[Cougar]

I've always found it puzzling that so many of the members want it to be like a computer game, as if power is directly measurable. I always think of it like the courts vs the legislature. Arguably the legislature has more power than courts but in he right circumstances the courts' powerz are final.

Or say a 100m vs 400m runner, they aren't comparable. Usain Bolt might be the fastest man in the world but put him up against a middling 400m runner and he's taking his arse home in a bag.

Plus add to all this the fact that nobody at any stage maybe with the exception of the Tiste Edur against QB/the Eres'al and then against Beak really just unleashes all of their power in a great glut. At other stages they are manipulating particular manifestations of warrens.

This post has been edited by Cougar: 07 September 2009 - 08:42 PM

[lorddarkflare]

Cougar, on 07 September 2009 - 08:41 PM, said:

I've always found it puzzling that so many of the members want it to be like a computer game, as if power is directly measurable. I always think of it like the courts vs the legislature. Arguably the legislature has more power than courts but in he right circumstances the courts' powerz are final.

Or say a 100m vs 400m runner, they aren't comparable. Usain Bolt might be the fastest man in the world but put him up against a middling 400m runner and he's taking his arse home in a bag.

Plus add to all this the fact that nobody at any stage maybe with the exception of the Tiste Edur against QB/the Eres'al and then against Beak really just unleashes all of their power in a great glut. At other stages they are manipulating particular manifestations of warrens.

I agree, but i am puzzled as to why you would find it puzzling.

People like things being nice and neat and categorized. Enter into any conversation about just about anything, and you will find people attempting to classify, to place structure upon, to make neat just about anything that they view to be chaotic.

I think that this is part of Erickson's point with his story and his characters. Most things in life cannot be easily placed, answers are not always easily found, paths are not always lit, ETC.

You can try and create order out of the chaos of the universe, but more likely than not, you will fail.

[Use Of Weapons]

As in most things, context is King. The application of power depends on the context in which that power is being applied. I don't think Erikson is saying 'shut up' to nerds arguing about who'd win. He's saying that 'who'd win' depends on circumstance, on the context of the contest, on the desire (the will, if you will) of the participants to follow through on their potential. One can interpret that as an injunction, if one prefers. I prefer to see it as encouragement to continue, while evaluating _all_ the circumstances surrounding a contest. Not just 'who'd win', but who'd win if the situation was thus-and-so.

[Abyss]

I read Bugg's Kilava thoughts this way:

If something, however powerful, decided to threaten Seren, Kilava would step into its way. Wholly and completely. Kilava is VERY powerful. So it doesn't matter who or what threatens Seren, it is going to deal with the whole of Kilava's power trying to rip its face (or whatever) off. So the hypothetical enemy must be ready to take damage to inflict damage - is it prepared to bring the whole of its own force against Kilava in order to get at Seren. And if it does, what about any other enemy out there that might take advantage of its distraction, or injury, to jump in. The enemy knows it can beat Kilava, eventually, but there is a cost to pay. Kilava, on the other hand, doesn't need to beat the enemy. She just needs to make it clear that she will oppose it fully.

thus, to the quote:

Quote

Bugg sighed. "A conviction I am slowly coming to accept. People do not understand power. They view it exclusively as a contest, this against that; which is the greater? Which wins, which fails? Power is less about actual conflict - recognizing as it does the mutual damage confict entails, with such damage making one vulnerable - less about actual conflict, then, than it is about statements. Presence, Acquitor, is power's truest expression. And presence is, at its core, the occupation of space. An assertion, if you will. One that must be acknowledged by other powers, lesser or greater, it matters not."
"I am not sure I understand you."
"Kilava would have invoked her presence, Acquitor. One that embraced you. Now if you still insist on simplistic comparisons, then I tell you, she would have been as a stone in a stream. The water may dream of victory, may even yearn for it, but it had best learn patience, yes? Consider every dried stream bed you have seen, Acquitor, and judge who was the ultimate victor in that war of patience.

Kilava's presence, is sufficient to deter. She is the stone. The stream/enemy can absolutely beat the stone, but it must be prepared to spend time and resources doing so, which may cost it elsewhere. So the enemy cannot bring a greater presence to bear than Kilava can. Thus, Kilava wins because Seren is safe.

So we're not debating about 'will' in the Green Lantern's Ring sense. We're debating about who is prepared to do what it takes to win.

Of course, this works both ways... the Nahruk 'won' because they were prepared to die to march right through the Bonehunters, whatever the cost. But the Bonehunters 'won' because rather than breaking and running, they were prepared to die to buy enough time for an orderly retreat rather than a rout.
That said, the Nahruk were weakened and it was that tiny bit easier for the GESLER AND STORMY'S CHEMALLERIFFIC LIZARD POWER ARMY to beat them.


- Abyss, prefers presents.

[HoosierDaddy]

Nice post, Abyss.

If you want to expand the situation, look at the pantheon. The presence of gods in certain roles asserts their control. There was no High House Shadow until Ammanas and Cotillion evoked their presence in Shadow Hold. In so doing, they occupied a space in the pantheon and asserted their claim to it by their mere presence.

[Abyss]

And in that same vein, when Rake confronts Shadowthrone, his main threat is not that he will kill ST - he even says that with the Hounds and Cotillion around, he may lose - but that he will commit to an attack which will cost ST more than Shadow can afford to lose.

Look at the Rake v Dassem fight in TtH. Rake 'won' because he was prepared to die to achieve his goal. Dassem was confused and conflicted and frustrated and couldn't think straight, thus, he 'lost'.

Had evil enemy/stream attacked, Kilava may have died protecting Seren, but if she drove the stream away, she still won.


- Abyss, notes this analogy is all wet.

[Dravon]

In a sword fight the ultimate defence is to just being willing to die to kill the other man. If I refuse to play you game you have no power over me and if I achieve my goal by doing so I win. POWER is subjutive....

[Grief]

So...Apt has been willing to keep up the war so far, bringing his presence to bear against a foe much more powerful and Abyss has been unwilling to commit to an attack(adminly destroy him)...Who wins

I agree with idea that it is about circumstance. Obviously will alone won't save your life-but often that isn't the point of it. It's the statement of it. A far less powerful being standing against a stronger one may be destroyed. However, there will still be consequences for the stronger power-because going around destroying people unecessarily is going to draw attention.

Same with Kilava.

She stood, in defense of the child. Mael couldn't fully commit himself as she could-because he has other things going that mean he would not commit. He wouldn't be willing to make such a commitment.

And perhaps Kilava could be destroyed, but she would commit a lot more will to it-she may fight to the death where Mael would withdraw. And if Kilava is destroyed, that would hold consequences for the destroyer. So it takes a large commitment to act against someone who has strongly stated their will.

[Abyss]

Grief, on 10 September 2009 - 10:00 PM, said:

So...Apt has been willing to keep up the war so far, bringing his presence to bear against a foe much more powerful and Abyss has been unwilling to commit to an attack(adminly destroy him)...Who wins

Not exactly. I could wipe Apt out of existance in less time than it takes to eat a swedish meatball. Apt continues to exist because he entertains me. Were Apt to commit 100% to the attack and bring the full force of his presence to bear, he might, might, manage to... umm... hmm. Are we talking on a weekend? Because honestly on a weekend i doubt i would even notice until Monday at best...

But this does raise an interesting point...

Suppose for a moment that instead of Kilava, Seren was protected by someone entirely inconsequential. Harllo. Harllo could bring every ounce of his five year old power to bear and not accomplish much more than maybe peeing himself.

When people do the 'ho'd win' dance, they are trying to acheive some form of objective X beats Y line of thought. Poorly, because as we all know, the answer is Wolverine. But Bugg's point is that when dealing with 'power', the will, or willingness, of one side can matter more than the actual power of the other. Because an assertion of 'presence' - a la Trull's i am here and you have to get through me first and whatever you do i'm going to shove this spear through your chest even if you did just reduce an army, two immortal Imass warriors, a demon matron and a bonecaster into confetti - can cause a much more powerful being to back off, hence Iccy's aversion to spears in DoD.

Brys was willing to step into the Errant's way during the reading at the beginning, even though the Errant had him completely outclassed. But if the Errant had attacked outright during the reading he would have had to risk whatever Brys brought back with him. Attacking by surpise later, the Errant had Brys dead to rights, but he still balked at the earlier attack, because (in part at least) of Brys 'presence'. And weh he did finally attack, look what happened - he left himself vulnerable and another force hit him in the brainz!


- Abyss, notes he's using 'force' loosely, since this is Ublala we're talking about...

[HoosierDaddy]

Abyss, on 10 September 2009 - 11:22 PM, said:

Grief, on 10 September 2009 - 10:00 PM, said:

So...Apt has been willing to keep up the war so far, bringing his presence to bear against a foe much more powerful and Abyss has been unwilling to commit to an attack(adminly destroy him)...Who wins

<snip>

Brys was willing to step into the Errant's way during the reading at the beginning, even though the Errant had him completely outclassed. But if the Errant had attacked outright during the reading he would have had to risk whatever Brys brought back with him. Attacking by surpise later, the Errant had Brys dead to rights, but he still balked at the earlier attack, because (in part at least) of Brys 'presence'. And weh he did finally attack, look what happened - he left himself vulnerable and another force hit him in the brainz!


- Abyss, notes he's using 'force' loosely, since this is Ublala we're talking about...

Brys was there, but was it Brys 'presence' that made the Errant back off? Maybe, but I think not at this point, as Brys hasn't fully awakened to himself yet (Hood hasn't copped it yet). Rather, it was Fiddler's statement that Ganoes Paran would announce HIS presence that made the Errant go away. While it was a bluff, it makes the notion of 'presence' even more notable.

This post has been edited by HoosierDaddy: 10 September 2009 - 11:32 PM

[Venerus]

As a vaguely related aside: I took the "stone in the stream" talk to be a fun description of ascension itself. Gesler and Stormy talk about feeling "weightier" after ascending, "more real". Reg'lar people get pushed around by fate/forces around them/inevitability; ascendants move themselves.

[BridgeBurner]

HoosierDaddy, on 10 September 2009 - 11:28 PM, said:

Abyss, on 10 September 2009 - 11:22 PM, said:

Grief, on 10 September 2009 - 10:00 PM, said:

So...Apt has been willing to keep up the war so far, bringing his presence to bear against a foe much more powerful and Abyss has been unwilling to commit to an attack(adminly destroy him)...Who wins

<snip>

Brys was willing to step into the Errant's way during the reading at the beginning, even though the Errant had him completely outclassed. But if the Errant had attacked outright during the reading he would have had to risk whatever Brys brought back with him. Attacking by surpise later, the Errant had Brys dead to rights, but he still balked at the earlier attack, because (in part at least) of Brys 'presence'. And weh he did finally attack, look what happened - he left himself vulnerable and another force hit him in the brainz!


- Abyss, notes he's using 'force' loosely, since this is Ublala we're talking about...

Brys was there, but was it Brys 'presence' that made the Errant back off? Maybe, but I think not at this point, as Brys hasn't fully awakened to himself yet (Hood hasn't copped it yet). Rather, it was Fiddler's statement that Ganoes Paran would announce HIS presence that made the Errant go away. While it was a bluff, it makes the notion of 'presence' even more notable.

That's how I read it. The Errant backed down because of Fiddler's bluff. He wasn't ready to commit/risk everything yet.

[Tattersail_]

Abyss, on 09 September 2009 - 07:24 PM, said:

I read Bugg's Kilava thoughts this way:

If something, however powerful, decided to threaten Seren, Kilava would step into its way. Wholly and completely. Kilava is VERY powerful. So it doesn't matter who or what threatens Seren, it is going to deal with the whole of Kilava's power trying to rip its face (or whatever) off. So the hypothetical enemy must be ready to take damage to inflict damage - is it prepared to bring the whole of its own force against Kilava in order to get at Seren. And if it does, what about any other enemy out there that might take advantage of its distraction, or injury, to jump in. The enemy knows it can beat Kilava, eventually, but there is a cost to pay. Kilava, on the other hand, doesn't need to beat the enemy. She just needs to make it clear that she will oppose it fully.

thus, to the quote:

Quote

Bugg sighed. "A conviction I am slowly coming to accept. People do not understand power. They view it exclusively as a contest, this against that; which is the greater? Which wins, which fails? Power is less about actual conflict - recognizing as it does the mutual damage confict entails, with such damage making one vulnerable - less about actual conflict, then, than it is about statements. Presence, Acquitor, is power's truest expression. And presence is, at its core, the occupation of space. An assertion, if you will. One that must be acknowledged by other powers, lesser or greater, it matters not."
"I am not sure I understand you."
"Kilava would have invoked her presence, Acquitor. One that embraced you. Now if you still insist on simplistic comparisons, then I tell you, she would have been as a stone in a stream. The water may dream of victory, may even yearn for it, but it had best learn patience, yes? Consider every dried stream bed you have seen, Acquitor, and judge who was the ultimate victor in that war of patience.

Kilava's presence, is sufficient to deter. She is the stone. The stream/enemy can absolutely beat the stone, but it must be prepared to spend time and resources doing so, which may cost it elsewhere. So the enemy cannot bring a greater presence to bear than Kilava can. Thus, Kilava wins because Seren is safe.

So we're not debating about 'will' in the Green Lantern's Ring sense. We're debating about who is prepared to do what it takes to win.

Of course, this works both ways... the Nahruk 'won' because they were prepared to die to march right through the Bonehunters, whatever the cost. But the Bonehunters 'won' because rather than breaking and running, they were prepared to die to buy enough time for an orderly retreat rather than a rout.
That said, the Nahruk were weakened and it was that tiny bit easier for the GESLER AND STORMY'S CHEMALLERIFFIC LIZARD POWER ARMY to beat them.


- Abyss, prefers presents.

you do know that you're the MAN

[Roldom]

if u think of personal power in terms of nations i think it translates a little like this

in the neapolonic wars in europe, neapolon betrayed spain, and seized a large portion of spains towns and citys. the spanish tried to fight back, but where demoralized and scattered. however france was unable to defeat the spanish because they couldnt bring there whole force to bare, as much of there army was needed to fight the dutch, the russians the english etc

it doesnt matter how much force u have if its not where u need it when u need it. rake and dassem are powerfull ascendents, more dangerous than some gods, even tho the gods may have more power, because all there force is concentrated in one spot, but the gods have there power spread out, for example when ST said to Colt ( in tth i think)( or maybe the other way round ) shadows power was stretched to thin, they had a whole realm to defend as well as other more mortal interests, so they where unable to complete all the tasks they set out to do

[SiriusL]

Roldom, on 01 October 2010 - 07:16 PM, said:

if u think of personal power in terms of nations i think it translates a little like this

in the neapolonic wars in europe, neapolon betrayed spain, and seized a large portion of spains towns and citys. the spanish tried to fight back, but where demoralized and scattered. however france was unable to defeat the spanish because they couldnt bring there whole force to bare, as much of there army was needed to fight the dutch, the russians the english etc

it doesnt matter how much force u have if its not where u need it when u need it. rake and dassem are powerfull ascendents, more dangerous than some gods, even tho the gods may have more power, because all there force is concentrated in one spot, but the gods have there power spread out, for example when ST said to Colt ( in tth i think)( or maybe the other way round ) shadows power was stretched to thin, they had a whole realm to defend as well as other more mortal interests, so they where unable to complete all the tasks they set out to do

Darnit, I read through the entire thread, and right at the very end you post just what I wanted to say. Nice one.

Kilava's protection is a different application of force than an attack would be. She's like the castle in a seige, which will eventually fail but not without a sh*t-ton of work. If she's a stone in the stream, the attackers are guys with buckets trying to take the water out. 100 guys, 1,000 guys...Kilava's power is such that she displaces the water.


Sirius, needs to borrow a towel now, too.

[Roldom]

just beat ya to it

[champ]

a holy crap moment...

how can we comment on power levels and who will win what etc when SE decides by...

Quote

Believe it or not, the clash of two major characters in TtH was decided on a single roll of the die. If it had gone the other ... well, I shudder to think.

i cant even fathom where he would of taken the plot if hood had come out on top... (i am presuming it was hood vs rake and not rake vs dassem)

[Aptorian]

He was talking about the fight between Kruppe and Pust. Pust could have been the wielder of Dragnipur.

[HoosierDaddy]

champooon, on 12 October 2010 - 09:26 PM, said:

a holy crap moment...

how can we comment on power levels and who will win what etc when SE decides by...

Quote

Believe it or not, the clash of two major characters in TtH was decided on a single roll of the die. If it had gone the other ... well, I shudder to think.

i cant even fathom where he would of taken the plot if hood had come out on top... (i am presuming it was hood vs rake and not rake vs dassem)

He was very vague, but of the two scenarios you describe I think you are taking the wrong path. There never was a Hood v. Rake. There was an agreement between Hood and Rake (and ST), whereby Hood would get Dragnipur'ed and be free of his role, while Dragnipur would get Hood's armies of the dead vs. Chaos. The scene begins with a momentary hesitation by Hood, but Rake doesn't hesitate. Agreement fulfilled.

However, the moment Rake stepped in between Hood and Dessembrae, there was no doubt there would be a confrontation between them. Which also followed the plan.

Maybe he was talking about a toss of the die on whether Dassem's +1 friendship charm would work on Karsa.

This post has been edited by H.D.: 13 October 2010 - 03:57 AM

[champ]

good points! hmmm....