105 The Battle for Gobwin Knob, Page 95

[Draender]

The Gobwins could have simply rebelled against King Saline IV because they weren't loyal to him anymore. Stanley did have to retake the city but through this process the Gobwins may have chosen themselves a new leader.

[Richbin]

Not only do I suspect that Wanda might have betrayed FAQ to Stanley, set him up by getting the Gobwins to assassinate Saline IV, but possibly ALSO did NOT have any mind control spells on Jillian.
Imagine if the mind-contorl spell that Jacqueline was warning her about (as she does not know its proveneance, just that she is under one) came from either Charlie or Prince Radish. Imagine, if you willl, that Wanda's assertion that jillian would not attack her was based simply on her psychology and thinking that Jillian would not humiliate/harm her.
That might also explain why the other archon was reproaching jacqueline from talking too much (maybe the other archon already knew about what Charlie had wrought?).

I say Wanda is a villain where FAQ and Saline are concerned, but not where Jillian is concerned... until now.

I just hope that Vinnie limps back to Ansom and reports that Wanda has been croaked... but that is not the end of her - she is now an uncroaked caster... a lich-queen as it were... :D

Oooooh I am salivating in anticipation of this series continuing... :D

[Tignok]

I just hope that Vinnie limps back to Ansom and reports that Wanda has been croaked... but that is not the end of her - she is now an uncroaked caster... a lich-queen as it were... :D

I love allowing my imagination to run wild with the possibilities as well but this, it seems, cannot happen. According to Sizemore, uncroaked casters operate as normal infantry.

[Ptorquemada]

The facts:

Stanley conviently left the capital city with the most important spell casters right when it was attacked by suddenly traitorous gobwins. ...

Despite all this, the strip has never actually confirmed that Stanley put the plan in motion. This almost forces the reader to stop reading the strip and examin the creator's intention, and it does seem to indicate a surprising revelation regarding Saline's fall.

Exactly. The whole thing smells strongly of herring of the red variety.

Any idea that calls Stanley easily controlled/manipulated/charmed is a non-starter for me..

Now we know that, but when Wanda first heard the new heir-designate of Gobwin Knob was a former pikeman (probably not even a unit in his own right, but part of a unit), she might very well have thought otherwise. For that matter, she might have been a part of making him the way we see him now: I can see him unwittingly doing exactly as Wanda wanted at first, having some early big successes, and then deciding since he was obviously a strategic genius who wins every time he should stop listening to anyone else, particularly stupid Wanda and her stupid ideas about not attacking everything in sight.

[fendrin]

According to Sizemore, uncroaked casters operate as normal infantry.

While that's true, there's no reason that Wanda couldn't have developed a new spell to allow it to happen.

It seems to me that Erfling magical theories are like Earthling scientific theories: subject to revision as more information becomes known.

[SteveMB]

It remains to be seen just what kind of spell Wanda is preparing. The obvious guess is some sort of combat spell (though we haven't actually seen any examples of such as yet); another possibility that occurs to me is a more powerful control spell (perhaps "mind control" as distinct from "suggestion") to bring Jillian back into line.

[teratorn]

Not only do I suspect that Wanda might have betrayed FAQ to Stanley, set him up by getting the Gobwins to assassinate Saline IV, but possibly ALSO did NOT have any mind control spells on Jillian.

She had one, she even discusses that with Parson and Sizemore:

You know nothing of the underpinnings of this spell.

The whole exchange identifies the spell and all the caveats about it.

[fendrin]

She had one, she even discusses that with Parson and Sizemore:

You know nothing of the underpinnings of this spell.

The whole exchange identifies the spell and all the caveats about it.

Well, if she had no reason to lie about it, that would be true.
However, Wanda knows that if Jillian stays in captivity Stanley will eventually croak her, as he will get tired of paying upkeep for her. Thus she has to get out of GK. Now, she could risk her life fighting her way out with a pair of chopsticks, which would possibly get her croaked and probably seriously weaken GK, or she can be let go. Now, would Stanley or Parson let Jillian go if they thought she was still a threat? No way. However, if they think she is controlled, then she is more useful out in the field. Boom, all it takes is one lie. Then maintaining that lie, obviously, or else the next time Jillian gets captured, there's no way Stanley would let Wanda see her.

[the_tick_rules]

I'm assuming the archons weren't paid to tell Jillian that and that's why she tried to stop the other. You know we just find out why why Wanda, who apparently doesn't think much of Stanley, follows him so intensely. Oh and of course YOU GO WANDA!!!

[Kasavin]

Well, if she had no reason to lie about it, that would be true.
However, Wanda knows that if Jillian stays in captivity Stanley will eventually croak her, as he will get tired of paying upkeep for her. Thus she has to get out of GK. Now, she could risk her life fighting her way out with a pair of chopsticks, which would possibly get her croaked and probably seriously weaken GK, or she can be let go. Now, would Stanley or Parson let Jillian go if they thought she was still a threat? No way. However, if they think she is controlled, then she is more useful out in the field. Boom, all it takes is one lie. Then maintaining that lie, obviously, or else the next time Jillian gets captured, there's no way Stanley would let Wanda see her.

I'll say it once, I'll say it a thousand times. When the strip gives an explanation for something and confirms it, deciding it didn't happen to support a pet theory is somekind of nihilism. Once again, the facts:

1. Wanda is seen using her yellow magic on Jillian during the interrogation, the same yellow magic that she casts on the guard to convince nothing but screams happened.

2. Wanda announces to Parson and Stanley that she has cast a spell on Jillian.

3. Jillian acts pretty much as the spell would make her: disobey direct orders, find reasons to not attack the wounded dragon stack, etc.

4. Jacalyn tells Jillian she under a spell, and presumably the archons through Charlie can tell this sort of thing.

5. When Jillian attacks the stack in spite of the spell and breaks it, Wanda suffers the common mental backlash associated with breaking a thinkamancy spell.

6. Maggie spent most the night trying to repair Wanda's mind, and this did nothing to change her diagnosis of a thinkamancy spell gone wrong.

[Freederick]

I know all this has been said here before, but I just couldn't resist putting all the refs for the cheat codes together in easy clickable format.

1. ABACABB
2. GOURANGA
3. IDCLIP
4. XYZZY
5. UUDDLRLRBASS
6. AYBABTU
7. AGGRO

[fendrin]

I'll say it once, I'll say it a thousand times. When the strip gives an explanation for something and confirms it, deciding it didn't happen to support a pet theory is somekind of nihilism. Once again, the facts:

ni·hil·ism (nī'ə-lĭz'əm, nē'-) pronunciation
n.

1. Philosophy.
1. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
2. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4. also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.
5. Psychiatry. A delusion, experienced in some mental disorders, that the world or one's mind, body, or self does not exist.

[Latin nihil, nothing + –ISM.]

"nihilism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.

Nope not quite.

The strip as an objective existential entity does not give an explanation for anything. I do not dispute your facts, but to say that they prove there was a spell on Jillian is fallacious. It is the obvious conclusion, but the world would be a very different (and boring) place if the obvious was always true, especially in a work of fiction.

I admit that it is probable that there was a spell*, but the fact of the matter is that unless your name is Rob Balder or Jamie Noguchi you don't know either.

And please, stop throwing around philosophical terms that you don't understand, or else I will whip out some epistemology and show you just how little you truly know.
[Just to be clear, the last part of that sentence is a philosophy joke, and not meant to be an insult in any way, shape, or kind.]

*Though the lack of concrete proof either way leads me to expect a Reveal

[El_Chupacabra]

Still, I think Occam's Razor would apply here, even though, in the literary world, sometimes writers deliberately violate that principle to "surprise" the reader.

I'd say that in all likelihood, there was a spell involved. If the writers choose to spin the story in a direction otherwise, they may have to Hang a Lampshade or two, but I'd say it's not utterly implausible that the spell was truely psychosomatic in nature. That would require Wanda to have some valid reason for not casting the spell, of course. For your theory to gain ground, you'd have to have some reason for Wanda to not cast the spell.

[Kasavin]

Nope not quite.

Oh no, a dictionary has been thrown at me and hurt my head, literally.

The strip as an objective existential entity does not give an explanation for anything. I do not dispute your facts, but to say that they prove there was a spell on Jillian is fallacious. It is the obvious conclusion, but the world would be a very different (and boring) place if the obvious was always true, especially in a work of fiction.

This is EXACTLY why I said you were being nihilistic, you don't believe what the strip tells you outright. If you nothing in the strip can be believed, then I say you think "...nothing can be known or communicated."

Think about it this way. In order for there to not have been a spell... Wanda would have had to lie to Stanley and Parson, and still expect them to not notice when she cannot actually control Jillian, subtle or otherwise. Then, we'd have to explain Jillian's insistance that there are no wounded dragons (the existence of which Wanda could not have known about before letting her go). Jillian then wanted to not attack the dwagons, doing a 360 with her earlier reasoning. This is Jillian, the raging barbarian who never turns down a battle and who absolutely hates Stanley, refusing to strike a crippling blow at him. Why? Because as Jaclyn (who can detect this sort of thing) plainly says, as the readers already knew, that she was under the influence of a spell. If she wasn't, then Jaclyn was either lying or Wanda was under the inluence of somebody else's spell, and presuambly still is. Then, there'd have to be another explanation for Wanda's catonic state.

To abandon the existence of a spell, the authors would have to re-explain every single one of these occurrences, or leave enormous continuity gaps. Thats just poor story telling on their part if thats the case.

I admit that it is probable that there was a spell*, but the fact of the matter is that unless your name is Rob Balder or Jamie Noguchi you don't know either.

So, if only the creators know anything, why do I bother to read the strip? On one level, you're correct. On another more pragmatic level, its silly to dismiss what we've been told in plain English.

And please, stop throwing around philosophical terms that you don't understand, or else I will whip out some epistemology and show you just how little you truly know.

Never! Language is meant to malleable, otherwise we'd live in a world with out poetry! And nobody wants that, except maybe Ford Perfect. On another note, my job, like my signature, really is being a scholar (at a university). Now I'm neither a philosopher or linguist or semiotician, but don't think me ignorant of the basics.

*Though the lack of concrete proof either way leads me to expect a Reveal

The presence of concrete proof leads me to expect that can only be a http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...ShockingSwerve , though only because the site doesn't have a "They're just making this up as they go along for maximum shock effect while pretending like they had some truly elaborate scheme going on, aren't they."

Note, I'm not denying reveals can't or shouldn't happen, (Ansom bought the Arkenpliers from the marbits!, Bogroll is actually Stanley's half brother!, Wanda loves Parson and Sizemore too!), but this is one case where the door has been slammed shut.

[kagato23]

Nope not quite.

The strip as an objective existential entity does not give an explanation for anything. I do not dispute your facts, but to say that they prove there was a spell on Jillian is fallacious. It is the obvious conclusion, but the world would be a very different (and boring) place if the obvious was always true, especially in a work of fiction.

I admit that it is probable that there was a spell*, but the fact of the matter is that unless your name is Rob Balder or Jamie Noguchi you don't know either.

Um yes, yes it does in fact state that she was under a spell. Multiple people have mentioned a spell at this point, including Jillian herself.

And even the creators word probably won't help, it's people like you that still argue Belkar is Chaotic Netural when Rich told us otherwise. Rob and Jamie could tell us straight up there was a spell (and probably note "we thougtht his was assumed) and you'd be arguing about what that meant. There was a spell, most of us believe there was a spell, so cling to your contradictory theories if you must but spare us your arguments on issues that have been established untill there are facts to back it up, please.

[Commonblade]

I got to wondering about this Natural Thinkamancy thing. Why would Stanley have the eyebooks made and use them if he could do this? I mean I know he can do it, but notice who has the eyebooks.

Stanley
Sizemoore
Wanda
Parson

What if Stanley had the books made to talk to those he can not use Natural Thinkamancy on?

What follows is total guessing:

Wanda is the current ruler of Faq (nice big city of the dead), in fact it is where she was at when Stanley first called her on the eyebook.

Parson, plays by different rules, Stanley realized this and gave him a book.

Sizemoore is Stanley's brother (of some sort) and is considered royalty.

course I could be insane. But hey.

[SteveMB]

I got to wondering about this Natural Thinkamancy thing. Why would Stanley have the eyebooks made and use them if he could do this?

The eyebooks enable Stanley and his senior staff to communicate. Natural Thinkamancy only does that for units with specific "scout" functions (like Vinny's bats).

[fendrin]

Oh no, a dictionary has been thrown at me and hurt my head, literally.

Oh boy, here we go... just remember you asked for it.
For the sake of the sanity of of the rest of the readers of this thread, I may condense or simply not respond to some of what you say. If you feel I have overlooked or ignored some crucial point, please point it out and I will respond to it specifically.

This is EXACTLY why I said you were being nihilistic, you don't believe what the strip tells you outright. If you nothing in the strip can be believed, then I say you think "...nothing can be known or communicated."

Incorrect. I do not think "...nothing can be known or communicated", and thus am not (in that or in any other way) a nihilist.

'The strip' says nothing. It is a vessel of communication. It contains communication and is not communication in and of itself. Narration and characters communicate, not the strip.

Narration, when presented as a bodiless speaker (such as on pages 1 and 2 of this comic) is generally accepted to be factual information (in the context of the work of fiction, of course). In the context of a graphical medium (such as a comic), the visuals (so long as they are not in the context of a fictive experience, such as Parson's thinkagram with Charlie) can be considered narration.

Characters, on the other hand, are in general capable of telling untruths, whether deliberate lies or by having incorrect information themselves. Thus we must examine their motives and/or the source of their information before deeming it incontrovertible.

The 'proof' you believe is concrete is largely based on characters, but also on some narration. The narration, however (in the form of the 'yellow magic') is Two distinct images. In one, wanda's scroll and eyes glow yellow. In the other [pixie dust ], it is a material component to the spell, or possibly a one-shot magic item and not a spell at all.

The rest is a matter of examining character motivations and proffering alternative explanations, which I could do quite easily, but is beyond the scope of this reply, which is intended to speak more to your choice of terminology and logical fallacies. The proof or lack thereof for the spell is a separate issue that I have rehashed numerous times and do not feel like repeating.

To abandon the existence of a spell, the authors would have to re-explain every single one of these occurrences, or leave enormous continuity gaps. Thats just poor story telling on their part if thats the case.

Incorrect again. There are explanations already available, for those willing/able to see them. If you are not, I can elucidate them for you.

So, if only the creators know anything, why do I bother to read the strip?

Simply put, to find out what they know. If you already knew it all, it wouldn't be nearly as enjoyable, now would it?

Never! Language is meant to malleable, otherwise we'd live in a world with out poetry! And nobody wants that, except maybe Ford Perfect. On another note, my job, like my signature, really is being a scholar (at a university). Now I'm neither a philosopher or linguist or semiotician, but don't think me ignorant of the basics.

Do you mean Ford Prefect? I don't know if he had a low tolerance or if Vogon poetry loses some of it's 'oomph' when translated into English. As for the malleability of words, it may be desirable in artistic works, but it is not desirable in jargon. I too work in academia, though I do not get payed to be a scholar (someday, perhaps). I do study philosophy in my spare time, however (and if I'm lucky will someday have a diploma to prove it).

The presence of concrete proof leads me to expect that can only be a http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...ShockingSwerve , though only because the site doesn't have a "They're just making this up as they go along for maximum shock effect while pretending like they had some truly elaborate scheme going on, aren't they."

It may turn out to be a shocking swerve to some people, but it won't be because there is concrete proof to the contrary. We have obviously been led to believe that there was a spell, either because there was, or to make the reveal all the more dramatic. The evidence, however, is not so much concrete as wet mud.

And even the creators word probably won't help, it's people like you that still argue Belkar is Chaotic Netural when Rich told us otherwise.

I am insulted. You know next to nothing about me, so how can you say that?

On the other hand, when it comes to artistic analysis, the author's word only describes intent. Art is funky like that.

Rob and Jamie could tell us straight up there was a spell (and probably note "we thougtht his was assumed) and you'd be arguing about what that meant.

Don't tell me what I would and would not be doing. It is rude and quite probably wrong.

There was a spell, most of us believe there was a spell, so cling to your contradictory theories if you must but spare us your arguments on issues that have been established untill there are facts to back it up, please.

By your logic the world was flat until there was concrete evidence to prove otherwise. Homey don' play that.

Face it that you could be wrong. I fully admit I could be wrong, but there is as of yet no concrete evidence in either direction.

[kagato23]

Face it that you could be wrong. I fully admit I could be wrong, but there is as of yet no concrete evidence in either direction.

How about a conversation between the two people that would have to be integral to this deception? Or are they lying to each other as well? Also, exactly why for that matter is Wanda damaged, with speech slurring and untill recently catatonia, which the thinkamancer stated was the result of a broken spell, if there was in fact no spell?

[SteveMB]

How about a conversation between the two people that would have to be integral to this deception? Or are they lying to each other as well? Also, exactly why for that matter is Wanda damaged, with speech slurring and untill recently catatonia, which the thinkamancer stated was the result of a broken spell, if there was in fact no spell?

Well, to be fair, Jillian is presumably relying on what Jaclyn told her earlier about being under a spell.

However, the "there wasn't really any spell" theory requires that Jaclyn was lying or mistaken and that Wanda was lying to everybody* about the spell and that Wanda was confident that Jillian wouldn't cause any problems even without a spell and that there's an alternative explanation for Wanda's crash** and that this alternative explanation looked just like the expected "spell backlash damage" to Maggie the Thinkamancer.

That's just too tall a stack of "ands", IMO.

*Including Stanley, which might be a defiance of Natural Thinkamancy -- I can't recall offhand a clearcut instance of Wanda outright lying to him.
**Actually, given that Wanda's crash happened after Jillian got through her crash and went all stabbity-stabbity-chop-chop on Leeroy, this last one seems likely. However, that still leaves several other things, all of which have to be true.

[kagato23]

Well, to be fair, Jillian is presumably relying on what Jaclyn told her earlier about being under a spell.

However, the "there wasn't really any spell" theory requires that Jaclyn was lying or mistaken and that Wanda was lying to everybody* about the spell and that Wanda was confident that Jillian wouldn't cause any problems even without a spell and that there's an alternative explanation for Wanda's crash** and that this alternative explanation looked just like the expected "spell backlash damage" to Maggie the Thinkamancer.

That's just too tall a stack of "ands", IMO.

*Including Stanley, which might be a defiance of Natural Thinkamancy -- I can't recall offhand a clearcut instance of Wanda outright lying to him.
**Actually, given that Wanda's crash happened after Jillian got through her crash and went all stabbity-stabbity-chop-chop on Leeroy, this last one seems likely. However, that still leaves several other things, all of which have to be true.

Exactly

Though as to your last point, Wanda went from being very verbose to 1 syllable words at that point. I suspect the effects of the spell were already underway. Perhaps the collaspe was a secondary effect, what with the falling from favor and loosing the fight etc, but to me she was already feeling the effects. And additionally, Maggie, who would have no reason to be part of any such deception, described to Parson that Wanda's condition was the result of a spell being broken. I'm willing to believe that Wanda was not as incapiciated as she was purely by virtue of the spell, but I think all evidence thus far points to a spell in fact being at least a partial reason.

[teratorn]

Face it that you could be wrong. I fully admit I could be wrong, but there is as of yet no concrete evidence in either direction.

The spell compels you to seek a reason.

Jaclyn could be lying, but why? Just to get Jillian to spend money on a thinkagram? It's too farfetched.

On the other hand Jaclyn's attachment to Jillian, evident again in this last strip, is somewhat surprising. She's not like the other archons, all business oriented.

[fendrin]

Well, to be fair, Jillian is presumably relying on what Jaclyn told her earlier about being under a spell.

Indeed. Also, we have a conspicuous lack of (verbal) response from Wanda. It was the perfect time for her to justify it, apologize for it, deny it, whatever, but yet she did not. That is not direct evidence for either possibility, but it does get my "twist sense" tingling (not that it's infallible or anything).

However, the "there wasn't really any spell" theory requires that Jaclyn was lying or mistakenand that Wanda was lying to everybody* about the spell and that Wanda was confident that Jillian wouldn't cause any problems even without a spell and that there's an alternative explanation for Wanda's crash** and that this alternative explanation looked just like the expected "spell backlash damage" to Maggie the Thinkamancer.

That's just too tall a stack of "ands", IMO.

*Including Stanley, which might be a defiance of Natural Thinkamancy -- I can't recall offhand a clearcut instance of Wanda outright lying to him.
**Actually, given that Wanda's crash happened after Jillian got through her crash and went all stabbity-stabbity-chop-chop on Leeroy, this last one seems likely. However, that still leaves several other things, all of which have to be true.

Ok, I'll try not to miss any...

• Jaclyn may have ulterior motives, as she works for Charlie, who at this point is a plot black-hole*. For that matter, she might be simply lying to make her job less complicated. For that matter, how does Jaclyn know that it's Wanda?? I can understand assuming that Stanley has a croakamancer involved, what with Leeroy getting a wet willy, but why assume it's the croakamancer that cast the supposed spell on Jillian, and even more so, that the croakamancer is female ("These... are her creatures"; bold added)?? Jaclyn obviously has more info about what's going on than a simple 'Detect Magic' spell would indicate.
• Jillian is a source of crucial intelligence, but only if she is able to go out into the field and periodically get captured. Not letting Jillian go free could lead to Stanley's destruction, but he would never agree to it unless he thought she was under control. Thus Wanda lying to Stanley is for his own good, and thus she is allowed to lie to him. I fact, duty compels her to. (It may be a stretch, but so long as Wanda buys it it gets her around the lying to Stanley problem... rationalization would seem to be a powerful tool against natural thinkamancy)
• Wanda is convinced that Jillian would never harm her. She essentially says that Jillian loves her, and I believe that she loves Jillian. I mean, think about how overjoyed she is to see Jillian again. She's absolutely giddy. Wanda Firebough, the mean, nasty, tough-as-nails croakamancer is as giddy as a schoolgirl. I mean, she gets dressed up as if she were going on a date, not going to a torture/interrogation session. When you truly love somebody, you trust them not to rip your heart out of your chest and shove it in your face...
• ...which is what it must have felt like when Jillian betrayed her, and hooked up with Ansom. Imagine loving and trusting someone so much you almost literally put your life in their hands, just to have them throw it all away for some pretty-boy... what would your emotional state be like? That sort of thing causes people to snap, go into depression, become homicidal... or all of the above, which seems to be exactly what has happened to Wanda.
• We really don't know enough about the effects of backlash or Erfling conceptions of psychology to know whether or not Maggie could tell the difference between the two, or whether she would treat them any differently. For that matter we don't even really know if Maggie is as good at thinkamancy as she claims. She could be utterly incompetent, and just pretending to be better than she is (Gee, no one ever lies on a resume...).

*We don't know the extent of Ansom's contract with Charlie is. Part of it could be to find out what is going on with Jillian. For that matter, it's not inconceivable for Charlie to be a chessmaster

[kagato23]

Ok, I'll try not to miss any...

• Jaclyn may have ulterior motives, as she works for Charlie, who at this point is a plot black-hole*. For that matter, she might be simply lying to make her job less complicated. For that matter, how does Jaclyn know that it's Wanda?? I can understand assuming that Stanley has a croakamancer involved, what with Leeroy getting a wet willy, but why assume it's the croakamancer that cast the supposed spell on Jillian, and even more so, that the croakamancer is female ("These... are her creatures"; bold added)?? Jaclyn obviously has more info about what's going on than a simple 'Detect Magic' spell would indicate.
• Jillian is a source of crucial intelligence, but only if she is able to go out into the field and periodically get captured. Not letting Jillian go free could lead to Stanley's destruction, but he would never agree to it unless he thought she was under control. Thus Wanda lying to Stanley is for his own good, and thus she is allowed to lie to him. I fact, duty compels her to. (It may be a stretch, but so long as Wanda buys it it gets her around the lying to Stanley problem... rationalization would seem to be a powerful tool against natural thinkamancy)
• Wanda is convinced that Jillian would never harm her. She essentially says that Jillian loves her, and I believe that she loves Jillian. I mean, think about how overjoyed she is to see Jillian again. She's absolutely giddy. Wanda Firebough, the mean, nasty, tough-as-nails croakamancer is as giddy as a schoolgirl. I mean, she gets dressed up as if she were going on a date, not going to a torture/interrogation session. When you truly love somebody, you trust them not to rip your heart out of your chest and shove it in your face...
• ...which is what it must have felt like when Jillian betrayed her, and hooked up with Ansom. Imagine loving and trusting someone so much you almost literally put your life in their hands, just to have them throw it all away for some pretty-boy... what would your emotional state be like? That sort of thing causes people to snap, go into depression, become homicidal... or all of the above, which seems to be exactly what has happened to Wanda.
• We really don't know enough about the effects of backlash or Erfling conceptions of psychology to know whether or not Maggie could tell the difference between the two, or whether she would treat them any differently. For that matter we don't even really know if Maggie is as good at thinkamancy as she claims. She could be utterly incompetent, and just pretending to be better than she is (Gee, no one ever lies on a resume...).

*We don't know the extent of Ansom's contract with Charlie is. Part of it could be to find out what is going on with Jillian. For that matter, it's not inconceivable for Charlie to be a chessmaster

... OKay, that's pretty damn good. I'll give you that. I don't agree with any of it mind (except Charlie being a chessmaster, that is quite plausable. At the least he's an opportunist). I still think that's far too many assumptions to make when it's presented as being fake. And an awful lot of preperation for a simple "There was no spell, I thought you loved me" comment, as I don't see at this point what more your theory could lead to. Either way, Jillian has made the decision to be with Ansom.

The Maggie parts a bit weak though. Your assuming she's in competant, when she was previously the head of an unparalled communication and observation network, as wanda put it? Also, according to Sizemore, three casters bound together is supposed to be no easy feat. Maggie is by all indications very good at what she does, and she obviously did something with Wanda, as she'll much better than her previous near catatonia.

Also, Wanda relying on a pure S&M mastery relationship to have Jillian be a traitor seems a bit much, especially when she knows that Jillian loves Ansom. If however, she was relying on that AND a spell, I can see where she'd get the confidence.

[teratorn]

Jaclyn may have ulterior motives, as she works for Charlie, who at this point is a plot black-hole*. For that matter, she might be simply lying to make her job less complicated.

But Jaclyn does it again, she's again helping Jillian. It could be an act, and the surprise shown by the other archons part of that act, but for now I fail to see the motivation for that. Besides, how did they know Jillian had some sort of relation with Wanda, how did they know which strings to pull? They could suspect treason and some sort of relation with Stanley, not Wanda.

For that matter, how does Jaclyn know that it's Wanda??

Probably they have some info on the casters from GK, and the spell detection includes info on type of spell and caster level. I don't believe Jaclyn was acting, but assuming you're right, a possible motivation for Charlie could be trying to capture Wanda. Breaking Jillian and Wanda's relation would make it easier for him to claim Wanda.

Jaclyn obviously has more info about what's going on than a simple 'Detect Magic' spell would indicate.

It's possible there was something pretty nasty between Charlie and Stanley in the past. When Maggie comments on how odd Charlie is, she acts like she had previous contact with the owner of the arkendish. It's quite possible Charlie knows a lot about GK.

[Moechi_Vill]

Do we actually know this? I mean, yeah, the circumstances look suspicious, but as far as I know it's just speculation that Stanley was involved.

Here's a thought: what if Wanda was behind the deaths of both Saline and Banhammer, knowing that would make Stanley her nominal ruler and she'd have an easy time manipulating him?

durrh .... ('t least regarding the death of Saline)

[SteveMB]

Though as to your last point, Wanda went from being very verbose to 1 syllable words at that point. I suspect the effects of the spell were already underway. Perhaps the collapse was a secondary effect, what with the falling from favor and loosing the fight etc, but to me she was already feeling the effects.

You have a point; she might have already been feeling (and fighting off?) a backlash effect, and fully succumbed after everything came crashing down (not only Jillian broken free of her control, but also the battle lost, Stanley enraged, and Gobwin Knob apparently doomed).

[Guyinthestreet]

I just wish they wouldn't use internet lingo and memes every two frames. It's becoming quite corny to me. I await the flames.

[Dragonath]

Can we stop discussing the "there was/wasn't a mind control spell" because I want to hear more opinions on what will happen next instead of what has already been.

What will Parson do now that Wanda is going to attack ?

Wanda isn't in much risk to be honest cause Jillian ordered her units to scatter once things got out of hand so Wanda will only be able to take some units down before the air forces flee from GK.

[SteveMB]

I just wish they wouldn't use internet lingo and memes every two frames. It's becoming quite corny to me. I await the flames.

There's no point arguing an issue of taste -- one either likes it, or not.

What will Parson do now that Wanda is going to attack?

First, he needs to find out what's going on. So far as we know, all he's aware of is that a flyer incursion group just parked itself over the Tower of Efdup. My guess is that he intends to keep his head down. A fireworks show just above and outside his window might change his mind....

Wanda isn't in much risk to be honest cause Jillian ordered her units to scatter once things got out of hand so Wanda will only be able to take some units down before the air forces flee from GK.

Assuming they obey orders better than Jillian herself usually does.