[Aptorian]

Correct me if I'm wrong but her turning away from the Andii and her shunning of Rake is two different things.

She was already displeased with the Andii because they were growing imperial in their leanings, were both fighting among themselves and were heading out to wage war against Father Lights children.

Rakes drinking of Tiams blood was just the last straw. It wasn't the fact that he killed Tiam (didn't remember that he did that) that pissed off Tiam, it was his drinking of her blood.

Mother Dark represents Order, she was the one who brought the elementals out of chaos and forged new worlds. Tiam represents chaos, she was the Matron of Dragons, pure raw chaotic elemental powers that at least in their nature were connected with chaos.

Anomander Rake, the First Son of Darkness, drinking Tiams blood and contaminating himself with their draconean power was a slap in the face of Mother Dark. It was like turning his back on everything she represents.

[D'rek]

^^What Apt said. MD didn't like Rake going to find a new, chaotic wellspring of power other than Dark.

There's also the possibility that Rake may even have been the first one ever to kill Tiam and thus begin the horrifying trend of people hunting Tiam to become Soletaken - I'm sure MD wouldn't have liked that.

[Hetan]

D, on 23 March 2010 - 08:26 PM, said:

^^What Apt said. MD didn't like Rake going to find a new, chaotic wellspring of power other than Dark.

There's also the possibility that Rake may even have been the first one ever to kill Tiam and thus begin the horrifying trend of people hunting Tiam to become Soletaken - I'm sure MD wouldn't have liked that.

Where is the evidence that others killed Tiam apart from Rake?

[Aptorian]

It is said that she has died multiple times but she always rises again.

So, somebody else than Rake, whom I don't even remember killing her, must have killed her.

Of course, there might also be some confusion with people connection her deaths with people said to have drinked the blood of Tiam.

[Hetan]

Aptorian, on 23 March 2010 - 08:54 PM, said:

It is said that she has died multiple times but she always rises again.

So, somebody else than Rake, whom I don't even remember killing her, must have killed her.

Of course, there might also be some confusion with people connection her deaths with people said to have drinked the blood of Tiam.

Of course she rises again - but those resurrections were through childbirth.

[Illuyankas]

She also dies after giving birth, leading to a literal 'fucked if you do, fucked if you don't' situation.

[Hetan]

Which reminds me, Olar Ethil is also listed as a daughter of Tiam in DoD.

[D'rek]

Hetan, on 23 March 2010 - 09:02 PM, said:

Which reminds me, Olar Ethil is also listed as a daughter of Tiam in DoD.

Daughter and lover, she somehow spawned herself. Hence the weird loopy thing in the tree.


Look, there's just no factual evidence to support the notion that Tiam has died permanently, especially not any saying that Rake killing her was what did it either. It is stated both that she dies in childbirth and it has been stated that she comes back when dead. The only basis for Tiam even being dead permanently is that Feather Witch, in an extremely cynical tiles-reading - wherein she just about pronounces the entire world dead or insane - says that Tiam is dead and *MAY* never rise again. Holding to that as arguable evidence is like believing Fiddler is Father Light simply because he gives himself Light cards a lot in Deck readings.

When there's characters who are Soletaken eleint like Tulas Shorn, Scabandari and the Galayn Lord who all would have a tricky time having drunk the blood of Tiam (whether from killing her or dating her) a million years ago, then I'd prefer to stick with the consideration that Tiam did not die permanently a million years ago, that if she somehow did die and not rise again than it was more recent than that. tCG may completely subvert this idea, but until then I'll stick to the simplest solution with the facts that we have.

[Hetan]

I still do not see your evidence that after Rake killed Tiam she resurrected. The only evidence that we have seen that she comes back from dead is from childbirth, which is why Rake's killing of Tiam is different. Show me the quotes that proves she came back after Rake killed her and I will be happy with your evidence.

[worry]

I wonder if the Otataral dragon as Consort has anything to do with Tiam dying in childbirth. Also, it would seem that the "final" death of Tiam has to have been around the same time Korabas was spiked, not necessarily in tandem, but the disappearance of one would facilitate the other. I'm not as sure as Hetan that Rake caused her "final" death, but if Korabas was taken down first, then Rake's killing Tiam COULD very well have been an act of mercy in her grief.

[D'rek]

Hetan, on 23 March 2010 - 10:20 PM, said:

I still do not see your evidence that after Rake killed Tiam she resurrected. The only evidence that we have seen that she comes back from dead is from childbirth, which is why Rake's killing of Tiam is different. Show me the quotes that proves she came back after Rake killed her and I will be happy with your evidence.

I have no evidence towards that either, but if she can return from regular deaths too than it makes things a lot more sensical as far as Tulas Shorn, Scabby and GL being soletaken eleint. It's certainly possible that it's the other way and they drank another dragon's blood, but there's no evidence of drinking other dragons' blood causing Soletaken-ness either. If it were so, then you have to start wondering why a bunch of Nah'ruk didn't take the opportunity to become Soletaken-Nah'ruk when they found a crucified Sorrit in their skykeep, or why no one rushed to drink some dragon blood when the Galayn Lord died in Darujhistan, or the sisters in the refugium, or when Rake himself died.

I guess in the end either viewpoint could be true. Either Tiam is slain once and they keep buckets of her blood or other dragons can pass on Soletaken-ness. Or, else, Tiam can be slain numerous times but only she gives Soletakenness. Either works, but I like mine better and don't see any reason to change it until tCG proves me wrong, especially because the other way leaves the tree more open-ended as to how many of them became soletaken eleint.

[Jorram]

I gotta say I'm with D'rek on this one. I also find pretty plausible the option that Rake was the first to kill Tiam.
In that very scene MD is saying that "there are new ones now", referring either to the Liosan (hence no Edur yet) or to the Edur (hence the Edur have just been spawned or whatever they were). It took Scabandari to establish himself, to kill off the royal bloodline (and Tulas Shorn seems to even predate him), to mate with Tiam and possibly kill her too, it's just not plausible that all of this happened meanwhile. Most likely it didnt yet happen at the time of the MD-Rake scene. This alone seems to be enough proof even though not absolute

It certainly doesnt sound right that Silchas would go to the corpse and drink whatever blood he could find in hardened lolli-pop kinda sheets there. The idea that Rake showed it could be done and gave the Andii an alternative to Kurald Galain's heritage is what MD is pissed at. That, and of course, like Apt or D'rek mentioned above - the fact that the very Son of Darkness took draconic power on himself.

This post has been edited by Jorram: 24 March 2010 - 03:50 AM

[Hetan]

D, on 24 March 2010 - 02:44 AM, said:

Hetan, on 23 March 2010 - 10:20 PM, said:

I still do not see your evidence that after Rake killed Tiam she resurrected. The only evidence that we have seen that she comes back from dead is from childbirth, which is why Rake's killing of Tiam is different. Show me the quotes that proves she came back after Rake killed her and I will be happy with your evidence.

I have no evidence towards that either, but if she can return from regular deaths too than it makes things a lot more sensical as far as Tulas Shorn, Scabby and GL being soletaken eleint. It's certainly possible that it's the other way and they drank another dragon's blood, but there's no evidence of drinking other dragons' blood causing Soletaken-ness either. If it were so, then you have to start wondering why a bunch of Nah'ruk didn't take the opportunity to become Soletaken-Nah'ruk when they found a crucified Sorrit in their skykeep, or why no one rushed to drink some dragon blood when the Galayn Lord died in Darujhistan, or the sisters in the refugium, or when Rake himself died.

I guess in the end either viewpoint could be true. Either Tiam is slain once and they keep buckets of her blood or other dragons can pass on Soletaken-ness. Or, else, Tiam can be slain numerous times but only she gives Soletakenness. Either works, but I like mine better and don't see any reason to change it until tCG proves me wrong, especially because the other way leaves the tree more open-ended as to how many of them became soletaken eleint.

The Nah'ruk were frozen in a ritual and the fragment was caught there - did you not read that part?
The blood of the soletaken is not the same as pure eleint blood.
Meanwhile I should also say that I do think Tiam is necessary to restore the balance if the otataral dragon is freed and that is another reason why her death at Rake's hands was such a crime. I just don't see lines of people queuing up to have a pop at Tiam.

[D'rek]

Hetan, on 24 March 2010 - 08:34 AM, said:

D, on 24 March 2010 - 02:44 AM, said:

Hetan, on 23 March 2010 - 10:20 PM, said:

I still do not see your evidence that after Rake killed Tiam she resurrected. The only evidence that we have seen that she comes back from dead is from childbirth, which is why Rake's killing of Tiam is different. Show me the quotes that proves she came back after Rake killed her and I will be happy with your evidence.

I have no evidence towards that either, but if she can return from regular deaths too than it makes things a lot more sensical as far as Tulas Shorn, Scabby and GL being soletaken eleint. It's certainly possible that it's the other way and they drank another dragon's blood, but there's no evidence of drinking other dragons' blood causing Soletaken-ness either. If it were so, then you have to start wondering why a bunch of Nah'ruk didn't take the opportunity to become Soletaken-Nah'ruk when they found a crucified Sorrit in their skykeep, or why no one rushed to drink some dragon blood when the Galayn Lord died in Darujhistan, or the sisters in the refugium, or when Rake himself died.

I guess in the end either viewpoint could be true. Either Tiam is slain once and they keep buckets of her blood or other dragons can pass on Soletaken-ness. Or, else, Tiam can be slain numerous times but only she gives Soletakenness. Either works, but I like mine better and don't see any reason to change it until tCG proves me wrong, especially because the other way leaves the tree more open-ended as to how many of them became soletaken eleint.

The Nah'ruk were frozen in a ritual and the fragment was caught there - did you not read that part?

I meant after they killed Ganath and went back into their skykeep (to then lift it off and take it into the IW). At the front door they would've noticed a big bleeding Sorrit - whether hive mind or not I'm sure they'd have thought "Hey look, we're about to go conquer the Wastelands, I'll bet a few dozen soletaken eleint in our ranks would be mighty useful."

Also also - MT, Sukul talking with Osserc about Tiam and her "thousand deaths but nothing changes"... she definitely doesn't seem to think that Tiam is dead permanently (that would be a big change) and there is absolutely no way that convo could be anywhere close to when Rake killed her.

[Hetan]

Well we'll have to wait and see.
I also read the bit about Korlat drinking in Anomanders wake in MoI - that is another instance where Steve has said that - she drank after Anomander did.
The ice ritual's breaking would also have released that fragment of Shadow, so there's no way we could know if it remained or wandered again.
The quote in Toll regarding the drinking of Tiam's blood by Anomander, Osserc etc implies that a lot of people drank Tiam's blood but does not mention that she was killed again and again by everyone, the only person who killed Tiam (other than through childbirth) was Rake. The quote also goes on to talk of the abominations spawned by the crimson nectar - the Galayn Lord springs to mind. The reason why the Gate to SD was sealed was to prevent more getting in to drink Tiam's blood.
Do you really think that after being killed by Rake, Tiam would sit around and wait for others to come and do it all over again?
I asked before and no-one has replied so I'll make a post in the book forums regarding who killed Tiam and see how many names people can come up with.

[Use Of Weapons]

Just a thought: would need to reread to find out if it's even slightly possible. But could Rake have killed her more than once?

[Kanese S's]

Are Spite and Envy twins are just siblings? And if not twins, which one is older?