PDA

View Full Version : About the newfound ability of Parson's bracet...



SolkaTruesilver
2009-12-17, 12:31 AM
While I agree it might be quite a gamechanger, you should please take notice of the 2 people aware of that capability:

- Parson (duh)
- Charlie

Charlie who has still 6 calculations left in his contract. Who do you think has the best pool of intelligence to ask critical questions about the future? :smallbiggrin:

Jarawara
2009-12-17, 09:51 AM
I calculate a 62% chance that Parson is best equipped intellectually to utilize the prediction and calculation abilities of the braclet, over that of Charlie (or anyone else detailed so far in Erfworld, for that matter).

This expends one of your remaining calculations.

douglas
2009-12-17, 10:52 AM
Charlie might have more information to base his questions on, but any question he asks reveals the question, his interest in it, and the answer to Parson as well. Parson is smart enough to get quite a lot out of that, and Parson and Charlie are currently on opposing sides. Charlie will have to weigh very carefully whether it's worth revealing that information to Parson in order to get his prediction.

Haven
2009-12-17, 02:35 PM
Additionally, Parson can ask unlimited questions. In addition to giving him more information, this means the information is more useful. Charlie doesn't know if the 4% chance means that he'll be able to discover it easily, or that the calculations will be really valuable, or something else; however Parson could ask as many questions as he wants, so he can narrow it down.

Twin2
2009-12-18, 08:17 PM
Another thing to consider is that there is the potential that Parson really doesn't have to follow through on that deal. Charlie is in no position to force Parson into answering the questions and given how their relationship seems to be at this point I wouldn't be suprised for Parson to get a few more digs in on Charlie.

Yuki Akuma
2009-12-19, 07:40 AM
It's probably safe to assume that Charlie's contracts are backed up by Thinkamancy.

Oslecamo
2009-12-19, 06:19 PM
Another thing to consider is that there is the potential that Parson really doesn't have to follow through on that deal. Charlie is in no position to force Parson into answering the questions and given how their relationship seems to be at this point I wouldn't be suprised for Parson to get a few more digs in on Charlie.

He's duty bound to answer them. Efworld is still a game with stone carved rules. And like you must pay upkeep to all your troops, and you cannot atack during night, or get our of a city if you're a garrison unit, or move out of an hex at all if it's your turn, Hamster MUST answer the questions.

Shhalahr Windrider
2009-12-19, 10:47 PM
He's duty bound to answer them. Efworld is still a game with stone carved rules. And like you must pay upkeep to all your troops, and you cannot atack during night, or get our of a city if you're a garrison unit, or move out of an hex at all if it's your turn, Hamster MUST answer the questions.
But Parson’s broken Erfworld rules now. In the text updates as well as the incident at the end of Book 1. Duty may not have much of a hold over him.

Of course, movement rules still apply, so… :smallfrown:

Oslecamo
2009-12-20, 06:25 AM
But Parsonís broken Erfworld rules now. In the text updates as well as the incident at the end of Book 1. Duty may not have much of a hold over him.

The only rule breaking I remember was he swearing.

There was the "not make the city patrol" incident, but that could be justified for the simple fact that Hamster didn't knew he actualy needed to make the patrol. Can't obey to an order you don't understand in the first place. Just like uncroaked can't make complex maneuvers due to their rotten brains.

Anyway, if he could give out fake answers, he would've already done so, and tried to convince Charlie it would be profitable to give up on all the remaining answers.

One way or another, that Hamster holds one of the strongest non-arkentools trinkets in Efworld and knows how to use it is a mighty advantage for Gobwin Knob. Being the only one who knows the odds of sucess almost feels like cheating. Almost.:smalltongue:

tribble
2009-12-22, 01:38 PM
Being the only one who knows the odds of sucess almost feels like cheating. Almost.:smalltongue:

but he isn't, remember mathamancers and predictamancers? a linked pair of the two could possibly replicate the abilities of parson's bracer.

Haven
2009-12-22, 02:41 PM
but he isn't, remember mathamancers and predictamancers? a linked pair of the two could possibly replicate the abilities of parson's bracer.

I think the "effortless and instantaneous" part is unique to him though. Though I'm wondering if there's something like a once-a-turn limit for him, since we don't see him use it nearly as often as he could. (Actually, maybe he uses it a lot but just doesn't say the results out loud all the time, which makes sense) Nevermind, quick look through the archives shows I am made of wrong.

Oslecamo
2009-12-23, 05:47 AM
but he isn't, remember mathamancers and predictamancers? a linked pair of the two could possibly replicate the abilities of parson's bracer.

Perhaps they could...But what side would have all the pieces and be able to afford it? You cannot simple form and breack links whitout great risks as we've seen. And even then it would have a limited number of uses per day due to juice, while Hamster seems perfectly able to spam his ability at will.

fangthane
2009-12-23, 03:09 PM
As Charlie, I suspect I'd be thinking of some ways of asking questions which didn't necessarily divulge quite so much of my own side of things...

"Parson, I'd like you to run a calculation for me. Please give me the odds that asking the other question I've got in mind will provide you with a greater benefit than it will me."

In some cases, I'd know based on the answer what the answer to my second question would be; in any other case, I'd be aware of the relative likelihood that asking the question would damage my relative position.

As Parson, I'd be contemplating as broad a range of hypothetical situations for probability assessment as I possibly could.

tribble
2009-12-25, 06:58 PM
Perhaps they could...But what side would have all the pieces and be able to afford it? You cannot simple form and breack links whitout great risks as we've seen. And even then it would have a limited number of uses per day due to juice, while Hamster seems perfectly able to spam his ability at will.

we've seen triple-caster links reanimate volcanoes and keep flawless, real-time military surveillance (IE: Maphacks) on an area the size of a small coutry at least, if not the entire world. I'm fairly certain juice is not a big issue here.

Shhalahr Windrider
2009-12-27, 01:05 AM
The only rule breaking I remember was he swearing.
More or less the only real example, yes. But it is evidence that not all rules apply to Parson. There’s no telling what applies until he tries to break a rule. It’s okay to assume certain rules apply for the sake of discussion, but we should admit when there is a chance that they do not.


Anyway, if he could give out fake answers, he would've already done so, and tried to convince Charlie it would be profitable to give up on all the remaining answers.
That assumes Parson knows he can lie to Charlie or that willing to try it and hope nothing gives the lie away. (Of course, it also makes the reasonable assumption that Parson wants to lie to Charlie. :smallwink:)

Parson doesn’t automatically know what rules apply to him and which he can break. Hence experimenting with riding a dwagon and leaving Gobwin Knob. If he doesn’t know that he can lie to Charlie, he would have to make an attempt at doing so. The attempt could fail, and that could give Charlie more information than Parson wants to risk. Alternatively, the attempt could succeed, but Charlie could still realize something is up by a bit of relief (or similar emotion) in Parson’s voice. So an experiment still holds a potentially big risk in the Parson/Charlie conflict.


As Charlie, I suspect I'd be thinking of some ways of asking questions which didn't necessarily divulge quite so much of my own side of things...

"Parson, I'd like you to run a calculation for me. Please give me the odds that asking the other question I've got in mind will provide you with a greater benefit than it will me."
But that would spend one more of his limited calculations without giving him any of the information he really wants to know. It would only be a useful tactic if the question was important enough to be worth using two calculations.