[Gem Windcaster]

I'm pretty sure Errant gloats about it. Besides you don't 'earn' power, you take it. Tehol, on the other hand, really has earned his wealth.

[Aptorian]

Here's a quote for the OP to "ponder" and "muss" on further.

Quote

Udinaas on The Realm Forgers (MT, p.31, UK Trade):

'Udinaas, like all Letherii, knew the sequences and the forms. First would come the three Fulcra known as the Realm Forgers. Fire, the silent scream of light, the very swirl of the stars themselves. Then Dolmen, bleak and rootless, drifting aimless in the void. And into the path of these two forces, the Errant. Bearer of its own unknowable laws, it would draw Fire and Dolmen into fierce wars. Vast fields of destructions, instance upon instance of mutual annihilation. But occasionally, rarely, there would be peace made between the two contestants. And Fire would bathe but not burn, and Dolmen would surrender its wandering ways, and so find root.
The Errant would then weave its mysterious skein, forging the Holds themselves. Ice. Eleint. Azath. Beast. And into their midst would emerge the remaining Fulcra. Axe, Knuckles, Blade, the Pack, Shapefinder and White Crow.'

It's that quote that has time and again made people wonder whether the Errant is actually a mortal that ascended to become an avatar of the Element of fate or destiny or something like that.

[D'rek]

Well I suppose he could be like Shadowthrone - "Shadowthrone" being the name of the position, while Ammanas is the name of the actual ascendant. Just as there could be Shadowthrones of the past, as to I suppose there could be multiple Errants.

Or it's just traditional Letheri hyperbole.

[Lister of Smeg]

So because the people Tehol killed were "faceless" that makes him a better person than the Errant? Although I find him a funny guy, my rereads of MT and RG really made me realise what kind of a person Tehol is. He's prepared to sacrifice hundreds/thousands of people for what he perceives as the greater good. Not really a nice person at all. But it's amazing what can be forgiven of a fictional character if he happens to be funny and witty. Look at Tyrion of ASOIAF or Glokta in the First Law.

The Errant just nudged someone to stab Trull in the back. It wasn't the nicest thing to do (a simple "Hello" would have been OK), but he's not pure evil. He just wants to protect what's his while maintaining his calling, that of nudging things to induce tragedy. He should get together with Dessembrae. AND he killed Feather Witch. For that one act, I can forgive him anything.

[Gem Windcaster]

SO, I guess you're against war then? Because that's what those people were, casualties of war. Tehol took on the entire Letheri, much the same way the malazan army did. Problem is, they are not just 'one guy'.

And with the Errant there is no such thing as 'just nudge'. And I don't find anything noble about the featherwitch kill. She was annoying, sure, but she was still only a mortal, and I find him killing her repulsive.

The differences between the Errant and Tehol are many, and not just in motives and methods, but also in their attitude towards other beings.

Tehol deals with numbers, and I'm sure he had to deal with the fact that if he didn't do what he did, much more people would be killed.

The Errant doesn't have those kind of goals, he just want to inflict chaos and death. It's what he is. Promoting life is not part of change, in his mind.

In a way, that is why he's the opposite of Paran, because Paran set life above everything else, especially human life, and humans rights to their own choices.
The Errant takes away humans choices and human life.

You still wanna root for him now?

[Aptorian]

Gem Windcaster;322838 said:

And with the Errant there is no such thing as 'just nudge'. And I don't find anything noble about the featherwitch kill. She was annoying, sure, but she was still only a mortal, and I find him killing her repulsive.

You must be kidding. He was practically enslaved by her and she was an utter bitch. She was going to wage war against both the Letherii, the Edur and the very system of magic.

But then again, I am one of the people who love the Errant. He's almost as cool as Kallor.

[Gem Windcaster]

Aptorian;322849 said:

You must be kidding. He was practically enslaved by her and she was an utter bitch. She was going to wage war against both the Letherii, the Edur and the very system of magic.

But then again, I am one of the people who love the Errant. He's almost as cool as Kallor.

Imo he had it coming.
Edit: actually, that kill is one of the reasons I hate him so passionately. It shows his attitude. I find nothing 'cool' about it all all. Quite the opposite. I'm not exactly a fan of Kallor, but he's way behind the Errant in that regard.

[buddhacat]

Gem Windcaster;322838 said:

The Errant doesn't have those kind of goals, he just want to inflict chaos and death. It's what he is. Promoting life is not part of change, in his mind.

In a way, that is why he's the opposite of Paran, because Paran set life above everything else, especially human life, and humans rights to their own choices.
The Errant takes away humans choices and human life.

Hmm. What about the Errant's actions regarding killing the Pack? His healing of one the Crimson Guard soldiers? Some nefarious plot to inflict even more killings, perhaps?

Before Bugg rescues Tehol: I'm thinking when that Edur foot came down to smash a head into pulp, it could very easily have been Tehol's, but was not. It was the Errant's nudge that the boot smashed Tehol's servant.

Errant's aspect is similar to Oponn's - both good and bad outcomes.

[Gem Windcaster]

Wtf are you on about buddhacat?

ANd for the record, I don't like Oponn either.

[Aptorian]

He's showing you some of the Errants good actions.

[Gem Windcaster]

Aptorian;322862 said:

He's showing you some of the Errants good actions.

Pfft. I disagree.

[Ammanas]

buddhacat;322857 said:

Hmm. What about the Errant's actions regarding killing the Pack? His healing of one the Crimson Guard soldiers? Some nefarious plot to inflict even more killings, perhaps?

Before Bugg rescues Tehol: I'm thinking when that Edur foot came down to smash a head into pulp, it could very easily have been Tehol's, but was not. It was the Errant's nudge that the boot smashed Tehol's servant.

Errant's aspect is similar to Oponn's - both good and bad outcomes.

Bah, I'm going to side with Gem on that one. Healing might not have been necessary if he had told Iron Bars what the Guard was going to face.

"Lizard cats", IIRC.

[Gem Windcaster]

Ammanas;322877 said:

Bah, I'm going to side with Gem on that one. Healing might not have been necessary if he had told Iron Bars what the Guard was going to face.

"Lizard cats", IIRC.

Indeed.

[Lister of Smeg]

If the Errant was just bent on "inflicting chaos and death", he would have allowed the Pack to go free, at least for a while. He would have let Tehol get killed to send Mael mad. But he didn't, because he isn't the complete bastard you claim him to be.

The Malazans took on soldiers, Edur and Letherii both. Tehol's actions would directly lead to the deaths of innocent civilians. Less deaths than if he had done nothing at all? I'm not so sure about that.

Quote

You still wanna root for him now?

Why wouldn't I? You haven't told me anything I didn't know before.

[buddhacat]

Gem Windcaster;322863 said:

Pfft. I disagree.

I'll chalk that one up to "irrational hatred" and leave it there, then.

[Gem Windcaster]

buddhacat;322915 said:

I'll chalk that one up to "irrational hatred" and leave it there, then.

How dare you, just because I disagree with you! I've described exactly why I don't like him. He's arrogant, deceitful, and obnoxious, and he's only trouble. I hate him because he takes choices away from the humans and wants chaos and death.
If you want to start with name calling, I say it is your love for him that is irrational.

The only argument anyone has come up with in his favor so far is, 'he's cool'. Really impressive.

[Gem Windcaster]

Lister of Smeg;322912 said:

If the Errant was just bent on "inflicting chaos and death", he would have allowed the Pack to go free, at least for a while. He would have let Tehol get killed to send Mael mad. But he didn't, because he isn't the complete bastard you claim him to be.

The Malazans took on soldiers, Edur and Letherii both. Tehol's actions would directly lead to the deaths of innocent civilians. Less deaths than if he had done nothing at all? I'm not so sure about that.



Why wouldn't I? You haven't told me anything I didn't know before.

You are entitled to your own opinon, for sure.

I've always thought that Tehol's plan was based on saving lether, and with it, alot of people. There's no other reason he would do it.
AND if you don't remember, the errant did send people after Tehol, but Mael saved him. So that argument doesn't fly, friend.

[buddhacat]

Gem Windcaster;322925 said:

How dare you, just because I disagree with you! I've described exactly why I don't like him. He's arrogant, deceitful, and obnoxious, and he's only trouble. I hate him because he takes choices away from the humans and wants chaos and death.
If you want to start with name calling, I say it is your love for him that is irrational.

The only argument anyone has come up with in his favor so far is, 'he's cool'. Really impressive.

So the examples I gave in my previous post don't count as any form of argument? And where do you find "my love" for him in what I have written? Where do you find "he's cool" in what I have written?

Irrational is exactly the right word to describe your diatribe now.

[D'rek]

Gem Windcaster;322925 said:

The only argument anyone has come up with in his favor so far is, 'he's cool'. Really impressive.

While I think there've been valid reasonings on both sides so far, allow me to add additional reasons in his favour.

1) The Errant, unlike most gods, is self-empowering. Like Mael, he has distanced himself from his worshippers, but more so, to the point where he is not even worshipped personally, but rather is worshipped as an abstract. This lessens his own power dramatically, but also means his worship is casual and doesn't involve human blood-spilling and other things you would get from most gods. He could have allowed such things to continue and just made use of the power he gains from it like Mael, but instead reduced his own strength so these things would not happen to innocents.

2) As per (1) above, when a super-fanatical worshipper comes along trying to force his will and power to a course that is evil, he takes personal responsibility and deals with it, rather then letting the other mortals deal with the problem. Like D'rek.

3) Though not everyone would find this an evious quality, the Errant knows what he is. He knows what his powers are and what sort of role that entails. And he is content with it. Unlike some gods, he does not try to alter his nature or go on crazy schemes to increase his power. He fills his niche and that is that.

[Gem Windcaster]

A said:

While I think there've been valid reasonings on both sides so far, allow me to add additional reasons in his favour.

1) The Errant, unlike most gods, is self-empowering. Like Mael, he has distanced himself from his worshippers, but more so, to the point where he is not even worshipped personally, but rather is worshipped as an abstract. This lessens his own power dramatically, but also means his worship is casual and doesn't involve human blood-spilling and other things you would get from most gods. He could have allowed such things to continue and just made use of the power he gains from it like Mael, but instead reduced his own strength so these things would not happen to innocents.

2) As per (1) above, when a super-fanatical worshipper comes along trying to force his will and power to a course that is evil, he takes personal responsibility and deals with it, rather then letting the other mortals deal with the problem. Like D'rek.

3) Though not everyone would find this an evious quality, the Errant knows what he is. He knows what his powers are and what sort of role that entails. And he is content with it. Unlike some gods, he does not try to alter his nature or go on crazy schemes to increase his power. He fills his niche and that is that.

I know what he is. I just find his actions repulsive. And I don't think he's 'needed'. I think he might have been needed once, but it's coming down to either him or Ganoes. As errant himself seems to recognize. They can't both exist. I think the errant is a remnant of an old, destructive system, that has to go. Just like the rest of lether has to change, so does the errant.

I am sure he sees that. ANd he will fight for his own existence. Most likely it will get very ugly.

I can't be sure Paran's going to win, but I hope so. Either way I reserve my right for abhorrence for the creature that is the errant.

I guess it's a personality thing. He happens to stand for everything that I hate irl, right down to his non-choice ridden toenails, so I project those feeling towards this character. Doesn't mean that it isn't totally legit.