[Abyss]

[quote name='Illuyankas' date='17 May 2010 - 05:17 PM' timestamp='1274131031' post='761968']
Wait, why do you think Rake never hung out disguised as a human?
[/quote]

Who said i didn't?
Rather, my point was that the gods lie all the time and pretend to be things they are not.


[quote name='dawnkiller' date='17 May 2010 - 11:20 PM' timestamp='1274152844' post='762037']
[quote name='Abyss' date='17 May 2010 - 04:00 PM' timestamp='1274130053' post='761963']
The list is long but colourful.[/quote]

Yeah, just last week archaeologists found a partial version inscribed on clay tablets of ancient Sumer. [/quote]

That's an old shopping list.


[quote] I'm not sure which warren this is -- it segues into Togg finding Toc in Chaos, which is one of the oldest, but Fener appears to have a warren of his own, so Togg may have been checking that one first. So while the EGs, or at least Olar Ethil, were definitely around in the days of the Imass, this passage leads me to suspect that Beasts came first. Before the ability to grasp abstracts, there would have been the ability to distinguish predator from prey . . . and violence and the fight for survival. [/quote]

Fener was one of several gods who drew on Tennes, altho that may be a GotMism.

I want to say that logically the Beasts must pre-date the Elders but time gets all wonky when Mother Dark and Creation Myths come into play.


[quote]
Okay, found it. Page 692, conversation between Curdle and Olar Ethil:

[quote]"He brought the ritual to his people-oh, it was an old ritual, much older than Dessimbelackis, much older than this world. He forced it upon his subjects."
"This tale I know well. I was there, when we gave answer to that. The swords of the T'lan Imass dripped for days. But, there were not dragons, not there, not then."
"You'd begun the slaughter. He'd fled even before then, taking his D'ivers form--"
"The Deragoth."
"Yes. He knew you were hunting him. He needed allies. But we were chained, and he could not break those chains. So he offered to take our souls..."[/quote]

Dessi's timeline can also be a bit of a mess, but somewhere it says that he was already missing when the HFE went beastly. It would make sense that the Imass hunted him after they purged the soletaken, but i have trouble with the notion that he did his thing to the two dragons because he needed allies...

Solid quote fu btw.

- Abyss, sends rep fu.

[dawnkiller]

Abyss, on 18 May 2010 - 02:09 PM, said:

Quote

Yeah, just last week archaeologists found a partial version inscribed on clay tablets of ancient Sumer.

That's an old shopping list.

Then "laser death ray" indicates commendable foresight.

Quote

Fener was one of several gods who drew on Tennes, altho that may be a GotMism.

I want to say that logically the Beasts must pre-date the Elders but time gets all wonky when Mother Dark and Creation Myths come into play.

Right right . . . Derudan used Tennes. That's land/Burn's warren, yes? That makes sense, though I'd figure that there's probably an elder/hold incarnation of it, kind of like Kurald Thryllan became Tellann became Thyr. And the beast gods seem aspected to seasons (D'rek is autumn, the Wolves of winter, etc), which are closely tied to nature, and etc and so forth.

It was . . . what . . . RG or tBH that indicated the Imass had attachments to the Beast Hold? IIRC they were sensitive to the wolves returning to it. Time does indeed get wonky what with Olar Ethil (supposedly) existing in some form to spawn the Eres, which were pre-Imass, which indicates Elder predates humanity, but I dunno -- it seems weird for EGs, who embody abstract concepts and draw power from worshippers, to exist before sentience. However, we do know from Setoc's experiences that animals can become a source of power and will even after death.

Then again, I suppose nothing says the EGs' current forms aren't the result of evolution, and they started out as something completely different . . .

Quote

Okay, found it. Page 692, conversation between Curdle and Olar Ethil:

Quote

"He brought the ritual to his people-oh, it was an old ritual, much older than Dessimbelackis, much older than this world. He forced it upon his subjects."
"This tale I know well. I was there, when we gave answer to that. The swords of the T'lan Imass dripped for days. But, there were not dragons, not there, not then."
"You'd begun the slaughter. He'd fled even before then, taking his D'ivers form--"
"The Deragoth."
"Yes. He knew you were hunting him. He needed allies. But we were chained, and he could not break those chains. So he offered to take our souls..."

Dessi's timeline can also be a bit of a mess, but somewhere it says that he was already missing when the HFE went beastly. It would make sense that the Imass hunted him after they purged the soletaken, but i have trouble with the notion that he did his thing to the two dragons because he needed allies...

It's weird, the quote does seem to indicate he got the hell out of dodge before the actual ritual (or at least before the slaughter) . . . to me, what seems weird is that he forced it on his subjects. DG, I think, also has Heboric mention that even before the mass-ritual becoming Soletaken was seen as an easier and more "natural" path to ascension, which arguably makes the ritual even stranger as it's not like the practice had been forgotten. The Curdlerast indicates Dessy inflicted it because Man Had Grown Proud and thought he was superior to beasts, in which case . . . maybe Dessy meant to torpedo his own empire? Pure speculation, 'course, but we already have the example of D'rek getting so disgusted by her own worshippers she engaged in mass-slaughter. I don't think of Dessy as a megalomaniacal psychopath, but if the Lether empire is any indication I can see why he might throw up his hands and decide the world is better off starting from scratch. Tehol almost did the same thing, just with economics.

Man, I gotta reread DG. I'm getting confused. Again.

This post has been edited by dawnkiller: 18 May 2010 - 02:40 PM

[Bauchelain the Evil]

Abyss, on 18 May 2010 - 02:09 PM, said:

Illuyankas, on 17 May 2010 - 09:17 PM, said:

Wait, why do you think Rake never hung out disguised as a human?

Who said i didn't?
Rather, my point was that the gods lie all the time and pretend to be things they are not.

Quote

"He brought the ritual to his people-oh, it was an old ritual, much older than Dessimbelackis, much older than this world. He forced it upon his subjects."
"This tale I know well. I was there, when we gave answer to that. The swords of the T'lan Imass dripped for days. But, there were not dragons, not there, not then."
"You'd begun the slaughter. He'd fled even before then, taking his D'ivers form--"
"The Deragoth."
"Yes. He knew you were hunting him. He needed allies. But we were chained, and he could not break those chains. So he offered to take our souls..."

Dessi's timeline can also be a bit of a mess, but somewhere it says that he was already missing when the HFE went beastly. It would make sense that the Imass hunted him after they purged the soletaken, but i have trouble with the notion that he did his thing to the two dragons because he needed allies...

I agree that there are examples of Gods faking being human( Nightchil, K'rul,) however it was Tool who told the tale of th QoD, Brood and Rake alliance. I would assume that he is knowledgeable enough to be trusted. But then , the T'lann Imass did'nt seem to know that their top Bonecaster is actually an EG.

As for Desimbelackis, yeah Onrack tells Trull in HoC that he had long been gone in his seven d'ivers form( the Deragoth) when the T'lann Imass decided to clean up the mess of the First Empire. Once again it comes to "who knows more/better?".

[Sinisdar Toste]

Bauchelain the Evil, on 18 May 2010 - 05:40 PM, said:

Abyss, on 18 May 2010 - 02:09 PM, said:

Illuyankas, on 17 May 2010 - 09:17 PM, said:

Wait, why do you think Rake never hung out disguised as a human?

Who said i didn't?
Rather, my point was that the gods lie all the time and pretend to be things they are not.

Quote

"He brought the ritual to his people-oh, it was an old ritual, much older than Dessimbelackis, much older than this world. He forced it upon his subjects."
"This tale I know well. I was there, when we gave answer to that. The swords of the T'lan Imass dripped for days. But, there were not dragons, not there, not then."
"You'd begun the slaughter. He'd fled even before then, taking his D'ivers form--"
"The Deragoth."
"Yes. He knew you were hunting him. He needed allies. But we were chained, and he could not break those chains. So he offered to take our souls..."

Dessi's timeline can also be a bit of a mess, but somewhere it says that he was already missing when the HFE went beastly. It would make sense that the Imass hunted him after they purged the soletaken, but i have trouble with the notion that he did his thing to the two dragons because he needed allies...

I agree that there are examples of Gods faking being human( Nightchil, K'rul,) however it was Tool who told the tale of th QoD, Brood and Rake alliance. I would assume that he is knowledgeable enough to be trusted. But then , the T'lann Imass did'nt seem to know that their top Bonecaster is actually an EG.

As for Desimbelackis, yeah Onrack tells Trull in HoC that he had long been gone in his seven d'ivers form( the Deragoth) when the T'lann Imass decided to clean up the mess of the First Empire. Once again it comes to "who knows more/better?".

it may also come down to "how fast did the seven cities part of the HFE disintegrate into chaos? and how quickly did the t'lan imass arrive?"

in DG, heboric says that in the span of a few bells the ritual swept across the main part of the empire, claiming thousands. tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands would have died on the first day, i assume. heboric might have mentioned an actual figure.

now many of those who became soletaken, became d'ivers, and power levels grew in a select few as the death toll mounted. this couldn't have gone on for more than a week, maybe less, before the t'lan imass pricked up their ears and strolled in to "quiet that damn racket" - as it were. dessi could have skipped town on the first day as soon as he knew that the ritual was not going exactly to plan (or maybe it was, who knows?). he could've been in assail sipping mojitos by the time the imass thought about tracking him down.

This post has been edited by Sinisdar Toste: 20 May 2010 - 05:25 AM

[Hood's Legacy]

Sinisdar Toste, on 11 May 2010 - 04:17 AM, said:

i don't think the hounds are really that loyal to ST and Cotillion. kagamandra says that they represent all that cannot be tamed, and the realm of shadow has had multiple rulers who clearly weren't defended to the death by the hounds, because the hounds are still around and those rulers aren't

A question here, why do the Hounds kill randomly. Also, Kellanved and Dancer dont seem to be that demented/evil either (well, at least Dancer shows himself to be a true 'Patron'). Why would they unleash the hounds to kill people and start a convergence.. There are other ways to shout out... Hello.... major powers need gathering... a newborn power up for grabs... Wanna fight the summoned alien anyone...????

[Sinisdar Toste]

because their gigantic savage hounds, would be my guess. also they had lock and pallid to deal with. lastly, ST needed to make the area where dragnipur was shortly going to become up for grabs unappealing to certain powers

[jammer]

Interesting convo guys. I thought I needed to weigh in. A lot of people are talking about these gods as if they were people. They are not. We see them in the story as characters but we have been told many times that they are elemental forces. We have seen how their power comes from worship and have been told that sometimes this is a thing that can be forced on them i.e. the Errant and Featherwitch, Mael and Rel, or even what is hinted at in the story of Banaschar and the murder of the Wyrm's cult.

As far as Olar Ethil goes, she is not a person, she is a force. In her case it has to do with motherhood, creation. All motherhood, all creation. So each being that has worshipped "the mother", has spilled blood for her or cries out to her in their temples, is worshipping Olar Ethil. However, each being would put their own face to this motherhood. The Andii call her Mother Dark. Some humans call her Burn, as the earth, the Jaghut have their Stone Bitch etc etc. Whenever these faces were created by worshippers, they become a part of the god or goddess that represents the FORCE being worshipped. In Olar Ethil's case she has been worshipped since the moment of creation by all beings at one point or another, therefore she has many faces, and the countless personalities to go with that.

As far as the other Elders being the creators of other races, this is not the case. Olar Ethil is the mother. However, other creatures would worship other forces as well, and in doing so would put their faces on the gods that represent those forces. So the Forkrul Assail who worship destruction as a way to create peace would find their prayers/bloodletting/whatever adding to Kilmandaros, who is the personification of the force of destruction. Those that pray for chance or luck would find their worship adding to the power of the Errant, etc. this is why these gods can have many forms, they can wear the faces of the Gods that their worshippers created in their image.

As to how this relates to shapeshifting, if the worship of Olar Ethil is the oldest, and as the mother, this would seem to be an acceptable conclusion then she would have the most faces given her by her worshippers, i.e. be the first shapeshifter.

So Tiam would be Olar Ethil as well, as the God created by Dragons to represent their mother.

[worry]

That's one distinct possibility. But it might be completely right, completely wrong, right and wrong to varying degrees, right but not universally so, etc. It certainly seems to be what OE was getting at, regardless of how true it is.

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

jammer, on 08 June 2010 - 12:31 AM, said:

Interesting convo guys. I thought I needed to weigh in. A lot of people are talking about these gods as if they were people. They are not. We see them in the story as characters but we have been told many times that they are elemental forces. We have seen how their power comes from worship and have been told that sometimes this is a thing that can be forced on them i.e. the Errant and Featherwitch, Mael and Rel, or even what is hinted at in the story of Banaschar and the murder of the Wyrm's cult.

As far as Olar Ethil goes, she is not a person, she is a force. In her case it has to do with motherhood, creation. All motherhood, all creation. So each being that has worshipped "the mother", has spilled blood for her or cries out to her in their temples, is worshipping Olar Ethil. However, each being would put their own face to this motherhood. The Andii call her Mother Dark. Some humans call her Burn, as the earth, the Jaghut have their Stone Bitch etc etc. Whenever these faces were created by worshippers, they become a part of the god or goddess that represents the FORCE being worshipped. In Olar Ethil's case she has been worshipped since the moment of creation by all beings at one point or another, therefore she has many faces, and the countless personalities to go with that.

As far as the other Elders being the creators of other races, this is not the case. Olar Ethil is the mother. However, other creatures would worship other forces as well, and in doing so would put their faces on the gods that represent those forces. So the Forkrul Assail who worship destruction as a way to create peace would find their prayers/bloodletting/whatever adding to Kilmandaros, who is the personification of the force of destruction. Those that pray for chance or luck would find their worship adding to the power of the Errant, etc. this is why these gods can have many forms, they can wear the faces of the Gods that their worshippers created in their image.

As to how this relates to shapeshifting, if the worship of Olar Ethil is the oldest, and as the mother, this would seem to be an acceptable conclusion then she would have the most faces given her by her worshippers, i.e. be the first shapeshifter.

So Tiam would be Olar Ethil as well, as the God created by Dragons to represent their mother.

Everything you just said makes perfect sense if you only read DoD. And it is certainly possible that it is all correct. But considering all the information we've received in the previous books it becomes so convoluted it is next to impossible to put a succinct summary on Creation and the Elder Gods. You're statement that OE is the mother entity for all sentient and worshipping races certainly can't be dismissed off-hand, and it is actually very similar to the one that Abyss puts forth upthread from here that all the EG's are a D'ivers form of the same original entity. The problem I can see with your theory is that OE is she appears to be locked into her T'lan Imass form. Also all the talk about Burn as the sleeping goddess appears to be legitimate as well considering Brood's hammer and Quick Ben actually walking in her caverns/veins.

[jammer]

WhiskeyJackDaniels, on 08 June 2010 - 02:09 AM, said:

Everything you just said makes perfect sense if you only read DoD. And it is certainly possible that it is all correct. But considering all the information we've received in the previous books it becomes so convoluted it is next to impossible to put a succinct summary on Creation and the Elder Gods. You're statement that OE is the mother entity for all sentient and worshipping races certainly can't be dismissed off-hand, and it is actually very similar to the one that Abyss puts forth upthread from here that all the EG's are a D'ivers form of the same original entity. The problem I can see with your theory is that OE is she appears to be locked into her T'lan Imass form. Also all the talk about Burn as the sleeping goddess appears to be legitimate as well considering Brood's hammer and Quick Ben actually walking in her caverns/veins.

See there you go again. Entity. Olar Ethil is not an entity, she is a force. I think that is a problem that people from this site seem to have is they try to fit Erickson's work into established fantasy cliches and roles when it breaks all the old molds.

And for the record the book that led me to understand the "rules" of Erickson's world the best was Toll the Hounds, when Hood walks the streets of Darujhistan and death follows. He does not kill those people but his presence demands death, it is his aspect, he fits a role for the force of Death. Where Dassem goes, tragedy follows. It is his aspect and there is nothing more tragic then the death of Anomander. Of course these later Ascendants are not like the Elders, who are true forces, instead once mortals, they have been forced to adopt the roles that the universe requires, but that alas is another connversation entirely.

[worry]

Well there you go again, addressing the board like your position is somehow unquestionable fact that others would be foolish to deviate from. It's interesting and even plausible, no doubt, but it's nowhere near the certainty you seem to think it is.

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

jammer, on 08 June 2010 - 05:02 AM, said:

See there you go again. Entity. Olar Ethil is not an entity, she is a force. I think that is a problem that people from this site seem to have is they try to fit Erickson's work into established fantasy cliches and roles when it breaks all the old molds.

And for the record the book that led me to understand the "rules" of Erickson's world the best was Toll the Hounds, when Hood walks the streets of Darujhistan and death follows. He does not kill those people but his presence demands death, it is his aspect, he fits a role for the force of Death. Where Dassem goes, tragedy follows. It is his aspect and there is nothing more tragic then the death of Anomander. Of course these later Ascendants are not like the Elders, who are true forces, instead once mortals, they have been forced to adopt the roles that the universe requires, but that alas is another connversation entirely.

Once something has taken on a corporeal form and starts to hatch a plot I think you can say they have moved beyond being just a force, and can very correctly be described as an entity.

Also I think that the Hood example is more of an exception than a rule. I think Dessembrae is a tragic figure, and certainly seems prone to tragedy, but I wouldn't say he brings it with him. The only time in the series when we see him truly appearing as Dessembrae instead of as Dassem or Traveller was in RotCG when he arrives in that capacity to mourn the death of Ullen. He followed the tragedy, not the other way around. Also we have seen Mael on screen more than any Elder God, its not like water follows him around. I think you are trying to extrapolate the entire system of magic in Erikson's world from much too small a sample size.

[Abyss]

There are precisely zero 'rules. A force can be elemental or conceptual or a combination thereof. An entity can be aspected to a force. A force can be represented by an avatar. And an entity, force or even avatar of another force can aspect another entity. Who can in turn ascend to be greater than the original entity or force, and take on a different aspect. And whereas sometimes and aspect forces an entity to a certain conduct, in other circumstances a powerful enough entity can force their will back on whatever force of entity aspected it in the first place.

- Abyss, ...also, 'who's on first?'...

[amphibian]

jammer, on 08 June 2010 - 05:02 AM, said:

See there you go again. Entity. Olar Ethil is not an entity, she is a force.

The books seem to present an entire continuum of power - from elemental forces (Chaos, for example) to mere mortals. As of DoD, it is unclear where Olar Ethil is
on that continuum. During her longer speeches, she comes off as if she's lying or greatly exaggerating her significance and/or impact upon the world and the games being played. If she's that powerful, why is she thwarted several times in the book? I think she's a creaking windbag, trying to puff herself up before the gigantic convergence that is about to happen in order to convince herself that she can come out ahead.

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

Abyss, on 08 June 2010 - 08:25 PM, said:

There are precisely zero 'rules. A force can be elemental or conceptual or a combination thereof. An entity can be aspected to a force. A force can be represented by an avatar. And an entity, force or even avatar of another force can aspect another entity. Who can in turn ascend to be greater than the original entity or force, and take on a different aspect. And whereas sometimes and aspect forces an entity to a certain conduct, in other circumstances a powerful enough entity can force their will back on whatever force of entity aspected it in the first place.

- Abyss, ...also, 'who's on first?'...

You stopped trying to make sense after the second line...

[worry]

There is some uncertainty as to just how much give and take there is between the gods and people, in both directions. Sechul Lath is the son of Kilmandaros, but he's also called Knuckles, which clearly comes from the game humans play...it's a gambling game, and therefore has to do with luck/fortune. So there are elemental EGs, perhaps predating life, and then there are plenty who arrive subsequent to sentient life "inventing" worship, perhaps inventing gods through worship. I'm sure early ascendants had no clue they could become such, and plenty just got plopped into the job and had to deal (I'm thinking of the drunks here, and perhaps the Errant). MD and FL are somehow special, perhaps the before and after essences of the Big Bang of this universe. And Tiam and perhaps Olar Ethil are likewise special, creating life from magic. I don't think all the mysteries of creation are gonna get resolved, and I think it's better that way, but I personally think that in this universe magic exists at the atomic level. I dunno, there's some metaphysical aspect that isn't necessarily an equivalent to our new age version of God, but could be the magical particle equivalent to the atom. And as stars are hydrogen-into-helium factories, chaos is the same thing for magical atoms. Maybe that's all super dumb, but I think there's at least some metaphorical truth to it.

[HoosierDaddy]

I was just musing on Toll, and came up with an "idea." Now, my copy of Toll is battered and beaten (whole chunks of pages are coming out from the binding), so I don't want to venture in to get the exact quote.

In Toll, we have the introduction of the Hounds of Light. During ST and Cot's conversation with Tulas, Tulas warns that the Hounds are a "warning" (amongst other things.)

So, previously we had only had the Hounds of Shadow (the Deragoth don't count, imo as Hounds of Dark). Suddenly up pop Hounds of Light. We all wondered why that was because it kind of came out of the blue, and SE had said there were no Hounds of Light. In DoD, we learn that the Liosan may not be in control of their realm, and if they are, then they are still sharing it, perhaps unbeknownst to them, with FA. Perhaps the "warning" Tulas was referring to was the instability of the respected realm/warren and their vulnerability.

Emurlahn is sundered and Liosan is at least being patrolled, and at the worse, being usurped by FA for their own ends.

Just a thought.

[Abyss]

H.D., on 30 July 2010 - 03:30 AM, said:

... Perhaps the "warning" Tulas was referring to was the instability of the respected realm/warren and their vulnerability...

i took the warning to relate to the danger of trying to control primal forces. Tulas speculates on the Hounds of Death, among other things...

"[Pallid and Lock show up while Shorn is threatening ST/Cot. Shorn freaks out.]

'By the Abyss. ... Have you two lost your minds. They cannot be here - they must not be among you-'

'Why' Cotillion demanded...'

[Pallid and Lock clearly show they are contemplating shorn as dinner. Shorn freaks some more.]

'The... implacability of forces - we think to tame, but the wildness remains. Control is a delusion in the mind of self-provlaimed masters'...'The leash, you fools, is frayed - don't you understand anything at all?' ..... We'd deceived ourselves into thinking we were the masters, that every force bowed to our command, And what happened? They destroyed everything!'

'I don't-'

'Understand! I see that! They are conjurations - manifestations - they exist to warn you. They are the proof that you think to enslave will turn on you'

Cotillion stepped forward. 'Light, Dark and and Shadow - these three - are you saying-'

'Three?...What then of Life? Fire and Stone and Wind? What, you fools, of the Hounds of Death?manifestations, i said. They will turn - they are telling you that! That is why they exist! The fangs, the fury- all that is implacable in nature - each aspect but a variation, a hue in the maelstrom of destruction!' "

- Abyss, with thanks to amazon's look inside feature.

[MTS]

Nothing says their appearance can't have multiple meanings. A convergence of circumstance and such. I think it's a good idea, and has some merit. It's also interesting that he singles out the Hounds of Death at the end (and indeed Life as well), considering the upheaval that has occurred within that realm recently. Could there be ramifications to Hood marching the dead into Dragnipur? Unforseen consequences? Time will tell.

This post has been edited by MTS: 30 July 2010 - 04:10 PM

[GingerBreadMan]

Perhaps, i can't say with any confidence that your theory is right or wrong.

But I always assumed Tulas was speaking on a more basic level, the Hounds existence (he mentions about a dozen, basically tied all elements to the Hounds such as Life/Death/Fire whatever) is a warning as the bestial and uncontrollable aspects of the elements and the universe.

That their existence as massive and demonic hounds should warn people or more specifically Gods that while they may think they possess a degree of control over the elements, those elements are uncontrollable.

He was stunned that Shadowthrone had the hubris to think he could control two opposing elements Light/Shadow and we saw why when the Hounds of Light turned on the Hounds of Shadow