Some even misspelled the name six times in a single post, and quite consistently, so maybe this is a Thing and not a Typo.

I assume that it's some combination of laziness and learning disabilities/differences. I know there are some people who have learning differences (dyslexia, and so on) which make correct spelling a real challenge, so it's good to show some leniency. On the other hand, there can't be that many people with bona fide learning disorders, so I would assume that many of these cases are people simply being too lazy to learn how to spell a simple common name like Isaac. Which is infuriating, but it's almost impossible to tell who's doing it out of laziness and who's doing it because of dyslexia.
greycat wrote:
Umbrathor wrote:

Why spell Isaac as Issac? I see so many peple do that. Some even misspelled the name six times in a single post, and quite consistently, so maybe this is a Thing and not a Typo.

I assume that it's some combination of laziness and learning disabilities/differences. I know there are some people who have learning differences (dyslexia, and so on) which make correct spelling a real challenge, so it's good to show some leniency. On the other hand, there can't be that many people with bona fide learning disorders, so I would assume that many of these cases are people simply being too lazy to learn how to spell a simple common name like Isaac. Which is infuriating, but it's almost impossible to tell who's doing it out of laziness and who's doing it because of dyslexia.

I know, which is why I haven't commented on it before. But usually, the other words in the posts are spelled correctly. Just the name Isaac isn't. That makes me believe it's not dyslexia, but a Thing.
Umbrathor wrote:
seanfish wrote:
So yeah, we should abandon this whole line of reasoning. Just straight up throw it out. It doesn't have legs.

If we were to throw things out just because they don't have legs, there would soon be very few bowls of fish left in the world.

And that cannot possibly be something you are in favor of, unless you have suicidal tendencies.
Umbrathor wrote:
Snipped long-winded joke about Lipkin and Seanfish being American beers because of temperature...
Spoiler: show
Umbrathor wrote:
Lipkin wrote:
Scenario.

Friend 1: "I'm getting a beer, do you want one?"

Friend 2: "Is the beer cold?"

Friend 1: "Beer is typically served cold."

Friend 2: "In Germany beer is served at room, or cellar temperature."

Friend 1: "Even if Germany drank more beer than everyone else in the world combined, making beer more likely to be served warm overall, we are not in Germany. Context matters. My statement was in reference to the likelihood that the beer I bring you would be cold."

Friend 2: "So the beer is cold?"

Friend 1: "If you want to find out, you'll have to get it yourself."

fin

seanfish wrote:

How is that [a warrior replicant carrying a weapon] different from Stormbringer [which is apparently a sentient fantasy weapon]?

Is the sentience, which directs the soulsucking, the blade? Is the soulsucking a weapon, and if it is, is it a part of the intellect that is the sentience within Stormbringer, or is it external. Are you your teeth? Am I? Was I just asking if I was your or my teeth? If the beer's cold enough will it make my teeth hurt?

Nerd? I'll have you know I'm the coolest reader of a niche fantasy RPG webcomic with an obsession for contractual negotiation and metamagical theorisation that ever there was. Well, second to you. :lol:


What I have gleaned from all this, is that if Lipkin is the coolest, and Seanfish the second coolest, you are both American beers?

I may have misunderstood.

seanfish wrote:
Lipkin is a tall drink of water. I'm one of those cruddy energy drinks that leaves you feeling hyped up but still tired.


I rather imagined you as a short, round drink of a water. With a fish in it.

Thanks for correcting me.


I'm a fish suspended in a cruddy energy drink. Short Round is Indiana Jones' sidekick.
The brain doesn't actually look at the entire word, but rather recognizes patterns and goes "yeah, got it." Double a's are uncommon in the English language, while double s's are not. "Issac" is how some people spell the name, so people probably just aren't aware that the character is a double a.

Claud vs Claude suffers the same problem. Phonetically the same name, so people use the spelling they are familiar with.




But the "Gillian" crowd aren't even trying.
Umbrathor wrote:
If is IS a type, then the name would more logically be Plisaac.

If it IS a typo...
Umbrathor wrote:
greycat wrote:
Umbrathor wrote:

Why spell Isaac as Issac? I see so many peple do that. Some even misspelled the name six times in a single post, and quite consistently, so maybe this is a Thing and not a Typo.

I assume that it's some combination of laziness and learning disabilities/differences. I know there are some people who have learning differences (dyslexia, and so on) which make correct spelling a real challenge, so it's good to show some leniency. On the other hand, there can't be that many people with bona fide learning disorders, so I would assume that many of these cases are people simply being too lazy to learn how to spell a simple common name like Isaac. Which is infuriating, but it's almost impossible to tell who's doing it out of laziness and who's doing it because of dyslexia.

I know, which is why I haven't commented on it before. But usually, the other words in the posts are spelled correctly. Just the name Isaac isn't. That makes me believe it's not dyslexia, but a Thing.

It's not a thing.

Isaac and Issac are both names, and though Isaac is both correct in this case and much more common, it's plausible that multiple people on the forums are simply making the mistake.

A google ngram comparison.
twhitt wrote:

It's not a thing.

Isaac and Issac are both names, and though Isaac is both correct in this case and much more common, it's plausible that multiple people on the forums are simply making the mistake.

A google ngram comparison.


Capitalization matters on that. Using capital I's will smooth out the graph. Isaac still beats out all of them.
Try this ngram comparison

My son Ezekiel has a similar issue with people spelling his name Ezekial. Even happens from school teachers that are quite familiar with Bible names. It used to make him pretty mad. He doesn't like his name shortened either, which I'm guessing makes him feel older.
If Wanda is raised in present circumstances... she'd be a barbarian I would say. Still lost to Gobwin Knob, just not to fate or the World.

Question is, could she survive the dirtamancers and can the pliers provide her with something better than decryption?

wraith203 wrote:
And Wanda is still fated to serve FAQ with Marie.

Is she? There's obviously a prophecy behind it all, but is it really that specific? Turning to another side before burning the magick kingdom to the ground could take more than one form after all. And fate may adapt to circumstances (i.e. Wanda being as dead as a doornail).

Bandaid wrote:
eras10 wrote:
"Croak me if you can. What follows me would be worse" -Wanda

Title Book 5: Return of Wanda, Wanda harder!
Now with double the Fatalism!

Wanda hard with a vengeance.

Caprice wrote:
wraith203 wrote:
And Wanda is still fated to serve FAQ with Marie.

Well, technically she's fated to serve Queen Jillian.
And I must say, she served Queen Jillian quite well by destroying one of her sworn enemies' irreplaceable assets ;)

Well quite, it was incredibly foolish of her to charge into ICFYS in an attempt to seize control of someone else's destiny for her own, mad ends, let alone to gamble everything on Gillian Zamussels of all people siding with fate. While those orders she gave from Transylvito that treated her escape as a walk in the park complicated matters immensely, not to mention that silly plan of hers to enhance Charlie's tower, none of this would have happened if not for that. The worst of it, of course, was the way she insisted on taking the dirtamancers head on. Oh if only she'd listened to Cassandra and her plan to head for the dirtamansion!

The Unlurked wrote:
wraith203 wrote:
And Wanda is still fated to serve FAQ with Marie.
She may wind up serving as a martyr/symbol, for choosing the hard-hard way when Fate came knocking.

And when did Wanda reject fate exactly? She was never in a position to hop into ICFYS and decrypt an army as she never had the arkenpliers. Never mind that her supposed fate involved someone entering the magick kingdom from Faq and asking her to join, an event that never occured.
Whispri wrote:

Bandaid wrote:

Title Book 5: Return of Wanda, Wanda harder!
Now with double the Fatalism!

Wanda hard with a vengeance.

Weak

Wanda 2: Death & Upkeep.

Tagline: "There are two things that are inevitable on Erfworld: Neither shall happen to Wanda."

.

Now you've gone and made me miss Bungie's Oni... and Rockstar's cancelled sequel (Death & Taxes), which was killed in development by Red Dead Revolver. There's irony in that somewhere.