OotS 585

[Remus Lupin]

Even by the strictest construction of responsibility, Belkar has already been responsible for the death of one of the creatures listed in his question, namely the oracle. So, I don't seen any interpretation by which the prediction has *not* been fulfilled.

But that's Belkar's prophecy. fba827 referred to Vaarsuvius' prophecy, which was that he would achieve complete and total ultimate arcane power "by saying the right four words to the right being at the right time for all the wrong reasons". Nothing in there about dying. Durkon is the one whose prophecy involved his own death.

If I remember Logic 101 properly, "or" is an exclusive construction. In other words "X or Y" implies "Not X and Y," thus, Belkar's killing the Oracle means that he cannot be responsible for the deaths of the others.

 

[paradox42]

If I remember Logic 101 properly, "or" is an exclusive construction. In other words "X or Y" implies "Not X and Y," thus, Belkar's killing the Oracle means that he cannot be responsible for the deaths of the others.

No, that's only if you use "either." Either-or is the XOR in terms of mathematical logic, just saying "or" allows for both A and B to be true.

But, devils and demons trade favors won in games! I'll need to remember that one for later use.

 

[orsal]

If I remember Logic 101 properly, "or" is an exclusive construction. In other words "X or Y" implies "Not X and Y," thus, Belkar's killing the Oracle means that he cannot be responsible for the deaths of the others.

From Logic 101? That's funny; logicians conventionally you "or" inclusively, specifying the exclusive or if we need it. Common usage, however, is ambiguous.

 

[Remus Lupin]

From Logic 101? That's funny; logicians conventionally you "or" inclusively, specifying the exclusive or if we need it. Common usage, however, is ambiguous.

Well, I did say "if I remember correctly." It's been many years since logic class.

 

[drothgery]

From Logic 101? That's funny; logicians conventionally you "or" inclusively, specifying the exclusive or if we need it. Common usage, however, is ambiguous.

Programming language usage is almost always inclusive; exclusive or is a different operator (usually XOR).

 

[Lord Sessadore]

Of course, all this formal logic stuff only applies if the oracle meant his "or"s in a formal sense. If he wasn't using formal logic there, then the word "or" in the English language is ambiguous in its usage, though it usually is exclusive.

 

[Nifft]

Of course, all this formal logic stuff only applies if the oracle meant his "or"s in a formal sense. If he wasn't using formal logic there, then the word "or" in the English language is ambiguous in its usage, though it usually is exclusive.

Yep. And IMHO that would be a mistake, since formal logic isn't intuitive to most folks, and isn't particularly funny as a punchline.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nyeshet]

Maybe the four worlds for ultimate power are:

"Royal Flush, beat that!"

But I guess not ... the words need to be taken out of context - or at least that is how I read the oracle's prophesy.

 

[paradox42]

"Royal Flush, beat that!"

Now THAT would make a spectacular way of gaining Ultimate Arcane Might (tm).

 

[jmucchiello]

You know, this is exactly how Players remember stuff in my games.

FTW. If only that whole thing could be sigged without taking up so much room.