[Sinisdar Toste]

i think tanak' (side note, love the newest forum abbreviation) was worried about krughava's whole hearted embrace of her place as a glorious hero that the songs will sing of. he recognizes that a mortal sword with that attitude will throw away soldiers like chafe to see her glorious legend elevated. this i think is why i have a sly affinity for tanak', he's a ruthlessly clear thinker

[Abyss]

Which does bring up the point that Tanak is the only Sheild Anvil actively engaged in the plan, tho Stormy is sort of in the category too.

We've seen that when it comes to dealings with ascendents/gods, a Sheild Anvil has all kinds of crazy possibilities. One would really be at risk for taking the the CG's pain, but it seems like an event that may yet happen.

- Abyss, ...oh, the pain... wait, that's just gas...

[Mezla PigDog]

Has anyone defined the roles of a Destriant, Mortal Sword and Shield Anvil in the books? Do we really know? I see it as the Destriant holds the faith of the army and decides what path they should take. The mortal sword is the General figure who deals with the nuts and bolts of the army and then the Shield Anvil just gets left with picking up all the crap at the end, kind of a conscience? Shield Anvil seems like a cruddy job to me! I don't blame Tanakalian for being a bit peeved at being expected to take care of the souls of any Tom Dick or Harry. I'll bet he didn't ask to be Shield Anvil either. So if he isn't up to the task, does that mean the Wolves are bad choosers? Or they didn't choose and the Destriant/Mortal Swords choose? Stormy and Gesler didn't get much of a choice. That takes us back to the beginning of how did Setoc get chosen and does Krughava know?

Or maybe the Wolves have chosen well and he'll come good in the end......doesn't sound like SE to me but then Tanakalian seems too much of an obvious liability to actually turn out to be one.

This post has been edited by Mezla PigDog: 20 November 2009 - 09:51 PM

[Hellian's Keg Lid]

iirc, Itkovian says in MoI that as Shield Anvil its his duty to look into the history/learning of a place as well as embrace the pain of the men/enemy.

Destriant to me is physical healer/high mage-priest of the cult, the Shield Anvil is the "spiritual" healer who takes mortal suffering upon himself.

Semi-related, was why I assumed if any in the Snake had any roles with the KCCM, I would have put Rutt as MS, Badalle as Destriant, and Saddic as SA.

Rutt leads, Badalle is eh, Badalle, and Saddic listens to everything that happens, and speaks of taking it into himself - and also goes digging for history of Icarias.

[Tremolo]

Hellian, on 20 November 2009 - 10:49 PM, said:

iirc, Itkovian says in MoI that as Shield Anvil its his duty to look into the history/learning of a place as well as embrace the pain of the men/enemy.

Destriant to me is physical healer/high mage-priest of the cult, the Shield Anvil is the "spiritual" healer who takes mortal suffering upon himself.

Semi-related, was why I assumed if any in the Snake had any roles with the KCCM, I would have put Rutt as MS, Badalle as Destriant, and Saddic as SA.

Rutt leads, Badalle is eh, Badalle, and Saddic listens to everything that happens, and speaks of taking it into himself - and also goes digging for history of Icarias.

If my memory serves me correct Itkovian is also the master strategist/tactician. He is totally focused on the battle at hand and does not let his flesh lure him into either fear or lust. That could ofcourse just be a personal trait of Itkovians and not so much his job description.

[prq]

Not being subject to lust was a vow of the Gray Swords I think, nothing to do with Itkovian or Shield Anvils in general.

( I couldn't imagine Stormy abiding by that rule! )

[Sinisdar Toste]

actually, do we not find out that it was itkovian personally who decided to take those vows? does not karnadas the destriant say specifically that fener does not require such vows of his servants?

[lobo the wolfman]

Sinisdar Toste, on 25 November 2009 - 05:46 AM, said:

actually, do we not find out that it was itkovian personally who decided to take those vows? does not karnadas the destriant say specifically that fener does not require such vows of his servants?

Yeah, thats right. Part of the quote is "Itkovain, yours vows were born of a dialogue with yourself - not with Fener" MOI pg542

Also didn't Quick Ben say to Wiskeyjack that the title Mortal Sword was used for Fener follows before the Deck had the positions of Knights?

Mezla PigDog rises a good point though with who chooses the positions of MS, SA and destriant. l mean both the Destriant (before his gooacation) and the Mortal Sword both believe that Tanakalian isn't right for the job, so doesn't that show a lack of faith in their gods? A bit odd for a fanatical religious military order.

[foolio]

it just seems to me is too obvious of a villain to actually turn out to be a villain. Does that make any sense? The destriant makes reference to how he and Krughava disagreed over her elevating Tanak to SA. Wonder what she saw in him?

I certainly find myself liking Krughava, but what if Tanak is right?

[Tarcanus]

Hmm, I haven't seen anything wrong with Tanakalian at all. Of course, I find Krughava to be a raging, contemptuous bitch. I thought his logic was decent in deciding that embracing all souls was fairly foolish when you think of some of the sinful things many souls get up to while in the flesh. I think he thinks too highly of himself and his title - which is why he decided that final judgement was his call, when really his will should follow the Wolves'. Perhaps the Wolves don't really support Tanakalian after all because he seems have a subconscious that thinks it's as perfect in judgement as a god.

Seeing as how he is, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he embraces the Crippled God. Isn't the whole Bonehunters quest a shot at stopping the next Chaining? There aren't very many options left in dealing with the CG.

Crazy theory: Tanakalian will embrace the CG (since the CG is so crippled and busted up anyway, and can only barely manifest in his pocket warren, I don't think he has a corporeal form anymore) and become the corporeal form of the CG which will allow a better integration with the Houses and pull his poison out of the Warrens - thus tidying everything up nicely.

[Leo]

Tanak apparently wasn't enough to embrace the destriant. He would collapse as soon as he tried to do anything with the CG. I believe the CG needs to be embraced, though. I had a theory, but this second one seems more likely.

The Mortal Sword does not trust the Shield Anvil, and it seems that perhaps the wolves don't either. Togg still has a bit of a claim on Toc the Undead, and he might be able to fully take Toc now that Hood hood isn't resting on anything. Perhaps Tanak is just a placeholder until Toc can be taken from death. I don't think becoming Shield Anvil has to pull him from his place in the House of Death. Also, in his deathly state, perhaps his physical limits would not hold him back from embracing the CG?

Tanakalian obviously still has some role to play, but I don't think it will be embracing the CG.

[Gothos]

The Shield Anvil of the Grey Helms seems extremely weak, even more so seeing his position in the company. He's a shield that will crack. He's everything Itkovian wasn't, it's like comparing thin ice on a lake to the antarctic glacier. He's the weak link and bad things will come from his presence. Krughava should kill the bastard. He shouldn't have been chosen. He's got balls of copperwire.

[foolio]

Quote

Not being subject to lust was a vow of the Gray Swords I think, nothing to do with Itkovian or Shield Anvils in general

I thought the destriant of the grey Swords tell Itkovian his celibacy is self imposed and that it does not please or displease Fener.

[Sinisdar Toste]

Gothos, on 19 February 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

The Shield Anvil of the Grey Helms seems extremely weak, even more so seeing his position in the company. He's a shield that will crack. He's everything Itkovian wasn't, it's like comparing thin ice on a lake to the antarctic glacier. He's the weak link and bad things will come from his presence. Krughava should kill the bastard. He shouldn't have been chosen. He's got balls of copperwire.

i think tanakalian will surprise us all.

that is all.

[foolio]

Quote

i think tanakalian will surprise us all.

I kind of agree. It just seems like we are being pushed into thinking that he is traitorous or a villain too much. I think he will also surprise us.

[Tattersail_]

wasn't it stated somewhere that the "theme" for tCG was heroism? I think there will be a betrayal, from where will be unexpected I think. From that betrayal there will be someone who steps up to the plate to save the day, maybe tanek? maybe someone different.

[Nemorensis]

Judging from

Quote

'I travelled far,' Run'Thurvian said. 'Doubts ... a growing unease. Listen! She is not as we believed. There will be . . . betrayal. Tell Krughava! The vow - we have made a mistake!'

the betrayal the dying Destriant talks about is probably by Tavore, not Tanakalian. Krughava vowed them to her back in TBH if I'm not completely wrong.

Quote

No, he was not simply a Shield Anvil, in the manner of all those who had come before, all those who had lived and died beneath the burden of that title. He was not interested in passive acceptance. He would take upon himself mortal pain, yes, but not indiscriminately.
I too am mortal, after all. It is my essence that I am able to weigh my judgement. Of what is worthy. And what is not.

That is a reiteration of the theme found in TTH and MoI with Itkovian. It is similar in notion to the theme in TtH: Redemption is not something to be given or granted to everyone regardless of who they are or have done but an act that someone has to for themselves. There has to be some judgment because there is only a finite amount of compassion, a finite amount of empathy before the entity that offers them is torn asunder by the needs of the many.
The whole position/mechanic of a Shield Anvil is somewhat suspect: How is a mortal supposed to accept and bear this load of pain? Are the gods that create Shield Anvils shirking their duty by shoving the pain of their worshippers off into a mortal? (Which incidentally also opens up the can of worms we have with Hood: can you still care or be compassionate after witnessing the tragedies and horrors of mortal existence for centuries or millenia? Can the gods but create such means to get rid of this torrent because else they would despair and/or go mad?)
Given the fact that the relationship of mortals and gods is a two way street on Wu, that may even be an implicit trade: the triad of Mortal Sword/Destriant/Shield Anvil are a prerequisite for an involvement of the gods in the lives of their followers. Exactly the means that allow a close contact instead of pushing them away like Rake for example did.
And as for feeling himself more able to judge the worth of the souls he is going to embrace than the gods: The gods don't do it. At all. The Shield Anvil is supposed to embrace all. (Which opens yet another question, namely as to why he embraces even the enemies indiscriminately. There has to be a reason of some sort. Pure love and compassion like Krughava states as the reason a Shield Anvil does it seems almost too good to be true. I really do seem to have the cynicism and lack of trust that Tanakalian has.)

Tanakalian's sentiments about Krughava as the classic heroine of legends is a deconstruction of said legendary characters and of unflinching dogmatism. I'm not sure if they echo the folly of youth that thinks it knows best while lacking wisdom or if is clearsighted cynicism. The posters before me seem to view it as the former while I tend to view it as the latter. (But then again I am someone who does chafe at perceived authority and (moral) certitude myself.) Tanakalian does have some thoughts that are selfaggrandizing if you read them that way and he rationalizes problems his encounter with the dying Destriant raised, but I'm not sure if he is indeed completely wrong. He does make a hell of an unreliable narrator.

The scenario I think is possible to occur concerning the Grey Helms is this: Tavore is going to free the Crippled God which will be seen as betrayal by Krughava (who may expect a war that results in yet another Chaining) regardless of what a freeing might actually achieve. (And freeing the Crippled God at this point may be the moral thing to do, the Chainings seem to have a lot to do with leeching off his power and exploiting him. Which incidentally may keep him from healing.) After the warning by Kisswhere she may have may expect some form of betrayal. (The remark about her wanting the limelight by Tanakalian and the following meeting could have already set things in motion in exactly that direction.) Somehow I see a tragedy in the making out of misunderstandings and a lack of communication.

[Abyss]

The point of a Sheild Anvil, as illustrated by Itkovian, is to remove pain from souls and serve as a refuge for souls to be brought to their god eventually. Heboric makes the point that mortal's have an amazing capacity for this, beyond what anyone would expect. It's all very ephemeral and made even moreso by FW's comments in RG and other bits elsewhere, but what it amounts to is that Gods and Ascendents, or their worshippers, could invest power in a mortal to be their martial champion (mortal sword), religious symbolic leader/destriant, or soul saver/keeper/shield anvil. Interestingly while the martial champion role carries to the House as Champion, Knight, Soldier, etc, Destriant and Sheild Anvil do not, likely because a House is a reflection of an aspect (Light, Dark, etc) and doesn't draw on faith the way an individual god would or their worshippers would expect.


I suspect that the betrayal the Helms' Destriant warns of before going all mushy is Tavore's ultimate goal to free the CG, while the Wolves wish to see him Chained or destroyed. The Helms took a vow to support Tavore, hence the conflict

Which raises an interesting point... if Tanakalian is destined to betray Krughava, might that be in favour of Tavore?

And where does Setoc stand, since she's Letherii by way of Barghast and has never even met the Helms, let alone the Wolves...

Y'know... this could all go very very badly for the Wolves, given that their three remaining aspected mortals are likely at opposite purposes.

And then there's Toc, who seems to remain Death's Herald (albeit without Hood), Togg's Mortal Sword (albeit undead), linked to the House of War AND serving Olar Ethil for reasons unclear... my head hurts.

[Tattersail_]

very clear and precise, I know there are theories here but your explanation of the mortal sword, destriant and shield anvil warranted the rep!

from what you said, although the 3 different people are in different places with different people the God is one being and would surely relate it's goal to its MS, D and SA? So they may appear to be on different paths but may eventually be reaching the same goal.

[Abyss]

Well that is the question... the Helms' Destriant certainly suggests that Tana' may not be working towards the same goal as Krughava. No one asked Setoc if she wanted to be Destriant to a couple of gods her home country didn't even recognize. In MoI Gruntle cheerfully disregarded Rath'Trake's orders that supposedly came from Trake. Heboric even appeared to have switched from Destriant to Shield Anvil by virtue of necessity. Dassem broke from Hood but appeared to retain a lot of the power that he held as Death's Knight. FW basically forced the Errant to take her as Destriant and then tried to force the SA role on Udinaas who denied it. And I'm fairly sure Rake never asked anyone to make Clip his mortal sword. All of which is to say, investing power in a mortal can happen a few different ways and the God/Ascendent isn't necessarily in 'control' of what happens next. Sure, Itkovian, Brukhalian and Karanadas were religious fanatics sworn to their god, but that is clearly not always the case and as with Karsa, a decision to invest a mortal can really backfire on the god.