[heboric]

in HoC everyones friend karsa shatter a T'llan imass flint sword... that is suposed to be impossible does this mean that even T'llan imas swords can be broken by sheer force of power(/will) or just this one? the phrase bbeeng a bit obscure i missed it at first readthro (but got it at 2)

[The Tyrant Lizard]

I think Karsa generally doesnt conform to any rules. As the series goes on you'll see what I mean.

[Nandaki]

Well, if I remember correctly even Icarium slices through a T'lan Imass flint sword in his fight at the end of BH at the first throne. After which he slices through the T'lan Imass warrior in question (name?) as if he was made out of paper. I think in both cases the swords used by both Icarium and Karsa were/are more indestructible than the ones used by the T'lan Imass, plus were powered by to characters of incredible strength. So I think it's not impossible.

[Aptorian]

The T'lan Imass swords are indeed called unbreakable... but was that in GotM? Because then we might aswell throw it out the window like the notion of a T'lan Imass personal warren. I think the term might simply mean that T'lan Imass swords dont become dull or break from normal usage. After all, hammering a stonesword into steel should mean that the sword breaks, hence the magical forging that lessens the brittle nature of flint.

Like mentioned above I think these two occassions may be special in that it was two powerfull characters that did the breaking. Karsa simply does what he wants, and if he thinks he can break a TA sword, his personal warren/ascendant aspect/what ever... probably lets him do just that.

Icarium is like the worst thing on two legs alive, if he can break open an azath like a watermelon I think a T'lan Imass sword doesn't even register on the scale of things Icarium has broken.

[D'rek]

Actually, the Seven of the Dead Fires offer to invest Karsa's blade so that it is unbreakable too, I don't think it's just a GotMism. But as you say, this probably only means that they are unbreakable in the mundane way, but that invested items or sorcery can break them.

[beru]

or maybe it works the same way for Karsa ageinst all sorcery he does not keare the one witt he have

[Silencer]

Quote in RG: The only thing that can break a weapon, is a nastier weapon.

/end discussion

[amphibian]

Silencer, on Dec 23 2008, 01:06 AM, said:

Quote in RG: The only thing that can break a weapon, is a nastier weapon.

/end discussion

Not quite. The warren of Tellann invests within the flint weapons magic that presumably maintains their integrity. The weapons have been known to break before - presumably against Jaghuts (in the caves where Karsa made his sword). Karsa and Icarium are noted for defying sorcery - including Elder warrens like Tellann.

In Toll the Hounds (not a spoiler in any way), an Andii notes that the small magics placed in his sword eons ago to fend off rust and keep the sword sharp are wearing off. The magical investments do seem to fade somewhat, but since his sword later held up to strong, strong abuse before breaking, the magic was still powerful. If I have my chronology right, the Andii have been wandering long before the Imass became the T'lan.

[Silencer]

However, your points seem to contradict themselves, 'phib. If the Imass weapons were broken in the past, then the sorcery was not old then. So it was not that which caused them to break. It was things that were more powerful. Whether that is another weapon or magic, is kind of irrelevant, imo.

And weren't the swords in HoC failed attempts rather than ones that were broken after they had been made? I'm not entirely sure.

The thing is, the perspective of the "unbreakable" T'lan swords was from mortal humans. People who had never seen, nor heard of, a broken T'lan weapon. They knew that the swords were invested, and were hardened against breaking, and that the swords could break Aren Steel or whatever, but, what we are told from someone's POV is not the be-all-and-end-all. Just because Lorn thought they were unbreakable (might have been someone else), doesn't mean that they are.

I'd imagine Dragnipur breaks them with ease.

[Traveller]

I'd say Karsa's sword is 'unbreakable' in the normal sense, as it is held together by the spirits of Delum and Bairoth inside it. (A real flint blade would crack under it's own weight when held out - the spirit binding also meant it could be stuck in the first place.) Same for the Imass blades - strong, held by Tellann, but not invincible.

In the normal sense I mean it's a strong, invested sword - it's probably not indestructable in the face of another mean weapon though, Brood's Hammer might be able to break it. Also, if the spirits within it left for some reason, it would likely just crack.

EDIT - agree with Silencer about POV. Also, even humans have never made swords out of flint, because they break - seeing one cutting through steel would certainly look impressive.

(Did the swords that got cut in half belong to Imass outside of the ritual? That might explain it.)

This post has been edited by Traveller: 23 December 2008 - 08:12 AM

[Lisheo]

By unbreakable, its unbreakable in the sense of flint. It becomes unbreakable to normal weapons, however, as Silencer said, a nastier weapon will shatter that mofo like glass.
Nastier weapons- Bairoth Delum, but Karsa also has incredible force of will to back it up.
-Dragnipur
-The Crippled God's Broken Sword

Icarium is a different kettle of fish. I don't know what's going on with him, but I would assume that he doesn't need a special sword. Think of it this way. He BREAKS QB's magics, swats them away, and causes QB to nearly burn himself out. He breaks T'lan Imass.
As Apt said, he breaks a warren, making him a bit like Rock, Paper, Scisors, ICARIUM!!!!!!
I reckon when he's enraged he can destroy pretty much anything. And his arrows are noted as being spelled for the destruction of Eleint and anything else that thinks its hard, so we could assume that his sword probably DOES have some Omtose enchantments on it, to keep it breaking or whatever.

[D'rek]

There's probably a difference in the manner of investment into the weapon too. We've seen plenty of weapons that are 'magically invested', meaning they have magic added to them to make them better. But then there's lots of other we've seen with spirits residing within the weapon, like Bairoth Delum. And finally there are those like Dragnipur and Samar's knife that have warrens in them or something similar to that.

The ones that just have magic added to them, probably including most T'lan weapons, it's probably just another layer of protection or other characteristics. The T'lan weapons may be called invincible, but as you've said, that probably just infers no mundane stuff seems capable of breaking them. Of course, Kuru Qan noted that the laws of nature are never fully cheated, so swords that self-sharpen get gradually smaller as they use up matter, etc.

For weapons housing spirits and such, a clash of weapons probably sets the spirits against each other (on some metaphorical plane) and the weaker spirit's weapon shatters and the spirit loses existance or some such thing. You know, something really fantasy-ish.

In general, Withal's theorem of using a nastier weapon is probably a good rule, though.

[Silencer]

The other thing, while Icarium has a natural talent at destroying things, I would also imagine that his sword is up there with Bairoth Delum etc. It WILL be enchanted, as were his arrows, but those enchantments will be far more powerful than the T'lan Imass ones. If there are a few weapons in the world that I would contend are "unbreakable":
Dragnipur
Icarium's Sword
Grief/Vengeance
Burn's Hammer

TTH SPOILER:

Spoiler

Now, don't get all uppy with the fact that Dragnipur was broken - that's once the warren was removed and it became a 'normal beaten piece of iron' or whatever someone called it.

Now, perhaps they will eventually, but just in general, I don't think there is really another 'nastier' weapon to take those ones out. (A bit iffy on Bairoth Delum, but that's just me)

[chill]

ehm...
If flint swords are invested with some kind of Tellan sorcery, maybe they were completely indestructible while that warren was aspected to fire, but not so much indestructible now that Tellan is aspected to ash.
So maybe Icarium wouldn't have broken that sword before the Ritual.
Or not. I read it ages ago and my memory is not much at the best of times.

[Nandaki]

When it comes to Icarium, I think he can pretty much smash/destory anything. As Lisheo mentioned Icarium arrows can bring down Eleint and other assorted creatures. Also said arrows are made from special wood (HOC) obtained from the jaghut/tree combo in the Jag Odhan(sp). So again it isn't an ordinary set of arrows that he has, magically agumented or not.

Also in DG, Mappo mentions that Icarium smashed unbreakable thrones in some 7C city eons ago. Leaving only his time machine/clock intact. Don't have the exact quote but he does say that "the till then thought unbreakable thrones were destoryed by an indestructible sword/katana wielded by a enraged Icarium powered with unstoppable strength".

So Icarium has been going around breaking un"breakable" objects since eons ago. Amongst all the badass unbreakable swords out there Icarium's sword is the least written about. At certain points in the books he is depicted to be sharpening it with a wetstone or such. How do you sharpen something that is adamantium like strong? Also whenever his sword cuts something it is mentioned that its cuts it clean. As in slices straight through. Like the T'lan Imass in tBH, his sword and then himself were cut like paper. So Icarium is certainly one I want to read more about, his story and the mechanics behind his powers and weapons.

As for Dragnipur, uptil and including RG I haven't read anything where it is mentioned that it cut/broke anything unbreakable.

This post has been edited by Nandaki: 29 December 2008 - 06:52 AM

[Silencer]

In RG, towards the end, Withal makes reference as to how a "nasty" (read: magically enchangted/special) weapon, cannot be broken by less "nasty" swords. Icarium's sword has not been shown to be anything special, other than the fact that it is his sword. Dragnipur, on the other hand, contains the heart of a warren, countless souls, and a giant wagon. People look at Dragnipur and can sense it's power. The same does not occur with any other weapon. Now, as to what would happen if those swords on my list ever met, well, that remains to be seen.

I think your points about Icaruim don't show so much how powerful he is, but how, just because something is called "unbreakable" doesn't mean it is.

[amphibian]

Silencer, on Dec 23 2008, 03:04 AM, said:

However, your points seem to contradict themselves, 'phib. If the Imass weapons were broken in the past, then the sorcery was not old then. So it was not that which caused them to break. It was things that were more powerful. Whether that is another weapon or magic, is kind of irrelevant, imo.

And weren't the swords in HoC failed attempts rather than ones that were broken after they had been made? I'm not entirely sure.

My point was that the sorcery used to invest weapons does fade, but it does so over such a long time that the fade is not a factor in the breaking of weapons. I also have this conception of most Jaghuts not using weapons to fight (breaking the weapons through magic) - but some later revelations from Tulas Shorn (Toll the Hounds character) put that assumption to question.

Quote

The thing is, the perspective of the "unbreakable" T'lan swords was from mortal humans. People who had never seen, nor heard of, a broken T'lan weapon. They knew that the swords were invested, and were hardened against breaking, and that the swords could break Aren Steel or whatever, but, what we are told from someone's POV is not the be-all-and-end-all. Just because Lorn thought they were unbreakable (might have been someone else), doesn't mean that they are.

Yeah, I get your point.

I wonder if Icarium names his sword and then forgets it each time:

"I name you... Stabby. I rule for having a sword named Stabby." Eventually gets overcome with rage. Bzzzt.

"I name you... SharppointythingIusetokillthingsded. Gods, that is such an awesome name for a sword." Eventually gets overcome with rage. Bzzt.

"I name you... Freedom. Going for the deep stuff here. What do you think, Mappo?" "I liked the last name better." "Last one?" "Nevermind, ooh look at that Soletaken unicorn over there...." Bzzt.

[Nandaki]

Silencer, on Dec 29 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

In RG, towards the end, Withal makes reference as to how a "nasty" (read: magically enchangted/special) weapon, cannot be broken by less "nasty" swords. Icarium's sword has not been shown to be anything special, other than the fact that it is his sword. Dragnipur, on the other hand, contains the heart of a warren, countless souls, and a giant wagon. People look at Dragnipur and can sense it's power. The same does not occur with any other weapon. Now, as to what would happen if those swords on my list ever met, well, that remains to be seen.

I think your points about Icaruim don't show so much how powerful he is, but how, just because something is called "unbreakable" doesn't mean it is.

The point I was trying to make is, that just because something is called "unbreakable" doesn't mean that is. Sorry if it got lost in my rambling.

Also I am curious about Icarium and his sword (that sounds nasty) mainly because there isn't a good explaination how he does the things he does. Becuase "it is Icarium' sword, hence can smash things" doesn't do it for me. I think in this universe that something or someone is all powerful until sonething/someone more powerful comes along.

As for Dragnipur oozing power because it has a heart of a warren, countless souls and a gaint wagon. Well it does, what of it? I know that any living/undead thing that is so much as scratched with it results in an instant kill. Does nothing special to inanimate objects. Otherwise no one would be even able to parry it. Nothing said about it until now suggests that it can smash through anything in it's way. It is a lethal sword, don't get me wrong. But has a lot of relevance mainly because of it's weilder and the gate it holds.

[Silencer]

Ah, so we're agreed on the fact that "unbreakable" is a perspective thing. ^^

Dragnipur without the gate...it is nothing. Just a piece of metal. BUT it has the gate, and so is one of the nastiest weapons in existance. Icarium's sword is, no doubt, enchanted, and I have very little doubt that his rage does a lot to help. However, Dragnipur does have one effect on inanimate objects (TTH spoiler, though). However, it's not the same as Icarium's weapon which just cuts through stuff...but I somehow doubt Icarium's sword would but through Vengeance, BairothDelum, or Dragnipur. Hence why they are all on the same/similar level, imo.

If you consider, however, your argument against Dragnipur - then what do we base a weapon's power on? How do we judge these things, when we don't have every example possible? Has Rake fought a T'lan Imass? Has Icarium done the same to a T'lan Imass without being in his rage? If we take things on face value, Dragnipur is a sword that people see, and go HOLYSHITWTFISTHAT.

[D'rek]

Take all the swords to the top of a tall tower and drop them from the same height onto the street below which is full of babies (literally full, like a pile two storeys high). Whichever sword sinks the deepest is the nastiest...