PDA

View Full Version : Parson's Name



Kaolix
2009-01-16, 04:46 PM
Well, I did a forum search, and it didn't seem to have been posted before (not that I could be bothered to read every post in every one of the 27 threads in the search results) and although this has almost certainly been noticed and posted before, I couldn't find evidence of it, so I'm gonna post it anyway, just in case.

Has anyone else noticed that Parson's full name (Parson Gotti) is an anagram of Protagonist?

Commence ripping me apart with links to where this has been mentioned previously.

aapje
2009-01-16, 04:50 PM
I know I haven't.

Nice find!

teratorn
2009-01-16, 05:11 PM
Commence ripping me apart with links to where this has been mentioned previously.

Just check the Wanda has nerve thread in this same page. The anagram was noticed the first time Parson's full name appeared.

Kaolix
2009-01-16, 05:52 PM
Heh, trust there to be an extensive discussion of it in one of the very few threads on the front page that I haven't read.
Yeah, I figured it had almost certainly been posted as soon as Parson's name was known (I know what these forums are like :P ), but a search didn't seem to bring up any threads specifically about it so I thought I'd post anyway.
Oh well.

DevilDan
2009-01-16, 05:55 PM
One way to avoid it would have been to Google site:giantitp.com parson anagram protagonist

teratorn
2009-01-16, 06:13 PM
As I said, someone found out about it in the first strip where he is seen. On 01-06-2007, on the thread about strip 14:


"Parson Gotti" is an anagram of "protagonist".

So, you're about two years late... :smallbiggrin:

Kaolix
2009-01-16, 06:36 PM
I think, in retrospect, my greatest error was forgetting to include the word 'anagram' in my search. Probably would have narrowed it down to a few threads I could've simply read through until I found mention of it.

Oh well. Nothing to see here now, please let this thread die, and my embarassment along with it. :P

teratorn
2009-01-16, 07:03 PM
Oh well. Nothing to see here now, please let this thread die, and my embarassment along with it. :P

Nah, you're not escaping so easily, you even asked for it in the opening post...

In retrospect, it's impressive that the thing was found in the thread about that strip, where his name isn't even mentioned (we found out through the fake site).

tribble
2009-01-16, 07:20 PM
Nah, you're not escaping so easily, you even asked for it in the opening post...

In retrospect, it's impressive that the thing was found in the thread about that strip, where his name isn't even mentioned (we found out through the fake site).

that is impressive. wow.

Tubercular Ox
2009-01-17, 01:15 AM
As long as we're asking potentially embarrassing questions, what's the city producing? It's been six turns since the start of the story, and we've got nothing. How long do these cities sit around with no wars to generate thousand-man armies that go rampaging across the countryside?

Just for sanity's sake, I hope it's producing something big. Possibly plot changing. I can't see empires of a hundred cities producing one soldier per city per week for 3 months just to get a battalion together

#94
2009-01-17, 02:01 AM
As long as we're asking potentially embarrassing questions, what's the city producing? It's been six turns since the start of the story, and we've got nothing. How long do these cities sit around with no wars to generate thousand-man armies that go rampaging across the countryside?

Just for sanity's sake, I hope it's producing something big. Possibly plot changing. I can't see empires of a hundred cities producing one soldier per city per week for 3 months just to get a battalion together

Actually thats something i've been wondering myself. it could be that the answer is nothing, stanley didn't have a lot of faith in parson saving GK, and therefore didn't bother to waste more of his treasury.....

um, didn't stanley say at the begining that the perfect warlord spell would just about wipe out GK's treasury? it might be that GK Can't Afford to be producing anything

dr pepper
2009-01-17, 03:16 AM
Walnuts.



(paddingtomakepostlargeenough)

Arkaim
2009-01-17, 03:20 AM
I suspect that the large armored dragon that Stanley currently rides is what was produced recently. I have no idea as to what is being produced now.

DevilDan
2009-01-17, 03:27 AM
GK had 11 cities and was obtaining other resources like mining; possibly they also raided other cities (Faq's treasury/treasuries among them?). It had a lot more production capacity before. Dwagons can be tamed, so that's a separate issue.

The RCC probably has at least that many cities, plus wherever the elf brands and other "natural allies" or whatever appear.

And we don't know exactly how many turns ago anything in the past happened...

Trixie
2009-01-17, 10:41 AM
Actually thats something i've been wondering myself. it could be that the answer is nothing, stanley didn't have a lot of faith in parson saving GK, and therefore didn't bother to waste more of his treasury.....

um, didn't stanley say at the begining that the perfect warlord spell would just about wipe out GK's treasury? it might be that GK Can't Afford to be producing anything

Yes, the 500.000 they were talking about in the beginning would empty it, but they spend only 350.000 - so, they still had 150.000 - minus almost 1.000 per turn spent on Parson.

Whispri
2009-01-17, 12:51 PM
As long as we're asking potentially embarrassing questions, what's the city producing? It's been six turns since the start of the story, and we've got nothing. How long do these cities sit around with no wars to generate thousand-man armies that go rampaging across the countryside?

Just for sanity's sake, I hope it's producing something big. Possibly plot changing. I can't see empires of a hundred cities producing one soldier per city per week for 3 months just to get a battalion together
Well it's never been said, but the Gobwins were listed as mostly level one and they punch above their weight in the Tunnels. The Spidews were also described as mostly low level.

SteveMB
2009-01-17, 01:13 PM
I suspect that the large armored dragon that Stanley currently rides is what was produced recently. I have no idea as to what is being produced now.

Actually, I think Stanley probably rides the biggest baddest dwagon he has -- which would presumably mean the one that has leveled up the most, and is therefore relatively old.

(Wanda, I think, chooses a green dwagon because its "poison gas" breath weapon leaves the target in better condition for uncroaking than a unit that has been roasted, zapped, gummed up, or crapped on.)

Kreistor
2009-01-17, 02:09 PM
Actually, I think Stanley probably rides the biggest baddest dwagon he has -- which would presumably mean the one that has leveled up the most, and is therefore relatively old.

I concur. No way Stanley would let himself ride anything but his most powerful unit.

As for "producing" dwagons, that's not how it works. The hammer allows Stanley to subdue dwagons and they'll then work for him. He doesn't produce them like other units.

as for cash reserves, Stanley has around 150000 schmuckers... 500000 that would have emptied the treasury less 350000 for the Chief Warlord summoning spell.

DevilDan
2009-01-17, 02:46 PM
Actually, I think Stanley probably rides the biggest baddest dwagon he has -- which would presumably mean the one that has leveled up the most, and is therefore relatively old.

That really is everyone's assumption: that's why so many people were mewling so vociferously and plaintively when it seemed that Jillian took down Stanley's dwagon so apparently effortlessly in the Battle for Faq's Pass.

Godskook
2009-01-18, 04:31 AM
As for "producing" dwagons, that's not how it works. The hammer allows Stanley to subdue dwagons and they'll then work for him. He doesn't produce them like other units.

There is precedence in other games such that 'taming' could possibly mean that Stanley is allowed to 'produce' dwagons if and only if he controls the ArkenHammer. I.e., it can still go either way.

NemFX
2009-04-01, 05:50 PM
I hope this is okay, I know it's a little bit old, but I have a theory that Parson has a younger sister, and she'll show up at some point.

Anna S. Gotti.

teratorn
2009-04-01, 06:02 PM
I hope this is okay, I know it's a little bit old, but I have a theory that Parson has a younger sister, and she'll show up at some point.

Anna S. Gotti.

Holy thread necromancy batman! That is a good one, yet I wouldn't be surprised if someone already had proposed that.