Book 4 - Page 170

Pop Eye-dolls

Book 4 - Page 170
Comic - Book 4 - Page 170

Recent posts... (See full thread)
Merilynne wrote:
It sounds like you managed to channel a bit of Rob Balder. Not a bad thing, all in all.


Little bit. I kinda crawled inside his head for a minute and took a look around without realizing that's what I was doing.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong this time. I wouldn't have been surprised if I had been completely wrong last time. But it just feels right. It works in my head. So I've made my prediction and now we shall see. :-D
JadedDragoon wrote:
JadedDragoon wrote:
To date, there are only 7 known occasions of fate intervening since Parson was summoned.


The fifth, Marie knowing to bring a healing scroll to the Battle of Portal Park. This one's explicit.


greycat wrote:
Your list is interesting. You and I have rather different interpretations of when Fate is explicitly involved.

For starters, I disqualify all of the events that are the result of a Predictamancer casting a Prediction and then acting upon it. Marie knowing to bring a scroll of Healamancy -- that's simply because she used her Predictamancy and learned what she would need, and then brought it. No different from a Lookamancer Looking outdoors to see that it's raining, and then bringing along an umbrella.


I have questions about this. I'll admit that the idea of Fate in general confuses me, much less as a "character" so to speak. It also doesn't help that we don't know Fate's end goal here, and the people that know what's going to happen, the Predictamancers, are secretive and vague.

But aren't Predictions basically Fate? I mean the Predictamancers (at least Marie) seem to consider themselves agents of Fate, and seem to be working towards making sure that what Fate "wants" happens.

For instance, in Book 0, when Marie was trying to help shoot down Olive, she said “This is not Fate‘s plon for Olive Branch. Fate doesn‘t want her croaked this way.” But when she Cast, she found out “It tuns out Fate doesn‘t motch care for that broom.”

So to me at least, it sounds like Marie used Predictamancy to find out what Fate did or didn't want to happen. So isn't Predicting something is going to happen just another way of saying Fate wants this to happen? If I'm misunderstanding something about either Fate or Predictamancy, please let me know.
I have the impression Fate doesn't have plans so much as objectives. And I think Marie supports this in her vignette; possibly she's still learning too. Imperfect unreliable knowledge.
Jade wrote:
Spoiler: show
JadedDragoon wrote:
JadedDragoon wrote:
To date, there are only 7 known occasions of fate intervening since Parson was summoned.


The fifth, Marie knowing to bring a healing scroll to the Battle of Portal Park. This one's explicit.


greycat wrote:
Your list is interesting. You and I have rather different interpretations of when Fate is explicitly involved.

For starters, I disqualify all of the events that are the result of a Predictamancer casting a Prediction and then acting upon it. Marie knowing to bring a scroll of Healamancy -- that's simply because she used her Predictamancy and learned what she would need, and then brought it. No different from a Lookamancer Looking outdoors to see that it's raining, and then bringing along an umbrella.


I have questions about this. I'll admit that the idea of Fate in general confuses me, much less as a "character" so to speak. It also doesn't help that we don't know Fate's end goal here, and the people that know what's going to happen, the Predictamancers, are secretive and vague.

But aren't Predictions basically Fate? I mean the Predictamancers (at least Marie) seem to consider themselves agents of Fate, and seem to be working towards making sure that what Fate "wants" happens.

For instance, in Book 0, when Marie was trying to help shoot down Olive, she said “This is not Fate‘s plon for Olive Branch. Fate doesn‘t want her croaked this way.” But when she Cast, she found out “It tuns out Fate doesn‘t motch care for that broom.”

So to me at least, it sounds like Marie used Predictamancy to find out what Fate did or didn't want to happen. So isn't Predicting something is going to happen just another way of saying Fate wants this to happen? If I'm misunderstanding something about either Fate or Predictamancy, please let me know.


This was my understanding as well. But I am curious to see if there's another interpretation.
So... does anyone want to bring up the possibility of Templeton catching onto Marie's lies about being popped in Faq? Last time I checked, she was popped in the Magic Kingdom under the direction of Wanda from Gobwin Knob.

This'll make Jillian seriously doubt Marie's loyalties.
Anomynous 167 wrote:
So... does anyone want to bring up the possibility of Templeton catching onto Marie's lies about being popped in Faq? Last time I checked, she was popped in the Magic Kingdom under the direction of Wanda from Gobwin Knob.

But her first popping was in Faq. The original Faq, under King Banhammer. Marie isn't lying, but she's being intentionally confusing with her language, not explaining to Templeton how there was a discontinuity in the existence of Faq as a side.

Jade wrote:

But aren't Predictions basically Fate?

This is one of the big unanswered questions. We don't really know what a Prediction is yet, or how it interacts with Fate, or what Fate really is. The tiny little glimpse we just got from Marie is the first POV text update we've ever had from a Predictamancer, IIRC. Prior Marie POV action was in the comic pages when she was assaulting ICFYS with Georgia, and had no inner monologue.

Violet wrote:
I have the impression Fate doesn't have plans so much as objectives.

That's possible.
greycat wrote:
Violet wrote:
I have the impression Fate doesn't have plans so much as objectives.

That's possible.


This is the way I think it is. Fate is like a DM running a game, they have a place they want the characters to end up, but the characters have free will. So Fate(the DM) constantly adjusts the scenario to keep things on the track they want. When they do it well, its seem-less and no-one really notices. When backed into a corner you have to have your protagonist knocked out with a falling brick. Either way "free-will" and "fate" both exist at the same time.
Violet wrote:
I have the impression Fate doesn't have plans so much as objectives. And I think Marie supports this in her vignette; possibly she's still learning too. Imperfect unreliable knowledge.


I look at it kind of how I see time in the Doctor Who universe. There is a definite beginning, middle and end, there is a definite journey between these points but outside that, some things are kind of fluid and can be worked around and over, there are other things that are absolutely set in stone and Fate will either block people into it or throw a tantrum if it is worked against.

Charlie is an irritant, he breaks things and currently shouldn't exist, so it is throwing an epic level tantrum and throwing everything it has into fixing this problem. If I recall, Charlie's demeanour changed when he attuned with the Dish which we know gives him a view on things that others don't get to see, so question I have is what in Fate's grand design made Charlie decide that he was going to change his whole way of doing things?
Jade wrote:
Goodness, what the heck happened here. I'm trying to read the new posts and I'm just seeing a red wall of "scrubbed." While I don't doubt what was removed was bad, a part of my brain is like I must know the forbidden texts.

Now you'll never know the context in which me saying "I can't read the word "sexual" followed by a 6-7 letter word ending with "er", without thinking they're talking about Lobsters..." makes sense...

Spoiler: show
Which, by the way, was not a Jordan Peterson reference but a SexuaLobster one... Not referencing anything specific he did, just his channel's name.


Wait. You thought I would be revealing the context in these spoiler tags?

I'm not baiting you. The sentence following "Wait" litterally occoured to me after finishing writing "Not referencing anything specific he did...".


I guess you could ask for a pm for context or me say publicly

greycat wrote:
Anomynous 167 wrote:
So... does anyone want to bring up the possibility of Templeton catching onto Marie's lies about being popped in Faq? Last time I checked, she was popped in the Magic Kingdom under the direction of Wanda from Gobwin Knob.

But her first popping was in Faq. The original Faq, under King Banhammer. Marie isn't lying, but she's being intentionally confusing with her language, not explaining to Templeton how there was a discontinuity in the existence of Faq as a side.

Not intentionally confusing. Things are complicated.

However I doubt Templeton would be able to tell where Marie was originally popped, what with Decryption over-riding that detail.

Then again, Jillian could take the information from Templeton to mean that Marie had been popped in Gobwin Knob during her first "life", if you can call a Wanda Puppet having any life at all. After all, how would Jillian know where Marie popped? She's older than Jillian. It was under Marie's advice that Banhammer popped Jillian in the first place.
I think part of the reason Templeton is so wacky (unhinged?) is that
1) Temples seem to at least slightly take after the side [while Shirley don't really jive with Charlie, she is an ok fit with how much of the Archons view him]
2) When Templeton was created, FAQ had barely any people, (one of them being Marie)
3) Jillian's mind is still really messed up from book 0

Thus people complaining about Templeton being unhinged and not seeming super loyal might be being too harsh