[Grief]

Silencer, on Aug 23 2009, 08:48 PM, said:

Grief, you are being obtuse.

The mage-assassins in this series use magic because it makes it easier to kill magical people. How would Cutter fare, do you think, against Osserc? Um. Fuck.
Why was Cowl able to kill Osserc? He used magic, ergo, he can assassinate more people than Cutter can, more easily. Ergo, he is better. And so on up the ladder. You then say this means that it's simply a matter of power - it's not. It's also a matter of style and skill. If they don't go around assassinating people, you can't call them an assassin. Simple enough?

It's not like Cotillion uses raw power, either. It's just that he has more to draw on, more talents with it, and then combines it into his assassinations.

Otataral would kill osserc more easily than magic, imo(assuming he's at full power etc), because this is Osserc we're talking about. Slipping an otataral knife in a soletaken eleint possible Elder Gods back would do more damage than a blast of magic from behind, unless the mage has some severe power-far beyond cowl.

When have we seen Cotillion outright assassinate someone? He doesn't exactly go around assassinating people-nor does laseen. So for one your definition is flawed.

Being magic, I feel, doesn't really let you kill more people. Who can a mage kill that a good assassin can't? Not many, i'd wager. Other mages? Well otataral levels that field.

[Grief]

The essence of what i'm trying to say is that I think assassins must be judged on how well they do with what they have. Yes, magic may be an advantage. But simply having it doesn't make them a better assassin. You have to factor in that advantage. Perhaps cotillion can do more impressive things-with magic, that laseen can't do without. But that doesn't mean he is actually a more skillful assassin, just that he has certain advantages. It'd be like saying Rake is a better swordfighter because he has dragnipur. Dragnipur is an advantage Rake has that increases his chances in a swordfight-but it doesn't mean he's actually a better fighter than someone who doesn't have it.
And I believe that with the tools availible, comparitively Kalam is just as good as Cotillion, it is just that Cotillion has the advantage of magic. But that doesn't actually make him a better assassin.

[High house Me]

Look nobody can deny that when Dancer was about no mother Effer wanted to mess with him so u gta put him top IMO so itd have to be:

1: dancer
2:Apsalar
3:Surly/Laseen
4:Kalam
5:Topper
6: cowl
7: Vorcan
8: Cant rmember her name (chick who killed laseen)
9: Rallick
10: Pearl

Obviously theres going to be people who dont agree but i cudnt give a crap

[Silencer]

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 08:18 AM, said:

Silencer, on Aug 23 2009, 08:48 PM, said:

Grief, you are being obtuse.

The mage-assassins in this series use magic because it makes it easier to kill magical people. How would Cutter fare, do you think, against Osserc? Um. Fuck.
Why was Cowl able to kill Osserc? He used magic, ergo, he can assassinate more people than Cutter can, more easily. Ergo, he is better. And so on up the ladder. You then say this means that it's simply a matter of power - it's not. It's also a matter of style and skill. If they don't go around assassinating people, you can't call them an assassin. Simple enough?

It's not like Cotillion uses raw power, either. It's just that he has more to draw on, more talents with it, and then combines it into his assassinations.

Otataral would kill osserc more easily than magic, imo(assuming he's at full power etc), because this is Osserc we're talking about. Slipping an otataral knife in a soletaken eleint possible Elder Gods back would do more damage than a blast of magic from behind, unless the mage has some severe power-far beyond cowl.

When have we seen Cotillion outright assassinate someone? He doesn't exactly go around assassinating people-nor does laseen. So for one your definition is flawed.

Being magic, I feel, doesn't really let you kill more people. Who can a mage kill that a good assassin can't? Not many, i'd wager. Other mages? Well otataral levels that field.

Osserc. Elder god. Elder magic. Pwnt. Otataral doesn't work on Elder.
Besides which, my point was - can Cutter defeat Osserc with a knife to the back? No. Therefore, being magical makes you a better assassin. It's not necessarily the be-all and end-all, however in the general case it is superior. Otataral gives you an advantage over mages, it doesn't against non-mages. Magic allows you take out non-mages more easily, and also lets you take out mages more easily. So therefore it is better than Otataral. PLUS, the people we are talking about are GOOD ASSASSINS even without magic. So it's an enhancement. We don't need to see Cotillion outright assassinate people - he is the Patron God of Assassins, and has more kills to his name than most soldiers. That's like saying we only see Rake get Dragnipur out three times, so we don't know he's very good at it. We also take into account the Seguleh, his defeat of Draconus, his chaining of the 3 dragons in Shadow, etc, etc.

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 08:42 AM, said:

The essence of what i'm trying to say is that I think assassins must be judged on how well they do with what they have. Yes, magic may be an advantage. But simply having it doesn't make them a better assassin. You have to factor in that advantage. Perhaps cotillion can do more impressive things-with magic, that laseen can't do without. But that doesn't mean he is actually a more skillful assassin, just that he has certain advantages. It'd be like saying Rake is a better swordfighter because he has dragnipur. Dragnipur is an advantage Rake has that increases his chances in a swordfight-but it doesn't mean he's actually a better fighter than someone who doesn't have it.
And I believe that with the tools availible, comparitively Kalam is just as good as Cotillion, it is just that Cotillion has the advantage of magic. But that doesn't actually make him a better assassin.

HOW WELL THEY DO WITH WHAT THEY HAVE. THEY HAVE MAGIC. You can't take someone and say if they didn't have the magic they'd suck - it's part of what they use. Magic is a part of assassination, you can't discount that. Shadow Dancing is an ancient art of assassination, which incorporates both flexibility, forms, and MAGIC. It's like saying perhaps Kalam can do more impressive things with his knives than Laseen does with her feet. Does it make Laseen a better assassin? No. It's a difference of style. If you don't want to use magic, don't use it. Don't then complain that it's unfair if a magic user pwns your ass with it.
You can't realistically suggest that Kalam is better than Cotillion. There is a reason one is a god, and one is lying in the Deadhouse on the verge of death. And that's not because of circumstance - Cotillion took out the Protectress of Li Heng, the entire Quon royal family, and 300 Tiste Edur. 300 Tiste? That's more, in closer proximity, than Kalam took out in the entire night on Malaz. This is the guy who took on Laseen, and her hand-picked top-ranked Claw, while protecting a powerless mage, and not only survived but also kicked most of that top-ranked Claws' ass. He also scared the shit out of Kalam when he took out those people in DhG. What's Kalam done that is even remotely comparable?

Your Rake analogy is flawed. Not only is Dragnipur also a burden to its wielder, but Rake beat the last person to hold it. So the only way to prove you're better than him is to defeat him while he's using Dragnipur. Dassem did that. Except Rake let himself lose. Engineered it, in fact. And we all agree that Dassem is the best surviving swordsman in the series.

So, until someone beats Cotillion, he's the best in the series. If Cotillion for some reason decides to not use magic, tie one hand behind his back, and not use a knife, is that going to change your opinion of the guy who beat him? Probably. Cotillion is THE ROPE. There's a reason for that - it's part of who he is. You can't go disregarding something innate like magical ability.

It comes down to the ascendant list vs the non-ascendant list. And guess what? Most people here have Dancer at the top of the non-ascendant list, too. So there.

*disclaimer - sorry if this sounded angry. I actually quite like Grief. We normally agree. Plus, I've got exams at the moment. Grawr.

[Hinter]

1) SAS sniper with L96A1 rifle
2) Cotillion
3) Cowl
4) The rest

But I am a self confessed Crimson Guard fanboy. And I'm a little drunk on cider and champagne.

[D'rek]

It's kind of a really weird discussion because while it is easy to determine who is or isn't an assassin based on their lifestyle and all that (ie you know Gothos isn't an assassin because he doesn't wear tight silks and use long-knives), a lot of the assassins' goings-ons in the books are very un-assassinlike.

Rallick crossbowing the counselor on a balcony in GotM, Apsalar and Cutter slicing/garroting malaz officials in Kan, Pearl taking out Henaras without the Talons or Kamist (who were in the same tent) even realizing - these are assassinations.

Emerging from a warren in a group of Avowed and then slicing them all up, running through Malaz City incessantly knife-fighting/crossbowing Claw or firing waves of magic at Silanah... these are not assassinations. They may include stealth elements or common assassin skills, but they're not the primary action that makes them *assassins*. Rather, they just evince the assassin as a great knife-fighter, mage, rooftop-brawler, etc.

So really, this isn't best-at-assassinating-people, this is best-fighter-who-is-commonly-known-as-an-assassin...

[Ulrik]

WhiskeyJackDaniels, on Aug 23 2009, 05:02 PM, said:

we know of 4 major groups of them (talons, claw, daru guild, and you could even say the rat catchers guild).

If you want to make such "boxes", add Seerdomin...

[Grief]

Silencer, on Aug 24 2009, 12:51 AM, said:

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 08:18 AM, said:

Silencer, on Aug 23 2009, 08:48 PM, said:

Grief, you are being obtuse.

The mage-assassins in this series use magic because it makes it easier to kill magical people. How would Cutter fare, do you think, against Osserc? Um. Fuck.
Why was Cowl able to kill Osserc? He used magic, ergo, he can assassinate more people than Cutter can, more easily. Ergo, he is better. And so on up the ladder. You then say this means that it's simply a matter of power - it's not. It's also a matter of style and skill. If they don't go around assassinating people, you can't call them an assassin. Simple enough?

It's not like Cotillion uses raw power, either. It's just that he has more to draw on, more talents with it, and then combines it into his assassinations.

Otataral would kill osserc more easily than magic, imo(assuming he's at full power etc), because this is Osserc we're talking about. Slipping an otataral knife in a soletaken eleint possible Elder Gods back would do more damage than a blast of magic from behind, unless the mage has some severe power-far beyond cowl.

When have we seen Cotillion outright assassinate someone? He doesn't exactly go around assassinating people-nor does laseen. So for one your definition is flawed.

Being magic, I feel, doesn't really let you kill more people. Who can a mage kill that a good assassin can't? Not many, i'd wager. Other mages? Well otataral levels that field.

Osserc. Elder god. Elder magic. Pwnt. Otataral doesn't work on Elder.
Besides which, my point was - can Cutter defeat Osserc with a knife to the back? No. Therefore, being magical makes you a better assassin. It's not necessarily the be-all and end-all, however in the general case it is superior. Otataral gives you an advantage over mages, it doesn't against non-mages. Magic allows you take out non-mages more easily, and also lets you take out mages more easily. So therefore it is better than Otataral. PLUS, the people we are talking about are GOOD ASSASSINS even without magic. So it's an enhancement. We don't need to see Cotillion outright assassinate people - he is the Patron God of Assassins, and has more kills to his name than most soldiers. That's like saying we only see Rake get Dragnipur out three times, so we don't know he's very good at it. We also take into account the Seguleh, his defeat of Draconus, his chaining of the 3 dragons in Shadow, etc, etc.

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 08:42 AM, said:

The essence of what i'm trying to say is that I think assassins must be judged on how well they do with what they have. Yes, magic may be an advantage. But simply having it doesn't make them a better assassin. You have to factor in that advantage. Perhaps cotillion can do more impressive things-with magic, that laseen can't do without. But that doesn't mean he is actually a more skillful assassin, just that he has certain advantages. It'd be like saying Rake is a better swordfighter because he has dragnipur. Dragnipur is an advantage Rake has that increases his chances in a swordfight-but it doesn't mean he's actually a better fighter than someone who doesn't have it.
And I believe that with the tools availible, comparitively Kalam is just as good as Cotillion, it is just that Cotillion has the advantage of magic. But that doesn't actually make him a better assassin.

HOW WELL THEY DO WITH WHAT THEY HAVE. THEY HAVE MAGIC. You can't take someone and say if they didn't have the magic they'd suck - it's part of what they use. Magic is a part of assassination, you can't discount that. Shadow Dancing is an ancient art of assassination, which incorporates both flexibility, forms, and MAGIC. It's like saying perhaps Kalam can do more impressive things with his knives than Laseen does with her feet. Does it make Laseen a better assassin? No. It's a difference of style. If you don't want to use magic, don't use it. Don't then complain that it's unfair if a magic user pwns your ass with it.
You can't realistically suggest that Kalam is better than Cotillion. There is a reason one is a god, and one is lying in the Deadhouse on the verge of death. And that's not because of circumstance - Cotillion took out the Protectress of Li Heng, the entire Quon royal family, and 300 Tiste Edur. 300 Tiste? That's more, in closer proximity, than Kalam took out in the entire night on Malaz. This is the guy who took on Laseen, and her hand-picked top-ranked Claw, while protecting a powerless mage, and not only survived but also kicked most of that top-ranked Claws' ass. He also scared the shit out of Kalam when he took out those people in DhG. What's Kalam done that is even remotely comparable?

Your Rake analogy is flawed. Not only is Dragnipur also a burden to its wielder, but Rake beat the last person to hold it. So the only way to prove you're better than him is to defeat him while he's using Dragnipur. Dassem did that. Except Rake let himself lose. Engineered it, in fact. And we all agree that Dassem is the best surviving swordsman in the series.

So, until someone beats Cotillion, he's the best in the series. If Cotillion for some reason decides to not use magic, tie one hand behind his back, and not use a knife, is that going to change your opinion of the guy who beat him? Probably. Cotillion is THE ROPE. There's a reason for that - it's part of who he is. You can't go disregarding something innate like magical ability.

It comes down to the ascendant list vs the non-ascendant list. And guess what? Most people here have Dancer at the top of the non-ascendant list, too. So there.

*disclaimer - sorry if this sounded angry. I actually quite like Grief. We normally agree. Plus, I've got exams at the moment. Grawr.

Yes-how well they do with what they have. I'm not saying if cotillion didn't have magic he'd suck-obviously not. And yes, it's incorporated into his assassinations. What i'm meaning is that simply by having no magic it doesn't mean you're worse-simply you don't have certain advantages. I'm not saying take away magic-i'm simply saying that to judge fairly imo, you must take that into account-thee fact that yes there are things cotillion could do that kalam or laseen couldn't, but you must factor in that he does have that advantage. Kalam and laseen are just as good imo, because they do fantastically with what they have(i.e, no magic) just like cotillion does fantastically with what he has(with magic). They both do well compared to those in their class(cotillion fares well against magical assassins, laseen against mundane) but to compare those with and without magic you must factor in the innate advantage that doesn't necessarily mean more skill-being born with an ability hardly makes you more skillful(which is my judgement of what "better" should be-because otherwise innate advantages come into it. Same with best swordsman-for all say WJ may be a more talented swordsman(not saing he is, just an example, don't wish to start a best swordfighter discussion here) than karsa-in a fight karsa has the obvious advantages of strength and range. Against other people(say tiste edur or whatever) he would still fare better than WJ-but WJ could still be a better swordsman. Same for assassins, imo, they can't be judged just by advantages innate in them.

This is why I believe that there should be a judgement made for magical and non magical, and if compared the two should be compared only in skill.

As for Dancer-he is around the equal of Kalam and Laseen from what we know-though in recent times I would rate Kalam above Laseen(based mainly on DHG, though my emmory is vage) and in recent times it's hard to factor dancer in, due to ascension.

I still say that as an assassin, in terms purely of skill, that Kalam is the equal to Cotillion, or at least very close by, with laseen just below. Of course you can argue that he's a god and so could assassinate more people or kill kalam in a 1v1-but that doesn't make him, imo, a better assassin, since he has the obvious advantages.

[Ulrik]

Well, if you all want to make one box named "Assassins" (and thats impossible - IMHO), just put in characters who were said to be assassins...so no Crokus (if I didnt lost someting in ToH and his final cold blodded kill isnt assasination)...because after those "we think they might be marked as ´Sins" I simply can put some sappers like Fiddler with his clearly massasinating (nice word, isnt it? ) drum against Edur etc. Neatly set trap to kill someone IS assassination. And its no knife dancing, warren hooping...

So in this case, take Laseen, Vorcan, Dancer, kalam, Rallick, Clip... - all of them are precisely said to be assassins.

[D'rek]

Ulrik, on Aug 24 2009, 11:35 AM, said:

WhiskeyJackDaniels, on Aug 23 2009, 05:02 PM, said:

we know of 4 major groups of them (talons, claw, daru guild, and you could even say the rat catchers guild).

If you want to make such "boxes", add Seerdomin...

Seerdomins aren't assassins, they're just badass warrior-priests. Perhaps you got this idea because some of them were running around wreaking havoc on their own or in small groups in Capustan?

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 11:42 AM, said:

I still say that as an assassin, in terms purely of skill, that Kalam is the equal to Cotillion, or at least very close by, with laseen just below. Of course you can argue that he's a god and so could assassinate more people or kill kalam in a 1v1-but that doesn't make him, imo, a better assassin, since he has the obvious advantages.

In HoC, when Cotillion shows up in Bidithal's lair and saves Kalam, Kalam reflects that Cotillion is leagues ahead of him. Hard to say whether magic was used in that or not, but Cotillion wasn't using any overt magic, at least, ie no waves or projectiles or anything, it'd just have been imbued in his weapons. Either way, I'd take Kalam's word that Cotillion is better over some biased 3rd party thinking Kalam *might* have been a match.

Ulrik, on Aug 24 2009, 11:43 AM, said:

Well, if you all want to make one box named "Assassins" (and thats impossible - IMHO), just put in characters who were said to be assassins...so no Crokus (if I didnt lost someting in ToH and his final cold blodded kill isnt assasination)...because after those "we think they might be marked as ´Sins" I simply can put some sappers like Fiddler with his clearly massasinating (nice word, isnt it? ) drum against Edur etc. Neatly set trap to kill someone IS assassination. And its no knife dancing, warren hooping...

So in this case, take Laseen, Vorcan, Dancer, kalam, Rallick, Clip... - all of them are precisely said to be assassins.

I'm pretty sure Crokus assassinated some Kan officials with Apsalar before they made it to the Kanese coast and Rellock died, so he counts.

[Ulrik]

Ad Seerdomin - check dramatis personae at the end of MoI - also assassins (Im smart as hell, cause I finished rereadin;))

Ad Crokus - Uh, not sure, maybe, I forgot, but well, wasnt it just backstabbin? It doesnt make you assassin (in case of some comparison people here tries to)...or makes, but than we are in the beginning...shadow, knife and dead body makes assassin...

[Grief]

D'rek, on Aug 24 2009, 04:50 PM, said:

In HoC, when Cotillion shows up in Bidithal's lair and saves Kalam, Kalam reflects that Cotillion is leagues ahead of him. Hard to say whether magic was used in that or not, but Cotillion wasn't using any overt magic, at least, ie no waves or projectiles or anything, it'd just have been imbued in his weapons. Either way, I'd take Kalam's word that Cotillion is better over some biased 3rd party thinking Kalam *might* have been a match.

I forget who the quote is by, can you remember? I remember it as being ST who said they were close, and that dancer would hesitate before taking Kalam on. Or perhaps Topper or Laseen.

As for Kalams thoughts it's hard to judge having not read that book in some time. Of course, this is cotillion though-with definete innate advantages. And the fact he could just be underestimating himself-which is for example, the reason Icariums thoughts aren't useful for judging how good a swordfighter he is.

Also, considering that cotillions rope is an extension of his mind, and he has command of rashan/meanas to shadow dance, it's still a definete advantage, based in magic.

[Grief]

Ulrik, on Aug 24 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

Ad Seerdomin - check dramatis personae at the end of MoI - also assassins (Im smart as hell, cause I finished rereadin;))

Ad Crokus - Uh, not sure, maybe, I forgot, but well, wasnt it just backstabbin? It doesnt make you assassin (in case of some comparison people here tries to)...or makes, but than we are in the beginning...shadow, knife and dead body makes assassin...

Well in that case you can count Scabandari-who I wouldn't count as an assassin.

[Ulrik]

Grief, on Aug 24 2009, 08:22 PM, said:

Ulrik, on Aug 24 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

Ad Seerdomin - check dramatis personae at the end of MoI - also assassins (Im smart as hell, cause I finished rereadin;))

Ad Crokus - Uh, not sure, maybe, I forgot, but well, wasnt it just backstabbin? It doesnt make you assassin (in case of some comparison people here tries to)...or makes, but than we are in the beginning...shadow, knife and dead body makes assassin...

Well in that case you can count Scabandari-who I wouldn't count as an assassin.

And thats why I said - count as assassin only those, who were exactly descibed as assassins or members of assassin organization:)

[Silencer]

Grief, on Aug 25 2009, 06:22 AM, said:

D'rek, on Aug 24 2009, 04:50 PM, said:

In HoC, when Cotillion shows up in Bidithal's lair and saves Kalam, Kalam reflects that Cotillion is leagues ahead of him. Hard to say whether magic was used in that or not, but Cotillion wasn't using any overt magic, at least, ie no waves or projectiles or anything, it'd just have been imbued in his weapons. Either way, I'd take Kalam's word that Cotillion is better over some biased 3rd party thinking Kalam *might* have been a match.

I forget who the quote is by, can you remember? I remember it as being ST who said they were close, and that dancer would hesitate before taking Kalam on. Or perhaps Topper or Laseen.

As for Kalams thoughts it's hard to judge having not read that book in some time. Of course, this is cotillion though-with definete innate advantages. And the fact he could just be underestimating himself-which is for example, the reason Icariums thoughts aren't useful for judging how good a swordfighter he is.

Also, considering that cotillions rope is an extension of his mind, and he has command of rashan/meanas to shadow dance, it's still a definete advantage, based in magic.

It could just be modesty. But how often have we seen Kalam be modest? He assumed he could take out Laseen. So when he says Cotillion is fucking pwnage, I think we have to take his word at it.
And the 'innate advantage' argument still doesn't apply. As I said before, if you use something that allows you to do a better job, it does make you better. Kalam picked Otataral over magic. Are we saying his reliance on the Otataral knife makes him worse than the Claws? The only reason he didn't get raped by them was because he nullified their magic. Does his need for Quick Ben make him worse than the Tiste assassins? No, we include those things as part of who he is. A mage is a mage, you can't say it's unfair so it has to be factored in.

[Grief]

Silencer, on Aug 24 2009, 10:38 PM, said:

Grief, on Aug 25 2009, 06:22 AM, said:

D'rek, on Aug 24 2009, 04:50 PM, said:

In HoC, when Cotillion shows up in Bidithal's lair and saves Kalam, Kalam reflects that Cotillion is leagues ahead of him. Hard to say whether magic was used in that or not, but Cotillion wasn't using any overt magic, at least, ie no waves or projectiles or anything, it'd just have been imbued in his weapons. Either way, I'd take Kalam's word that Cotillion is better over some biased 3rd party thinking Kalam *might* have been a match.

I forget who the quote is by, can you remember? I remember it as being ST who said they were close, and that dancer would hesitate before taking Kalam on. Or perhaps Topper or Laseen.

As for Kalams thoughts it's hard to judge having not read that book in some time. Of course, this is cotillion though-with definete innate advantages. And the fact he could just be underestimating himself-which is for example, the reason Icariums thoughts aren't useful for judging how good a swordfighter he is.

Also, considering that cotillions rope is an extension of his mind, and he has command of rashan/meanas to shadow dance, it's still a definete advantage, based in magic.

It could just be modesty. But how often have we seen Kalam be modest? He assumed he could take out Laseen. So when he says Cotillion is fucking pwnage, I think we have to take his word at it.
And the 'innate advantage' argument still doesn't apply. As I said before, if you use something that allows you to do a better job, it does make you better. Kalam picked Otataral over magic. Are we saying his reliance on the Otataral knife makes him worse than the Claws? The only reason he didn't get raped by them was because he nullified their magic. Does his need for Quick Ben make him worse than the Tiste assassins? No, we include those things as part of who he is. A mage is a mage, you can't say it's unfair so it has to be factored in.

He didn't choose otataral over magic-magic wasn't a choice.
His use of otataral doesn't make him worse than the claws. It is an advantage though, so yes I do take into account his otataral. On the other hand his otataral only balances(if that-as you point out magic can still be used for stealth) their innate advantage-magic.

Doesn his use of QB make him worse than the Tiste? No-it simply levels the field, because QBs magic balances theirs-which is an advantage.

We cannot simply include QBs aid as part of Kalams skill though-no more than we can use the fact that ST would aid Cotillion.

I'm hardly saying magic is unfair-just that it is a blatant advantage-and as such should be taken into account.

Tell me, is being born with magical abilties something that they earned? Something that takes skill?

Magic is a talent-yes it has to be worked at-but it is an advantage that is not even open to some, and you don't have to be a strong mage against someone with no magic so that hardly takes skill-and as such should be factored in, in my opinion.

It does not make someone more skilled simply because they have magic. Yes it is part of who they are, and how they fight. However, that is not a more skilled way of fighting. In fact, as magic is an advantage I would say it is easier for a mage assassin to achieve the same resulsts as a normal assassin. However, that doesn't make the mage assassin better-because they had an advantage. So if we are to compare mundane and magic assassins, then it should be taken into account that just because you can achieve more by magic, doens't mean that someoone who can achieve less without it is less skillful. The best possible mage assassin is equally skilled to the best possible mundane one. Could the mage do more? Yes-because it has magic. Does that mean it is more skillful? Why would it-because the mundane has a limiting factor applied(lack of magic) whereas the mage does not. So yes, the mage could achieve more-but this alone doesn't make them more skillful.

Can cotillion or Apsalar achieve more than Kalam or Laseen? Yes-of course they could.
Are they more skillful simply because they are magic? No.
They all have extreme skill with the tools they have-the fact the tools are different doens't change the level of skill involved.
Which is why I do not consider cotillion and apsalar to be far ahead of the others in terms of skill.

[Grief]

[quote name='Silencer' post='667109' date='Aug 24 2009, 10:38 PM'][quote name='Grief' post='666938' date='Aug 25 2009, 06:22 AM'][quote name='D'rek' post='666855' date='Aug 24 2009, 04:50 PM']In HoC, when Cotillion shows up

[tiam]

Kalam is good with what he has. But in a contest of who is the best assasin he only way to judge that is who could sneak into a heavily warded and guarded compound and take their target then yes Dancer would be better. To say magic gives them certain advantages nd everyone whether a mage or not should be judged fairly is not ho is the best assasin it who is the best with what theyve got. For example Pearl, according to his boasts in BH, could have magicked his way into yghatan and killed leoman. Kalam, who i think we all regard as better, couldnt do that. Therefore pearl is technically a better assasin. Another example could be in HOC when Kalam says hed have to think it through about how to get past all those guards around Korbolo Doms tent and the only way he could is through Ash's distraction. Pearl,Cotillion, Vorcan etc could all magic there way behind lines of men and have that edge. Now Kalam s very good at what he does with the skills he has an i love Kalam. But the practicalities are that magic is better than no magic therefore mages make better assasins

[Abyss]

Grief, on Aug 20 2009, 06:04 PM, said:

Not in a battle of Hungry Hungry Hippos-we know from Maels discussion with Gothos(RG page 317) that you do not fucking mess with Rake at Hungry Hungry Hippos.

It's too close to call with Tiddlywinks, and Twister is a pointless discussion because Calm would pwn both of them.

I love you for this post.

In a gruff, manly, entirely short-lived sort of way.

Anyways, the answer is






- Abyss, assassinates ho'd wins.

[masan's saddle]

Just to chuck another spanner in the works, nobody has mentioned Serrat or Korlat ( who is decribed as a nighthunter in the DP of GotM) for that matter. Andii Nighthunters / Mage Assassins are well tasty and should not be discounted considering the whole strength, speed, magic, experience thing. The only problem is we don't really see enough of them, but having 50,000 years worth of wet work on your CV should count for something.

In GotM, Serrat and her crew scare the crap out of Rallick, Ocelot and Kalam who iirc, only gets outa town by getting QB to chuck one of Tays' imperial demons at them. Serrat is easily superior to Rallick and one on one, possibly Kalam. Although she must come lower than Cowl who bitchslaps her when she's about to grease Crokus.

Rank outsider who is probably wrong ? - For some reason I have a memory of Greyfrog describing itself as an assassin in its own realm ?

Although I may well be making that up !