Erfworld #137 - The Discussion Thread

[dr pepper]

It's up there, post #262.

[Aquillion]

I don't know, catatonia and slurred speech resulting from a mental breakdown doesn't seem that far fetched to me. Then again, I am not a doctor. Nor, I suspect, are the creators or most readers.

Maggie found what she expected to find. It would make sense for thinkamancy backlash to cause psychological trauma. That doesn't mean ALL psychological trauma is caused by thinkamancy backlash.

Sure, it's possible that Maggie just screwed up, but the much simpler explanation is that Maggie, a professional Thinkamancer, would be able to recognize the effects of a thinkamancy backlash; and that such effects do not randomly happen to look exactly like the effects of strong emotion (given that strong emotion, no matter how strong or world shaking, simply doesn't induce aphasia in the real world, this is not that much of a stretch. If Wanda had simply gone catatonic it might be a bit more credible; but arguing that she's still slurring and stuttering her speech almost two days later because she is really, really sad is kind of stretching it.)

Maggie was actually going inside of Wanda's mind and trying to treat her with Thinkamancy, then using this information to give professional diagnosis to Parson. It just seems pretty far out there to suggest that the effects of Wanda being really really shocked and sad could look exactly like a spell backlash to the eyes of a trained, professional Thinkamancer.

[fendrin]

What happened to my comment pointing out Wanda's catatonia and partial aphasia and Maggie's diagnosis?

That was post 262. In post 263 I quoted it, but my post was really in response to Godskook's post, #261. I dunno how I managed to do that.

Sure, it's possible that Maggie just screwed up, but the much simpler explanation is that Maggie, a professional Thinkamancer, would be able to recognize the effects of a thinkamancy backlash; and that such effects do not randomly happen to look exactly like the effects of strong emotion

A thinkamancer is not a healomancer. Also, do you really think that thinkamancy backlash has unique symptoms?

I used to work in a kitchen. I saw a lot of cut hands. Does that mean I can recognize when somebody cuts their hand with a kitchen knife as opposed to say, a boxcutter? No.

(given that strong emotion, no matter how strong or world shaking, simply doesn't induce aphasia in the real world, this is not that much of a stretch. If Wanda had simply gone catatonic it might be a bit more credible; but arguing that she's still slurring and stuttering her speech almost two days later because she is really, really sad is kind of stretching it.)

Some research has shown that extreme emotional events can cause a stroke. Thus emotional shock (I didn't say depression) can indirectly cause dysarthria or aphasia (and of course catatonia).
Wanda was likely hypertensive to begin with.

For that matter, we don't know that Wanda's speech problem is from the same thing as her catatonia. It could be a result of Maggie's 'help'.

Maggie was actually going inside of Wanda's mind and trying to treat her with Thinkamancy, then using this information to give professional diagnosis to Parson. It just seems pretty far out there to suggest that the effects of Wanda being really really shocked and sad could look exactly like a spell backlash to the eyes of a trained, professional Thinkamancer.

I would not expect a psychologist to recognize the difference between an embolic or hemorrhagic stroke. Heck, many strokes are declared cryptogenic because the trained professional doctors don't know what caused it.

I think you are relying way too much on Maggie's supposed expertise. Sure, Wanda a is a booping powerful caster, and Jack is a master-class foolamancer, and Sizemore seems to be at least decent at dirtamancy, but what evidence do we have that Maggie is even a moderately competent thinkamancer?

[OnDroid]

I think you are relying way too much on Maggie's supposed expertise. Sure, Wanda a is a booping powerful caster, and Jack is a master-class foolamancer, and Sizemore seems to be at least decent at dirtamancy, but what evidence do we have that Maggie is even a moderately competent thinkamancer?

The evidence would be 3-eyemancers succesfull link. It also could be pure luck, but I doubt that even his Toolship would risk 3 casters ( one of them the master-class foolamancer ) in one difficult spell without at least some trust in Maggie and her abilities.

[DevilDan]

A thinkamancer is not a healomancer. Also, do you really think that thinkamancy backlash has unique symptoms?

That would assume that healamancers actually have anything to do with psychological or neurological healing; I would normally put my money on thinkamancers.

[HandofShadows]

But the timing does not square though. Jillian broke the spell and attacked the Dwagons, but Wanda was still talking (pleading to spare her life) after that. It was only after Stanley gave the order did Wanda stop talking.

[SteveMB]

But the timing does not square though. Jillian broke the spell and attacked the Dwagons, but Wanda was still talking (pleading to spare her life) after that. It was only after Stanley gave the order did Wanda stop talking.

IMO, there were two separate effects -- backlash from the spell snapping and emotional collapse when everything fell apart (Jillian turned against her, Stanley too angry to listen to her, the apparent last hope of saving GK gone). Note that while Wanda was pleading to spare Jillian's life, she spoke two simple monosyllabic words -- not her usual pattern, perhaps implying the onset of her speech impediment.

[HandofShadows]

Maybe, but I also noticed that Wanda does not have any problem casting her spells. And they tend to be rather complex.

[DevilDan]

Maybe, but I also noticed that Wanda does not have any problem casting her spells. And they tend to be rather complex.

She is recovering, but her speech has continued to halter.

[fendrin]

The evidence would be 3-eyemancers succesfull link. It also could be pure luck, but I doubt that even his Toolship would risk 3 casters ( one of them the master-class foolamancer ) in one difficult spell without at least some trust in Maggie and her abilities.

Since when has his toolship ever shown wisdom in his decisionmaking?

That would assume that healamancers actually have anything to do with psychological or neurological healing; I would normally put my money on thinkamancers.

True, healamancers may not know anything about the physical functioning of the body. Similarly, what evidence is there that a thinkamancer has any real understanding of the functioning of the mind? Just that they interact with them? I know many more people who interact with computers than have any knowledge whatsoever about how they function or how to repair them.Other than Parson asking Maggie to examine Wanda (when the boop hits the fan, you make do with what you've got), what evidence is there in the strip that she knows anything about the functioning of the mind, beyond what she would have picked up by working with them?

"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."
- Abraham Maslow

To Maggie, the only tool she has is Thinkamancy. Thus it must be tempting for her to see everything as a result of or opportunity for thinkamancy.

[SteveMB]

The evidence would be 3-eyemancers succesfull link. It also could be pure luck, but I doubt that even his Toolship would risk 3 casters ( one of them the master-class foolamancer ) in one difficult spell without at least some trust in Maggie and her abilities.

Since when has his toolship ever shown wisdom in his decisionmaking?

The bottom-line fact is that the "risky and fragile" spell worked, which indicates that Maggie was either very skilled or very lucky.

[fendrin]

The bottom-line fact is that the "risky and fragile" spell worked, which indicates that Maggie was either very skilled or very lucky.

I'll concede that Maggie may be good with her golden hammer, but that still doesn't make Wanda's condition a nail.

[Aquillion]

Your theory would not only require that the symptoms of Wanda's strong emotional shock look indistinguishable from Thinakamancy backlash to a professional Thinkamancer; it would also require that Jaclyn lied to her when she said she was under a spell (or that Jillian was randomly under some other spell preventing her from attacking, which is even more nonsensical), and that the other Archons played along.

There is no discernible reason for any of this; we have no reason why Jaclyn would want to lie to her, or why Jillian would be under another spell, or why Thinkamancy backlash would look even slightly similar to strong emotional distress. We've been told three times -- twice by professionals we have not the slightest reason to doubt -- that Jillian was under a spell compelling her loyalty to Gobwin Knob. We were shown a scene of Wanda dramatically casting spells on Jillian. Jillian's response to being told that she was under a spell was to evince no surprise, and instead say "I like it"; by implication, sh believed she was under a spell without having to have been told. The only reason you have to doubt any of those is the belief that the authors were trying to trick the readers so we can have the shocking swerve of finding out that it was all a lie.

And no matter how much people enjoy epileptic trees theorizing, this comic is not written by M. Night Shyamalan. There haven't been any shocking swerves so far; the authors have never gone out of their way to trick us like this. Every major twist has been heavily hinted-at as a possibility well in advance. That is because they are trying to write a coherent plot, because they know that M. Night Shyamalan is a horrible writer, and over-reliance on plot twists to drive a story is the sign of an absolute hack.

For serious. Maybe Stanley is Jillian's long-lost brother. Maybe Parson is a prince of Erfworld who got sent to another world as a little kid. Maybe Sizemore killed king Saline IV.

But we have seen no hint of any of these so far, no more than we've seen any hint for your theory. And the authors have shown, again and again, that they prefer to set up their story in advance rather than pulling things out of their ass for shock value.

[DevilDan]

True, healamancers may not know anything about the physical functioning of the body. Similarly, what evidence is there that a thinkamancer has any real understanding of the functioning of the mind? Just that they interact with them? I know many more people who interact with computers than have any knowledge whatsoever about how they function or how to repair them.Other than Parson asking Maggie to examine Wanda (when the boop hits the fan, you make do with what you've got), what evidence is there in the strip that she knows anything about the functioning of the mind, beyond what she would have picked up by working with them?

Enough that she considered that she had a chance of helping Wanda and that she apparently expressed no doubts about her diagnosis.

To Maggie, the only tool she has is Thinkamancy. Thus it must be tempting for her to see everything as a result of or opportunity for thinkamancy.

She doesn't strike me as the sort who would promise more than she can deliver or talk about what she doesn't know. Don't you think that she is the more cautious sort?

[fendrin]

There is no discernible reason for any of this; we have no reason why Jaclyn would want to lie to her

Really? An opportunity for Charlie to make a booping lot of money isn't a reason? See my previous post(#263) on the subject.

...or why Thinkamancy backlash would look even slightly similar to strong emotional distress.

Wanda's symptoms resemble the results of a stroke. Now, whether that stroke was triggered by magical backlash or by extreme emotional duress would not change the observable symptoms.

Enough that she considered that she had a chance of helping Wanda and that she apparently expressed no doubts about her diagnosis.

As far as we can tell she hadn't even examined Wanda when she made her diagnosis. She has a hammer, she saw a nail.

She doesn't strike me as the sort who would promise more than she can deliver or talk about what she doesn't know. Don't you think that she is the more cautious sort?

She never said she could help Wanda. She specifically said "Well. I can try".

She was ordered to try to help Wanda. In fact, she was ordered to try before she gave her diagnosis. Her only tool is thinkamancy, so of course she's going to try to help Wanda the only way she knows how. She has no choice, she was ordered to try, and try hard. Like I said before, that could even be the cause of Wanda's speech issues.


Look, I know this whole idea is far fetched. I know it is unlikely. I even said so when I first mentioned it in this thread.

Of course I haven't given up on the extremely unlikely but possible idea that Wanda never cast a mind-control spell on Jillian. I'm stubborn like that.

...That's why I'm still not convinced (though I realize that I, like the cheese, stand alone on this) that there ever really was a suggestion spell on Jillian.

However, there is no hard evidence against it, either. I'm not looking to convince anyone, and if there was solid evidence against it I would give up the notion. But there isn't.

As far as I'm concerned, the authors may have left it intentionally vague, much the way they seem to have left the free will vs Loyalty/Duty issue vague. It adds a sense of depth to the comic by not having everything be cut and dry. It's one of the reasons I like this comic.