31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Discuss the comic here!
User avatar
ForgetsOldName
Is Heard Often
Posts: 301
UStream Username: TwoCoo
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by ForgetsOldName » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:11 am

If the necklace is in oblivion...does Oblivious have it?
The old name was Twocoo. The avatar is the scariest thing in Wizardry I, circa 1981.

User avatar
Wolfie
She Who Admins
She Who Admins
Posts: 3472
UStream Username: Wolfie213
Location: In a handbasket on a bus... and it's hot

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by Wolfie » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 am

ForgetsOldName wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:11 am If the necklace is in oblivion...does Oblivious have it?
Oblivious doesn't even have itself... except when it does.
"This is my therapy dragon, she's for my panic attacks. I attack, everyone panics." (Quote found on http://outofcontextdnd.tumblr.com/)

"If I have a +2 strength sword and I stab you, you won't get a +2 strength, you get wounds" ~Sir Butcher

"How few there are who have courage enough to own their faults, or resolution enough to mend them." ~Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
BuildsLegos
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 906
UStream Username: BuildsLegos
Location: So rorery in OKC

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by BuildsLegos » Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:54 am

If you drop a few rocks into a forge, does a sword that was already made from a similar or even the same forge have the rocks? No, and there's never been any indication that Oblivious "has" anything dropped into oblivion or not. Where do you think the necklace would manifest, and why not Minmax's boots, pants, and backpack with it?
The only one to pay attention to what happens in Goblins.

User avatar
ForgetsOldName
Is Heard Often
Posts: 301
UStream Username: TwoCoo
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by ForgetsOldName » Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:24 am

BuildsLegos wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:54 am If you drop a few rocks into a forge, does a sword that was already made from a similar or even the same forge have the rocks? No, and there's never been any indication that Oblivious "has" anything dropped into oblivion or not. Where do you think the necklace would manifest, and why not Minmax's boots, pants, and backpack with it?
Oblivious is not made out of Oblivion. Oblivious replicated Oblivion.

Think about this--the original sword was capable of being a flaming sword, at least I think it was. If a sword were made out of fire, it would go out instantly as there would be no fuel. So the fire sword must in some sense have something that is not fuel but which keeps it burning.

Makes my head hurt, but I think I could make a case for it. But I don't think it's worth getting into too deeply as the logic of the Maze is about as convoluted as a ball of mating garter snakes. Either Thunt will make it happen, or he won't.

As far as the boots, I don't think it's impossible that you can pull the boots out of Oblivion, but the necklace has an advantage in that Kin and Minmax might be able to work out that it used to exist. We're told the pants never existed, but if the necklace never existed, Kin's IME has no cause.
The old name was Twocoo. The avatar is the scariest thing in Wizardry I, circa 1981.

User avatar
BuildsLegos
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 906
UStream Username: BuildsLegos
Location: So rorery in OKC

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by BuildsLegos » Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:43 am

There was no mention or showing that it could copy non-solids that do exist, and the inability to do so is surely apart of the safety-guard that Kin described. But you can't account for non-existence, which is why Oblivious tried to copy it and glitch-ed into the current state.

You're not going to pull anything out of oblivion except the lack of a hand. And we've already explained that Psimax's imperfect oblivion erases matter and memory, but the emotional impact reflected on Kin's face when she received it is beyond the realms of either. They're never getting the physical item back, but this is a psychologically accurate example of Love Conquers All.
The only one to pay attention to what happens in Goblins.

redfeather
Enjoys Chitchat
Posts: 286

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by redfeather » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:32 pm

BuildsLegos wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:54 am If you drop a few rocks into a forge, does a sword that was already made from a similar or even the same forge have the rocks? No, and there's never been any indication that Oblivious "has" anything dropped into oblivion or not. Where do you think the necklace would manifest, and why not Minmax's boots, pants, and backpack with it?
And one of the alt Minmaxes himself, who was swallowed by the very first oblivion hole we saw.

User avatar
BuildsLegos
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 906
UStream Username: BuildsLegos
Location: So rorery in OKC

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by BuildsLegos » Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:16 pm

ForgetsOldName wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:24 amOblivious is not made out of Oblivion. Oblivious replicated Oblivion.

Think about this--the original sword was capable of being a flaming sword, at least I think it was. If a sword were made out of fire, it would go out instantly as there would be no fuel. So the fire sword must in some sense have something that is not fuel but which keeps it burning.
I should have done this a lot sooner, but I want you to really soak in the words on this page.
The only one to pay attention to what happens in Goblins.

User avatar
ForgetsOldName
Is Heard Often
Posts: 301
UStream Username: TwoCoo
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by ForgetsOldName » Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:05 am

BuildsLegos wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:16 pm
ForgetsOldName wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:24 amOblivious is not made out of Oblivion. Oblivious replicated Oblivion.

Think about this--the original sword was capable of being a flaming sword, at least I think it was. If a sword were made out of fire, it would go out instantly as there would be no fuel. So the fire sword must in some sense have something that is not fuel but which keeps it burning.
I should have done this a lot sooner, but I want you to really soak in the words on this page.
I'm obviously aware of that page.

I have to say, the level of snarky comments without any content is really high on this page. I keep quitting these forums and changing my mind and coming back. Honestly I don't care what forumnites want to do but if no one thinks I'm contributing I'm outa here.
The old name was Twocoo. The avatar is the scariest thing in Wizardry I, circa 1981.

User avatar
Krulle
Transcribes Goblins
Posts: 8116
Contact:

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by Krulle » Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:17 am

Forgets, for what it is worth, I do think you are contributing.

I assume BuildsLegos was simply providing a page as source. He may have quoted the wrong person too.

Anyway, my thought train derailed:
oblivion tried to destroy the sword, then the swords magic kicked in trying to protect the sword. And it usd its main magic: copying the properties of what is currently attacking the sword.
After that, oblivion was unable to destroy Oblivious, as Oblivious technically does not exist (anymore).
Goblinscomic transcriptions
Collection of G:AR cards

User avatar
BuildsLegos
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 906
UStream Username: BuildsLegos
Location: So rorery in OKC

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by BuildsLegos » Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:51 am

There's a blatant and direct contradiction between the way Forgets and Kin describe Oblivious, in so far she even says "It's made of oblivion". Forgets seems to think being made of something is mutually exclusive to replicating it, when the whole point of the sword's introduction was showing the exact opposite. Earlier on the same page, Forgath mentions the EXACT same hypothetical design flaw that Forgets did, and Kin even debunks such worry more acutely than I remember. Look, none of us are immune to brain-farts, but if you want one to be your hill to die on, then good riddance. How rude of me to not spell it out for you, when I should insult your intelligence.
The only one to pay attention to what happens in Goblins.

User avatar
Wolfie
She Who Admins
She Who Admins
Posts: 3472
UStream Username: Wolfie213
Location: In a handbasket on a bus... and it's hot

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by Wolfie » Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:15 pm

Politeness is a general requirement for the boards.

If someone has mentioned that the tone of another post is a bit too snarky, or mean, or even rude, then please do not keep egging it on. Either apologize for your slight, intended or not, and move on, or simply move on. Continuing to poke the wound is unwise and will result in an official warning, as the people involved in this have been warned previously.
"This is my therapy dragon, she's for my panic attacks. I attack, everyone panics." (Quote found on http://outofcontextdnd.tumblr.com/)

"If I have a +2 strength sword and I stab you, you won't get a +2 strength, you get wounds" ~Sir Butcher

"How few there are who have courage enough to own their faults, or resolution enough to mend them." ~Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
Glemp
Poorly Locked Patron
Poorly Locked Patron
Posts: 1082

Re: 31 July, 2018--Could that be what I think it is?

Post by Glemp » Sun Aug 26, 2018 9:27 am

For what it's worth, my thoughts regarding Oblivious is that it's what happens when you destroy a sword, but leave its properties intact. It no longer physically exists, but has all the intangible attributes of being physical - weight, and sharpness, and shape. It's like if you allowed moss to grow around a brick, then after centuries the brick crumbles but the moss holds the shape of the brick together in the hole it's left.

Post Reply