The One Guy
Rust Maid
Posts: 1,148
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by The One Guy on May 19, 2017 20:49:39 GMT
Fair points, but I'd argue the person providing the power is not being evil just because it can get misused. If a cook was struggling to cut through some food item and I give them a sharp kitchen knife, would that make me evil for giving the cook something that can be used to kill people? In the same way, players giving the next iteration of players power to more easily beat the game are not evil just because said power could be misused. And one application of our mental abilities is the invention of morality, or knowing when to relent. You know. The mentality that stopped us from becoming entrenched in nuclear war. And this morality would be possessed by the ones who get the power as well. The equivalent to players not powering-up their successors would be if the scientists that invented the nuclear bomb withheld their research or simply didn't do the research in the first place. This is not what happened, and guess what? We're avoiding nuclear war anyway, and even getting positive benefits from nuclear technology as well! Fair enough with this point, though.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 19, 2017 23:25:10 GMT
While, theoretically speaking, evolution would naturally provide that kind of effect, using consciousness and technology to manipulate what was already there is generally a bad idea. Doesn't every single technological and sociological advancement we as a species have made count as this? Are you saying that civilisation itself is generally a bad idea? What we're talking about, in a particularly long-term way, is giving super powers to an essentially random group of people. There's absolutely no guarantee whether it will produce heroes or villains, or guaranteeing that group will use their power justly. But they're not just random people. They're the people that you've spent however many centuries guiding along their way. In theory, by the time they start playing Sburb, you should've gotten them to be about as just, civilised and reasonable as they can be. Sure, it's possible that out of all the players, you may then get the bad eggs such as a genuine psychopaths, but that sort of thing would've happened anyway, and by shaping the culture the right way, they'd be better equipped to deal with unsavoury players. So even though we're quite explicitly told that God Tiers are meant to look after the next species, you're saying they shouldn't ever actually do anything towards that goal? Even the more passive actions like stopping an incoming asteroid can affect the species: if they've developed the astronomy to see the asteroid and note that it's mysteriously disappeared, that's going to shake up their society quite a bit, all their religions will spur into overdrive claiming it as their miracle, all the scientists will drop everything they're doing to figure out why it happened etc.
|
|
axolotlSushi
Scampermaster
Hi, my name is That Bastard
Posts: 215
Pronouns: they/them/theirs
|
Post by axolotlSushi on May 19, 2017 23:31:40 GMT
While, theoretically speaking, evolution would naturally provide that kind of effect, using consciousness and technology to manipulate what was already there is generally a bad idea. Doesn't every single technological and sociological advancement we as a species have made count as this? Are you saying that civilisation itself is generally a bad idea? Not quite, I was more referring to the manipulation of evolution. And, this kind of thing already happens, to an extent... For example, dog breeding. Please, try to tell me that there aren't an abundance of problems with that situation.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on May 20, 2017 1:50:50 GMT
Fair points, but I'd argue the person providing the power is not being evil just because it can get misused. If a cook was struggling to cut through some food item and I give them a sharp kitchen knife, would that make me evil for giving the cook something that can be used to kill people? In the same way, players giving the next iteration of players power to more easily beat the game are not evil just because said power could be misused. I'm not saying it isn't subtle, but if I had to decide where it fell, I think it's a little too easy to make a case for Just. Like how Rose charging at Condesce in revenge doesn't necessarily qualify as Heroic, and Vriska challenging Jack Noir might not qualify as Just, the situation certainly isn't clear cut, but the intent of the individual takes a backseat to the (would-be) consequences. Empowering a group that was already capable of doing tremendous good presents the chance they might be able to do a bit more, which is itself uncertain, as well as the risk of creating a terrible tyrant, which while similarly unlikely would be unconscionable. Does the potential reward justify the risks? So even though we're quite explicitly told that God Tiers are meant to look after the next species, you're saying they shouldn't ever actually do anything towards that goal? Even the more passive actions like stopping an incoming asteroid can affect the species: if they've developed the astronomy to see the asteroid and note that it's mysteriously disappeared, that's going to shake up their society quite a bit, all their religions will spur into overdrive claiming it as their miracle, all the scientists will drop everything they're doing to figure out why it happened etc. There's a difference between "looking after" a race, and manipulating their culture towards a specific end they weren't given the chance to comprehend or agree with. Doing something like stopping a meteor from wiping them out doesn't rob them of their independence, just the opposite, it gives them a fair chance to evolve without the cruelty of random chaos to cut them short. Something like preventing a world war is more of a fringe case, because it kind of does both, putting them on a path away from self destruction, but also denying them the consequences of their own actions. Doing something more extreme, like shaping the way their mythology unfolds, is injecting your own ideas onto them, and not letting them be themselves. If you own up to it, you're a god and a dictator all at once. If you don't, you're an insidious puppetmaster. Again, I'm not saying there isn't subtlety to the situation. I'm not trying to brazenly ignore the potential good of the situation at all. Just pointing out an alternative viewpoint and looking into certain possibilities that I think make the prospect a bit troubling.
|
|
|
Post by melonlord on May 20, 2017 5:21:31 GMT
You know...setting aside potential moral and ethical issues for a moment, the idea of meticulously shaping a civilization to Sburb-readiness scares me less than the people responsible for actually carrying it out.
Even without considering the inevitable corruption that would result from such power, just imagine the sort of heinous shit a group of recently traumatized god-powered teenagers with the self-imposed mission of creating the ultimate Sburb players might do entirely on accident. They try to instill a deep value of combat and fighting in some ancient tribe, and end up creating an empire of bloodthirsty spartan conquerors. They (poorly) explain Sburb and the meteors, and inspire a death-worshipping apocalypse cult some hundred years later. They give some hapless kingdom sburb-tech and alchemiters, and the king uses them to conquer and destroy his neighbors. They spread stories of obscenely badass warrior gods in the hopes of giving them more powerful god-tiers, and in a millennium or so everyone's making human sacrifices and having bloody, violent holy wars.
I just don't think any group of sburb victors would know enough about human nature (heck, not even human nature, the nature of whatever species evolves) to pull that kind of thing off without everything going horribly wrong.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 20, 2017 5:53:06 GMT
You know...setting aside potential moral and ethical issues for a moment, the idea of meticulously shaping a civilization to Sburb-readiness scares me less than the people responsible for actually carrying it out. Even without considering the inevitable corruption that would result from such power, just imagine the sort of heinous shit a group of recently traumatized god-powered teenagers with the self-imposed mission of creating the ultimate Sburb players might do entirely on accident. They try to instill a deep value of combat and fighting in some ancient tribe, and end up creating an empire of bloodthirsty spartan conquerors. They (poorly) explain Sburb and the meteors, and inspire a death-worshipping apocalypse cult some hundred years later. They give some hapless kingdom sburb-tech and alchemiters, and the king uses them to conquer and destroy his neighbors. They spread stories of obscenely badass warrior gods in the hopes of giving them more powerful god-tiers, and in a millennium or so everyone's making human sacrifices and having bloody, violent holy wars. I just don't think any group of sburb victors would know enough about human nature (heck, not even human nature, the nature of whatever species evolves) to pull that kind of thing off without everything going horribly wrong. You make it sound as though the only approach is to drop a bunch of gospels onto the first tribe you come across and leave it at that. But consider the options before you: Firstly "a group of recently traumatized god-powered teenagers". Time travel is a thing, they can take however long they like to unwind, deliberate and plan things out and also get in some natural maturation that Sburb so rudely interrupted. Following on from that, just as Dave used his time travel to game the LoHaC-SE, you could just travel to the future, where the civilisation is flourishing, hit up the local library, open a history book, and see exactly what it is you did to get there. Even if you don't have time travel for whatever reason, half of your scenarios are trivially avoided. If that one king starts causing a scene, you use whatever superpowers you have at your disposal to sit his ass down and explain to him in small words why wiping out the poor is a no-no.(Also, why'd you give just one kingdom alchemiters and not the others?) And if there are people making blood sacrifices in your name, all you have to do is just turn up and say "Hey, stop that. Get back to inventing medicine or something."
|
|
axolotlSushi
Scampermaster
Hi, my name is That Bastard
Posts: 215
Pronouns: they/them/theirs
|
Post by axolotlSushi on May 20, 2017 14:55:13 GMT
Even if you don't have time travel for whatever reason, half of your scenarios are trivially avoided. If that one king starts causing a scene, you use whatever superpowers you have at your disposal to sit his ass down and explain to him in small words why wiping out the poor is a no-no.(Also, why'd you give just one kingdom alchemiters and not the others?) And if there are people making blood sacrifices in your name, all you have to do is just turn up and say "Hey, stop that. Get back to inventing medicine or something." Now, I don't mean to start a whole religious debate here, but, I feel the need to draw this comparison... Just consider how the whole "Jesus" thing went down. Sure, there were probably fantastic intentions there! But, there are one of two things that can happen in that situation- or, in our situation, both. There are people on both sides of the spectrum, doing bad things because they shun his 'gospel', and people twisting it and following it in a way that just ends up hurting everyone involved.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on May 20, 2017 16:05:23 GMT
Following on from that, just as Dave used his time travel to game the LoHaC-SE, you could just travel to the future, where the civilisation is flourishing, hit up the local library, open a history book, and see exactly what it is you did to get there. Uh-oh, looks like somebody subscribes to the Karkat school of badly flawed thinking. "Why waste effort coming up with a plan of my own when I can skip ahead and see what I'll have already done, and do that?" Which, come to think of it, Karkat himself retorts, in his past before he even gets to that point. Man that guy needs to get it together. But yeah, Melonlord brings up a pretty good point. Even without regarding the moral grey area of the intended result, to manipulate a society to the degree of specificity required would be a monumental challenge for anyone, and there's A LOT they could fuck up in trying and failing. Even an amoral omniscient didn't have an easy run of it.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 21, 2017 6:01:56 GMT
Uh-oh, looks like somebody subscribes to the Karkat school of badly flawed thinking. "Why waste effort coming up with a plan of my own when I can skip ahead and see what I'll have already done, and do that?" Which, come to think of it, Karkat himself retorts, in his past before he even gets to that point. Man that guy needs to get it together. Just because one idiot failed to pull it off doesn't make it a fundamentally flawed strategy. Unless there's an unresolvable paradox that I'm missing entirely. Who said anything about specificity? For one thing, even just general nudges like telling the first few tribes to put a lot of emphasis on, say, reason and justice will likely do a lot of long term good. Secondly, there's no need to micromanage all of this. Delegate. Every generation or so, find a handful of people who are more competent that most, and tell the people to defer to them for advice/leadership. Once the civilisation has a good run of behaving itself, you can then hand them over to a democracy, now that they've got good precedent for what a good leader looks like.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on May 21, 2017 19:59:41 GMT
Just because one idiot failed to pull it off doesn't make it a fundamentally flawed strategy. Unless there's an unresolvable paradox that I'm missing entirely. Alright I was a bit of a jackass just there, sorry. But it does strike me as a huge fail in logical thinking. If you're lazy enough to let paradoxes do your own work for you, who's will are you following, your own or something else's? What if it turns out you do something horrible? Do you decide to ignore that future and change destiny? CAN you do that? It really is a more subtle thing than I guess I'm giving it credit for, it's why Jade insists on not allowing information pertaining to her future makes it to her past, so the plan she comes up with is her own and not the spawn of a paradox. The fact Karkat is the type willing to cheat in this way without understanding what an ontological paradox is is probably part of why he fails in a metaphysical sense. If he's not willing to put in the work, why would he get any results? Wasn't the whole focus of this argument about creating mythological figures to allow God Tiers to become more powerful? Either way, I don't think this is as easy as you're trying to argue. Like, okay. How do you go about finding the people to be leaders? How much time would that take? How would they determine competence? What if they choose wrong and have to clean up their own mess? But honestly these are problems they'd be getting into as regular Gods anyway, shepherding their creation as they see fit. It's not an easy job. Just not fucking it up is an enormous task, let alone trying to manufacture a specific result.
|
|
|
Post by renegadeshroom on May 25, 2017 11:14:26 GMT
Just because one idiot failed to pull it off doesn't make it a fundamentally flawed strategy. Unless there's an unresolvable paradox that I'm missing entirely. Alright I was a bit of a jackass just there, sorry. But it does strike me as a huge fail in logical thinking. If you're lazy enough to let paradoxes do your own work for you, who's will are you following, your own or something else's? What if it turns out you do something horrible? Do you decide to ignore that future and change destiny? CAN you do that? It really is a more subtle thing than I guess I'm giving it credit for, it's why Jade insists on not allowing information pertaining to her future makes it to her past, so the plan she comes up with is her own and not the spawn of a paradox. The fact Karkat is the type willing to cheat in this way without understanding what an ontological paradox is is probably part of why he fails in a metaphysical sense. If he's not willing to put in the work, why would he get any results? Your own. Either way you go about it, Dave's method or Caliborn's method, the will you're following is your own. By setting out with a specific intent in mind, and immediately skipping to the end of the loop (hitting up the distant future library detailing how shit went down) you get all the pertinent info because you're the one responsible for the loop; your will creates the loop itself, and is responsible for the events within. All that's left for the time traveler to do is actually read what they did, and then simply do it. The rest... well, doomed timeline mechanics come into play after this. That gets a whole lot messier.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on May 26, 2017 0:37:38 GMT
Your own. Either way you go about it, Dave's method or Caliborn's method, the will you're following is your own. By setting out with a specific intent in mind, and immediately skipping to the end of the loop (hitting up the distant future library detailing how shit went down) you get all the pertinent info because you're the one responsible for the loop; your will creates the loop itself, and is responsible for the events within. All that's left for the time traveler to do is actually read what they did, and then simply do it. The rest... well, doomed timeline mechanics come into play after this. That gets a whole lot messier. Let's look at it logically. What kind of solution to a problem is it to look for answers in a paradox? The idea hinges on getting ideas from somewhere else instead of coming up with one on your own. How are you supposed to have it both ways? It's like looking up a walkthrough to a game. Instead of solving problems on your own, you're looking for a handy dandy list that has the solution to every obstacle laid out. (Not that I'm trying to knock walkthroughs by the way) The difference here is that this isn't a game with a preordained outcome, it's a whole wide reality where anything can happen, and there's no clean solution. Worse still, the author of your walkthrough is the unknowable forces of time. The idea that your will can subconsciously affect the outcome of paradoxes is a counter to the idea the inevitability ignores your will altogether. But that can still happen when you voluntarily surrender it by looking for shortcuts like that. Caliborn gets away with things going his way because he proves again and again that he is stubborn and conniving enough to force inevitability to be as he wants it. When Dave gets backed into a corner and gets himself killed, it's still because he was going to have to do something that he ultimately wanted to do (fight Jack), and has to face the consequences for it even though he can see it coming. There's a reason nothing matching that description happens in the comic, as far as I'm aware. Sources of prognostication tend to be vague, and often with an agenda of their own, such as Skaia or Cue Balls. Then there's smaller cases like temporal loops in memos, where frequently they forget about the future they were just told about by the time they get around to it, allowing their natural impulses to dictate the conversation as norrmal. There's one case where Karkat questions if him flipping his lid didn't come from himself, and even that's kind of shaky. Thinking it over, I guess it's not actually terribly risky. One wouldn't suddenly find themselves doing something out of character. Most likely, they would travel into a future where they've done nothing, because there was no force of will to create the solution they were looking for. Maybe a doomed timeline where, from their perspective, the person who left in the past never returned. So completely pointless at best, and disconcerting to the friends, loved ones, and whatever innocents might have been relying on them at worst. An alternate possibility, if it's a stable time loop, is that they end up not seeing anything useful and return to the past empty handed. Maybe their future self meets them there, or has prepared for the occasion, intentionally disallowing their past self from causing a paradox and making them do it the right way.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 26, 2017 9:02:57 GMT
What kind of solution to a problem is it to look for answers in a paradox? The idea hinges on getting ideas from somewhere else instead of coming up with one on your own. How are you supposed to have it both ways? It's like looking up a walkthrough to a game. Instead of solving problems on your own, you're looking for a handy dandy list that has the solution to every obstacle laid out. (Not that I'm trying to knock walkthroughs by the way) The difference here is that this isn't a game with a preordained outcome, it's a whole wide reality where anything can happen, and there's no clean solution. Worse still, the author of your walkthrough is the unknowable forces of time. To roll with the walkthrough analogy, I think of it like this: You go to the site with all these walkthroughs, and there's a great big list of them. One is titled 'How to get Ending A', and another is called 'How to get Ending B'. You want Ending A, which walkthrough do you read? Sure, it's still the case that you didn't create the walkthrough(s), but by choosing what future/ending you want you still have the agency. It's like in animation, where you define two keyframes and the computer calculates and fills in the necessary frames in between to connect them. You didn't surrender your creative vision to the computer did you? No, you just defined your desired end state, and the system naturally filled in the details for you. You sit there as the first proto-people are just beginning to think of better ways to throw rocks at things. You firmly decide on what you want this civilisation to end up as. Travelling to the future is basically the "Is this your final answer" to step 2. And then you just need to commit to whatever plan causality throws at you. Like I said earlier, when you're immortal, super-powered and have teleportation and time travel and can delegate, a lot of the grunt work becomes trivial, so that third step isn't too hard in my opinion. On a slightly related topic, I've said before that I think the reason Caliborn won is because he encountered very little opposition. Outside of his challenge session, virtually no one seemed to care about actually stopping him, and few people put much effort to that end. It's one of the few things we can actually give credit to Vriska for. So on your note here: Did Caliborn actually need an Iron Will to bend causality the way he did, or does he just seem that way in comparison to the weaksauce competition? Outside of his Session, what Iron Will did he actually demonstrate for us? It looked to me that, metaphorically speaking, he never pushed anyone aside, everyone just stepped out of the way because they heard he'd push you if you didn't(Does that make Ms. Paint the secret, true protagonist of the story? After all, she did start out from a joke about MSPA being about her...).
|
|
|
Post by eerr on May 27, 2017 20:55:26 GMT
You didn't surrender your creative vision to the computer did you? In Karkat's world, someone else made the plan! Technically Current Karkat isn't the leader. He does not think of or make the plans himself. He just copies off himself. But he no longer has to think for himself! That's cheating! Like copying all the notes for the test off someone else! You don't learn anything. When the time comes to the most important battle- the five way bossfight? He knows NOTHING about leadership, because he can't cheat and learned nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on May 28, 2017 6:17:58 GMT
It's like in animation, where you define two keyframes and the computer calculates and fills in the necessary frames in between to connect them. You didn't surrender your creative vision to the computer did you? No, you just defined your desired end state, and the system naturally filled in the details for you. Who drew the key frames? How many key frames does an animation need? You still put effort into the drawing at every stage, you just leave the grunt work to a machine. This is different. This would be like drawing a vague sketch, or plugging in a description of what you'd like your drawing to be like, then expecting art to manifest itself from the ether. Well it's worth noting he makes a business out of operating from the shadows, and creating an environment where there is no opposition. Those who would rise up to oppose him tend to become his servants, knowingly or otherwise. The fact he goes to such lengths, has so much control, and is so successful at it for so long is the proof of his will. And it's certainly not that he fears opposition or is lacking the strength to prove this more directly, but why would a Lord do more than entertain the notion that his rule is not absolute? His masterpiece of subjugation, the alpha timeline, is the proof of his strength of will. So yes I agree, that is part of why Caliborn won.
|
|
|
Post by HypergressiveAgent on Jun 15, 2017 5:30:11 GMT
i was just going to mspa to reread problem slueth... AND THEN I FIND THIS SHIT WHAT THE HELL THE GAME IS OVER! THE CREDITS PLAYED. DON'T PLAY ME LIKE THIS AGAIN i thought i was over it :c don't tempt me again
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2017 6:59:20 GMT
i was just going to mspa to reread problem slueth... AND THEN I FIND THIS SHIT WHAT THE HELL THE GAME IS OVER! THE CREDITS PLAYED. DON'T PLAY ME LIKE THIS AGAIN i thought i was over it :c don't tempt me again epilogue. or Hussie just forgot that the page exists at all
|
|
The One Guy
Rust Maid
Posts: 1,148
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by The One Guy on Jun 15, 2017 15:51:59 GMT
Note that Jailbreak is still maked as "[UNFINISHED*]" despite him adding an ending page for it quite some time ago.
|
|
|
Post by alleywaycreeper on Jun 16, 2017 0:43:58 GMT
Note that Jailbreak is still maked as "[UNFINISHED*]" despite him adding an ending page for it quite some time ago. Eh. UNFINISHED is a bit different than IN PROGRESS. It doesn't give the same hope. Plus, Homestuck is much more well known and a much bigger deal than Jailbreak ever was.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on Aug 20, 2017 6:13:23 GMT
So as an informal poll of sorts, what's everyone's final take on Lord English's personality?
Is he...
A) An smooth fusion of Caliborn, Equius, Dirk/AR and Gamzee, combining elements of all their personalities into one coherent mind?
B) Basically Caliborn again as his iron will more-or-less subsumes and overrides the other components.
C) A conflicted and tortured being as each component fights for control
D) Little more than a feral beast as the conflict of personalities basically give him a net zero mind set.
E) Some sort of new emergent personality, with none of the components personalizes readily recognizable. or F) Unknown(and possibly irrelevant) as the story never shows enough of him to get a good reading.
Personally, I have to go with F but if we ever see more of him, I think I'd want to see the A option come true.
|
|
|
Post by Gab on Aug 20, 2017 17:45:29 GMT
B.
Potentially irrelevant, but I'd say Doc Scratch qualifies as somewhere between A and E. LE is mainly Caliborn with maybe some trifling influence from the other souls. But when all his genetic/soul information is shuffled around and recombined, the "recessive" personality traits of ARquius and 1/2 Gamzee get to play a part in defining an entirely new, unique identity.
|
|
|
Post by Blaperile on Aug 20, 2017 19:48:21 GMT
So as an informal poll of sorts, what's everyone's final take on Lord English's personality? Is he... A) An smooth fusion of Caliborn, Equius, Dirk/AR and Gamzee, combining elements of all their personalities into one coherent mind? B) Basically Caliborn again as his iron will more-or-less subsumes and overrides the other components. C) A conflicted and tortured being as each component fights for control D) Little more than a feral beast as the conflict of personalities basically give him a net zero mind set. E) Some sort of new emergent personality, with none of the components personalizes readily recognizable. or F) Unknown(and possibly irrelevant) as the story never shows enough of him to get a good reading. Personally, I have to go with F but if we ever see more of him, I think I'd want to see the A option come true. I'd go with E, with his personality basically being a mix of all components involved, with perhaps a slightly higher percentage of Caliborn and Gamzee. Same thing with Doc Scratch, except being a different kind of mix of the same personalities, with perhaps a slightly higher percentage of Auto-Responder and Equius.
|
|
The One Guy
Rust Maid
Posts: 1,148
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by The One Guy on Aug 21, 2017 17:24:37 GMT
I agree with banditAffiliate about it being B; I don't see any of his component parts in his personality aside from Caliborn, instead he seems more like Caliborn "powered up" by his component parts.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on Aug 21, 2017 21:21:18 GMT
I agree with banditAffiliate about it being B; I don't see any of his component parts in his personality aside from Caliborn, instead he seems more like Caliborn "powered up" by his component parts. I'm curious as to where you actually see his personality though. Unless I'm forgetting something, he says about three lines to teen!Damara, and other than that does nothing but turn up places and wordlessly destroys things. The only other possible indicators of personality I can think of are that he may guided and orchestrated Damara's chaos(but also may have delegated the whole task to Scratch), and also when he kills Hussie. With Hussie, the relevant bit of info I see is the fact that Ms Paint survived. With how much physical strength is in his arms, I feel that, like Equius, he would actually have to put in conscious restraint to not shatter her like an egg. That just doesn't seem like the sort of thing Caliborn would do to me.
|
|
The One Guy
Rust Maid
Posts: 1,148
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by The One Guy on Aug 21, 2017 22:27:10 GMT
I'm curious as to where you actually see his personality though. Unless I'm forgetting something, he says about three lines to teen!Damara, and other than that does nothing but turn up places and wordlessly destroys things. Searching for his sister and constant perseverance and assertion of his will mostly. Also, "turn[ing] up places and wordlessly destroy[ing] things" is part of his personality in a way, and I don't see Equius, AR, or Gamzee acting like that. Equius's conscious restraint is all about controlling his strength, not mental restraint to keep him from attacking someone, and furthermore, it's something that he fails at. I always thought that Ms. Paint was saved because she ran away and he was too focused on other goals, which would be rather Caliborn-like for Lord English to do.
|
|