So, it took me until Deadhouse Gates to get a decent understanding of how Steven Erikson's magic works. By Gardens of the Moon I had seen enough to make it make sense in the contexts Erikson was providing, but something still eluded me: the role of the gods.
I understand from later books that:
Spoiler
the warrens are born from K'rul, as alluded to in GotM where he says he was the Maker of Paths
and that:
Spoiler
from Starvald Demelain come the dragons, who are the 'sources of sorcery' according to Cotillion in BH
But, then, where do the gods come in? Why was Quick Ben ever a high priest? Was it the chance of being part of the House of Shadow like Dassem Ultor was Hood's Knight? (as mentioned by Tattersail on pg. 98, GotM)
In Deadhouse Gates the distinction is hammered in:
Spoiler
A mage was not a priest and magic was not divine intervention. -Kulp, DG
And if
Spoiler
The skills to access them [the Warrens] could be taught -Temper, NoK
Then... why would anyone even bother with gods? It's not like any of the rewards seem worth it if:
Spoiler
Sorcery could be the ladder to Ascendancy -Kulp, DG
Personally, gods -- or, at least, worshipping gods -- seems a rather useless practice in the books, unless they somehow have the ability to sever your connection to the warrens. But, then, so many mages are particularly non-religious. In Deadhouse Gates, after all, Kulp said that mages watched Ascendants, not gods.
Does anybody have any insights into this?
Kallor said: 'I walked this land when the T'lan Imass
were but children. I have commanded armies a hundred
thousand strong. I have spread the fire of my wrath
across entire continents, and sat alone upon tall thrones.
Why on earth did you post this in the GotM thread?
Also, it feels like you're taking these quotes out of a context, that the rest of us don't know about.
Spoiler
Why are there priests and cults? Just like in our own modern day, the religious figures become leaders, these cults dictate politics. These cults gain influence because they can claim to have a connection with a supreme being that the populace worships or fears. Toc in RG implies that most of the Malazan Gods are not worshipped out of love, but out of a wish for these gods to stay out of their lives, because every one knows ascendants bring a world of hurt.
On top of that, despite what Kulp's quote says, Priests do have power, they can be mages or at least borrow the equivelant powers from the deity or warren. Pust, Heuk from RCG, various shaman are all proof of that.
The Gods are infinitely more powerful than your average mage, they could destroy whole continents if they wanted, but they can also grant boons. That is why they are worshipped. Just because we don't hear much about their every day influence doesn't mean they aren't there, pushing and oulling, healing, blessing, killing. Gods of warrens can summon all the power of that warren. Gods with millions of worshippers can also harness that faith. And they hear every prayer.
Why was quick a High Mage? Because he is a meddling snake that's why. Quick has never worshipped shadow, and certainly not Cots and ST. Quick was a member of the Shadow Cults when they were an extension of the empire. Dancer was the leader of the shadow cults and he made sure that it serves the empires purpose and he weeded out any members that would cause dissent. This is where we hear Quick Ben was helping.
This post has been edited by Aptorian: 14 February 2010 - 09:06 AM
Why on earth did you post this in the GotM thread?
Also, it feels like you're taking these quotes out of a context, that the rest of us don't know about.
I posted it in GotM as I figured there would be non-spoiler aspects of the discussion that still pertained to the encompassing aspect of magic.
As for the quotes being out of context, I didn't really think they required much context... most of them are internal dialogues.
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 09:01 AM, said:
Spoiler
Why are there priests and cults? Just like in our own modern day, the religious figures become leaders, these cults dictate politics. These cults gain influence because they can claim to have a connection with a supreme being that the populace worships or fears. Toc in RG implies that most of the Malazan Gods are not worshipped out of love, but out of a wish for these gods to stay out of their lives, because every one knows ascendants bring a world of hurt.
On top of that, despite what Kulp's quote says, Priests do have power, they can be mages or at least borrow the equivelant powers from the deity or warren. Pust, Heuk from RCG, various shaman are all proof of that.
The Gods are infinitely more powerful than your average mage, they could destroy whole continents if they wanted, but they can also grant boons. That is why they are worshipped. Just because we don't hear much about their every day influence doesn't mean they aren't there, pushing and oulling, healing, blessing, killing. Gods of warrens can summon all the power of that warren. Gods with millions of worshippers can also harness that faith. And they hear every prayer.
Why was quick a High Mage? Because he is a meddling snake that's why. Quick has never worshipped shadow, and certainly not Cots and ST. Quick was a member of the Shadow Cults when they were an extension of the empire. Dancer was the leader of the shadow cults and he made sure that it serves the empires purpose and he weeded out any members that would cause dissent. This is where we hear Quick Ben was helping.
Spoiler
I am somewhat leery about looking to Pust for an example of High Priests borrowing power. The Hounds, after all, pretty much make it clear that they either hate or really dislike him in DG, making me think that Pust is simply a powerful mage in his own right, and because of that has earned Hood's attention. If he was vested with Hood's favour because he was handpicked, I would think that he'd have earned a little more respect.
That being said, gods obviously are an incredibly valuable source of power, but commoners don't seem to get much benefit of that. Kalam's acquaintance from the desert in DG gives us an insight into what common people believe about magic:
Spoiler
how it sounds more like an excuse for bumbling priests and mages and unlikely to be real; this was when they had just entered the Imperial warren
The part about gods drawing power from worship is consistent, of course. In GotM Anomander Rake reveals that ascendants are pretty much just gods who haven't found worshipers yet. That draws a couple questions, though, such as why ascendants can still be so threatening to gods. That's kind of like a mouse being a threat to an elephant.
I might be basing this a little too much off Rake's conduct, though, and the mitigating factor with Rake is that he possesses Dragnipur, itself possibly the most dangerous weapon in existence.
Spoiler
But then there are people like Icarium to consider... and Karsa Orlong, and Kallor pre-ascension... not ascendants, but powerful enough to destroy cities, topple armies, and raze continents. Where does all this come from? (I know with Kallor we don't know yet, but you get my point.
This post has been edited by Vesper: 14 February 2010 - 12:26 PM
Kallor said: 'I walked this land when the T'lan Imass
were but children. I have commanded armies a hundred
thousand strong. I have spread the fire of my wrath
across entire continents, and sat alone upon tall thrones.
Why on earth did you post this in the GotM thread?
Also, it feels like you're taking these quotes out of a context, that the rest of us don't know about.
I posted it in GotM as I figured there would be non-spoiler aspects of the discussion that still pertained to the encompassing aspect of magic.
Rule of thumb, if you want to have a discussion involving elements that take place in later books, do not post the topic in a forum where the discussion will spoil later events for the unadvanced reader. We'll see if a Moderator moves this or what happens.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 12:14 PM, said:
As for the quotes being out of context, I didn't really think they required much context... most of them are internal dialogues.
One line quotes that don't come along with out a description of what scene it is taken from and what is going on, can be confusing to discuss and may be miss leading. Kulps assertion for example doesn't hold water and should not be taken as scripture.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 12:14 PM, said:
Spoiler
I am somewhat leery about looking to Pust for an example of High Priests borrowing power. The Hounds, after all, pretty much make it clear that they either hate or really dislike him in DG, making me think that Pust is simply a powerful mage in his own right, and because of that has earned Hood's attention. If he was vested with Hood's favour because he was handpicked, I would think that he'd have earned a little more respect.
Spoiler
Pust is not the High Priest of the Shadow Dogs. He serves Shadowthrone. The Hounds have been proven more than once to be independent beings who tolerate the new rulers, are willing to do their bidding because they acknowledge their positions as Rulers of Shadow, but they are not an extension of Shadowthrones will.
Where do you get this connection between Pust and Hood from? Pust is not connected with death, he is very much a product of shadow.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 12:14 PM, said:
That being said, gods obviously are an incredibly valuable source of power, but commoners don't seem to get much benefit of that. Kalam's acquaintance from the desert in DG gives us an insight into what common people believe about magic:
Spoiler
how it sounds more like an excuse for bumbling priests and mages and unlikely to be real; this was when they had just entered the Imperial warren
I have to admit I don't understand what you mean here. How it sounds like an excuse and unlikely to be real? What is it that isn't real? The devotion to the gods? The existence of the gods themselves?
Again, a quote taken out of context.
Like mentioned above, it seems as though the Major Malazan pantheon is feared and sought avoided rather than worshipped. The population, especially the tribes, seem to seek strength and guidance from minor gods and ancestor spirits instead, like the Semk God, the Tanno Spiritwalkers, the Barghast ancestor spirits, etc.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 12:14 PM, said:
The part about gods drawing power from worship is consistent, of course. In GotM Anomander Rake reveals that ascendants are pretty much just gods who haven't found worshipers yet. That draws a couple questions, though, such as why ascendants can still be so threatening to gods. That's kind of like a mouse being a threat to an elephant.
I might be basing this a little too much off Rake's conduct, though, and the mitigating factor with Rake is that he possesses Dragnipur, itself possibly the most dangerous weapon in existence.
Spoiler
But then there are people like Icarium to consider... and Karsa Orlong, and Kallor pre-ascension... not ascendants, but powerful enough to destroy cities, topple armies, and raze continents. Where does all this come from? (I know with Kallor we don't know yet, but you get my point.
Spoiler
Power draws power and removing one power creates a vacuum and imbalance. Destroying a god, house or a mere ascendant makes precedent. The gods are more interested in keeping the status quo than have continuous battles over power.
Just because a god is very powerful does not mean the god cannot be killed, there is very little evidence of gods and mages haing defensive strengths, engagements are very offensive and it's often a case of who strikes first, usually from behind. What's more there is the question of efficacy and will. In DOD Mael mentions power and presence to Pedac. He implies that the mere presence of personality can be enough to negate the power of a god.
Power in the Malazan world can not be quantified as easily as simply saying x ascendant has more followers than x ascendant and there fore wins, or this god is older than this god so he wins, a mere mortal can kill a god if the situation is right. Like, I think it is Kallor in MoIs prologue... mentions, a stray arrow could have killed Sister of Cold Nights.
The strongest forces in this series is stubbornness, arrogance, ignorance and massive balls of steel.
This post has been edited by Aptorian: 14 February 2010 - 01:10 PM
Rule of thumb, if you want to have a discussion involving elements that take place in later books, do not post the topic in a forum where the discussion will spoil later events for the unadvanced reader. We'll see if a Moderator moves this or what happens.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 12:14 PM, said:
As for the quotes being out of context, I didn't really think they required much context... most of them are internal dialogues.
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:
One line quotes that don't come along with out a description of what scene it is taken from and what is going on, can be confusing to discuss and may be miss leading. Kulps assertion for example doesn't hold water and should not be taken as scripture.
Again, how much context is necessary when you're dealing with stand-alone quotes? If you really want context, here you go.
Spoiler
Kulp's internal musing that "sorcery could be the ladder to ascendancy -- a means to an end, but there was no point in worshipping the means" comes from DG, page 325 when he has noted his warren's seeming attentiveness to his situation when the crew of the Ripath is about to venture out to sea, into the path of the insane mage who had lost control of his warren
Spoiler
Kulp's internal musing that "Warriors talk about heroes. Mages talk about ascendants." comes from DG, page 438 when he is contemplating how to get himself, the Silana, and the crew out of the flooded warren (Kurald Emerhlain, I think) and was suddenly reminded of the power people like Anomander Rake and Osric.
Spoiler
Minala's remark that she'd "always believed all those tales of other realms were nothing but elaborate inventions wizards and priests used to prop up all the fumbling around they did", reminding Kalam that "for most people such a reality was remote, viewed with scepticism if acknowledged at all" is on pg. 472-3 of DG right after they had entered the Imperial Warren (which I specified earlier)
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:
Spoiler
Pust is not the High Priest of the Shadow Dogs. He serves Shadowthrone. The Hounds have been proven more than once to be independent beings who tolerate the new rulers, are willing to do their bidding because they acknowledge their positions as Rulers of Shadow, but they are not an extension of Shadowthrones will.
Where do you get this connection between Pust and Hood from? Pust is not connected with death, he is very much a product of shadow.
That was my bad about Hood/Shadow; mix up.
Spoiler
And where is it said that the hounds were independent beings not born of Shadowthrone? You wanted quotes from me, I would like some for this. I know the Deragoth are ancient, but I don't remember hearing how old the Hounds of Shadow are.
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:
Like mentioned above, it seems as though the Major Malazan pantheon is feared and sought avoided rather than worshipped. The population, especially the tribes, seem to seek strength and guidance from minor gods and ancestor spirits instead, like the Semk God, the Tanno Spiritwalkers, the Barghast ancestor spirits, etc.
That makes me wonder why major gods are major gods, since they obviously would be differentiated from minor gods by how many worshipers. Not exclusively, obviously; the sphere of their influence would come in to play as well, but if the gods aren't worshiped, it seems as if they would go the way of K'rul, whom we meet in GotM.
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:
Spoiler
Power draws power and removing one power creates a vacuum and imbalance. Destroying a god, house or a mere ascendant makes precedent. The gods are more interested in keeping the status quo than have continuous battles over power.
Just because a god is very powerful does not mean the god cannot be killed, there is very little evidence of gods and mages haing defensive strengths, engagements are very offensive and it's often a case of who strikes first, usually from behind. What's more there is the question of efficacy and will. In DOD Mael mentions power and presence to Pedac. He implies that the mere presence of personality can be enough to negate the power of a god.
Power in the Malazan world can not be quantified as easily as simply saying x ascendant has more followers than x ascendant and there fore wins, or this god is older than this god so he wins, a mere mortal can kill a god if the situation is right. Like, I think it is Kallor in MoIs prologue... mentions, a stray arrow could have killed Sister of Cold Nights.
The strongest forces in this series is stubbornness, arrogance, ignorance and massive balls of steel.
I largely agree, but on the topic of mages having defensive abilities I think you're ignoring a lot of things like magic wards, which are introduced as early as GotM when Tattersail lays a dozen wards behind her when the Hound of Shadow is coming. Regarding defensive abilities versus who attacks first, let's not forget that Rake slew two Hounds of Shadow that leapt for him. His sword was still sheathed up until that point, too. Turban Orr, too, had layers and layers of wards that were only bypassed because Rallick had slathered himself in Otataral dust.
I don't think it's fair to say that magic has no defensive applications, or that it's solely a matter of who strikes first. I do agree, though, that gods and ascendants are definitely portrayed as not being invincible, as are gods in mythologies like those of the Greeks.
Kallor said: 'I walked this land when the T'lan Imass
were but children. I have commanded armies a hundred
thousand strong. I have spread the fire of my wrath
across entire continents, and sat alone upon tall thrones.
Pust is not the High Priest of the Shadow Dogs. He serves Shadowthrone. The Hounds have been proven more than once to be independent beings who tolerate the new rulers, are willing to do their bidding because they acknowledge their positions as Rulers of Shadow, but they are not an extension of Shadowthrones will.
Where do you get this connection between Pust and Hood from? Pust is not connected with death, he is very much a product of shadow.
That was my bad about Hood/Shadow; mix up.
Spoiler
And where is it said that the hounds were independent beings not born of Shadowthrone? You wanted quotes from me, I would like some for this. I know the Deragoth are ancient, but I don't remember hearing how old the Hounds of Shadow are.
Spoiler
The Hounds are ancient. How ancient is uncertain, but we know that they were around when the Edur came to Wu originally, because in HoC the Hounds recognize the Edur as people of shadow and one of them responds to the words of one of the Edur, greatly annoying Cotillion.
As for their relationship with Shadowthrone and Cotillion. Along with Edgewalker they are there to watch the two when they ascendended and took the Shadow House in Night of Knives. When Edgewalker will not do as ST commands, the old emperor threatens to sick the dogs on Edge, but Edge is not impressed since he claims that the Hounds achknowledge his role in the shadowrealm, as a guardian.
There is also the scenes where the dogs, for fun, are stalking Cotillion. That is not the actions of a subservient bunch of dogs.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 11:11 PM, said:
Aptorian, on 14 February 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:
Like mentioned above, it seems as though the Major Malazan pantheon is feared and sought avoided rather than worshipped. The population, especially the tribes, seem to seek strength and guidance from minor gods and ancestor spirits instead, like the Semk God, the Tanno Spiritwalkers, the Barghast ancestor spirits, etc.
That makes me wonder why major gods are major gods, since they obviously would be differentiated from minor gods by how many worshipers. Not exclusively, obviously; the sphere of their influence would come in to play as well, but if the gods aren't worshiped, it seems as if they would go the way of K'rul, whom we meet in GotM.
The major gods are major for a host of reasons. Some sit on the thrones of warrens, that makes them unavoidable since they effectively are the arbitrators of whole aspect of power. Some are simply legendary, their names are a part of legend in every culture, in every tribe, even though the stories change and the names vary, they are remembered. Some are self contained, as in they are draconean or soletaken in nature, have great skill, great strength, etc.
A god does not disappear if he is no longer worshipped, merely diminished.
Vesper, on 14 February 2010 - 11:11 PM, said:
I largely agree, but on the topic of mages having defensive abilities I think you're ignoring a lot of things like magic wards, which are introduced as early as GotM when Tattersail lays a dozen wards behind her when the Hound of Shadow is coming. Regarding defensive abilities versus who attacks first, let's not forget that Rake slew two Hounds of Shadow that leapt for him. His sword was still sheathed up until that point, too. Turban Orr, too, had layers and layers of wards that were only bypassed because Rallick had slathered himself in Otataral dust.
I don't think it's fair to say that magic has no defensive applications, or that it's solely a matter of who strikes first. I do agree, though, that gods and ascendants are definitely portrayed as not being invincible, as are gods in mythologies like those of the Greeks.
Spoiler
I'm not saying that wards don't exist, they are just not mentioned much after the first book. They're probably not a GotM'ism, especially since L'oric uses them in HoC, but they are not used as blatantly in the later books.
I'm also not saying that one character can't defend himself against another in a fight, that would be silly.
What I did mean was that usually the one who strikes first, and hits the target, is also going to be the winner. It doesn't matter if you're a city destroying powerhouse, who's conquered nations and battled dragons, lived a million years, etc. if your guard is down, a street urchin could stab you in the eye and kill you. Take the heavy killing a d'ivers demon in BT, Trull holding his own against Icarium and Ruin, etc.
This post has been edited by Aptorian: 14 February 2010 - 11:45 PM
and wards are usually something that take a while to complete, rituals that take a lot out of the mage. you can't throw up an effective defense in the face of a wave of magic on the spot, the two forces will collide and cause a magical detonation usually. with one notable exception later in the series.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
The major gods are major for a host of reasons. Some sit on the thrones of warrens, that makes them unavoidable since they effectively are the arbitrators of whole aspect of power. Some are simply legendary, their names are a part of legend in every culture, in every tribe, even though the stories change and the names vary, they are remembered. Some are self contained, as in they are draconean or soletaken in nature, have great skill, great strength, etc.
A god does not disappear if he is no longer worshipped, merely diminished.
This is the most helpful reply so far. It clears up some major questions. It also raises some others, though. If:
Spoiler
Dragons are the sources of the Warrens after K'rul
Then why do the warrens have 'thrones'? I don't remember this being explained.
Kallor said: 'I walked this land when the T'lan Imass
were but children. I have commanded armies a hundred
thousand strong. I have spread the fire of my wrath
across entire continents, and sat alone upon tall thrones.
well its a gray area to be sure. for instance, telas and serc don't have a ruler, they have attendant dragons but they do not control the power, they channel it and separate it from the rest of k'ruls blood but take no hand in mortal affairs. its possible that the reason for this is that telas and serc, d'riss and denul and the like are not as developed as some other warrens, such as hoods or they are not derived directly from living elder warrens which are entire worlds.
its a very fluid system. aspects that have a huge influence on the world are elevated into high houses and by this virtue contain thrones and rulers. some aspects fail and their thrones remain unnocupied. shadow was like this for a long time, until shadowthrone and cotillion reawakened it.
it's possible that every warren has a throne, but some are just to inimical to be claimed. coming back to telas, which is a warren of fire, it's not to far of a stretch to assume that no normal being could claim a throne of fire.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
The major gods are major for a host of reasons. Some sit on the thrones of warrens, that makes them unavoidable since they effectively are the arbitrators of whole aspect of power. Some are simply legendary, their names are a part of legend in every culture, in every tribe, even though the stories change and the names vary, they are remembered. Some are self contained, as in they are draconean or soletaken in nature, have great skill, great strength, etc.
A god does not disappear if he is no longer worshipped, merely diminished.
This is the most helpful reply so far. It clears up some major questions. It also raises some others, though. If:
Spoiler
Dragons are the sources of the Warrens after K'rul
Then why do the warrens have 'thrones'? I don't remember this being explained.
Spoiler
Why does any kingdom possess a throne? The main reason, I think, is order. The Houses establish order upon the Warrens. The roles of the Houses and the Deck with regards to sorcery is explained somewhere, in MoI I think. Dragons cannot be the rulers of these warrens since they essentially are the warrens. They are the wellsprings of the warren's power. You can't have the very sources of sorcery going around meddling in things. That creates chaos. Thus, the Last Flight into Starvald Demelain.
Why is this in the GotM forum by the way? Belongs in the Dust of Dreams forum.
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
Si hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter educatus et nimis propinquus ades.
Obviously any mechanic like this from SE's world is going to be rife with exceptions and complexities, but going back to the original question of the thread - the purpose of gods related to warrens:
Gods are a lot like really powerful mages, each to their own warren. Now here I'm only talking about the warren-connected, major-religion-toting gods like ST (Meanas and maybe Rashan), Burn (Tennes), Fener (Tennes), Soliel/Poliel (Denul and Poliel's), D'rek (D'riss), QoD (D'riss), etc. So, imagine that ST is like Kulp, only with power x1000 that of Kulp's. So he's got a lot of power. ST then shares some of his power with his priests. His priests to not have to be mages, do not have to spend decades studying the sorcerous arts or have any natural knack for it, they just need to pray and have ST accept them. A great example is the Liosan from HoC - Jorrude the Seneschal is a priest who prays to his god and spills a bit of blood, and in answer the god masquerading as Osserc grants Jorrude some of its power for Jorrude to shape into a magical ritual.
Now there's no reason to believe that any mage couldn't do this. In MoI we see Karnadas letting other Grey Swords draw from his own magical abilities to use Denul healing. Granted, there's the possibility of this really coming from Fener, but Karnadas shows physical wear therefore he's clearly a part of it. The big difference of course is that the gods have the sheer power to let numerous mortals draw from them without being overly affected. How do you get the power for that? Well, being a super-ascendant helps, and then sitting your butt on a throne and taking over an entire warren probably gives you plenty of power, too.
Not that every god is necessarily sitting on a throne for a particular warren - D'rek and QoD both use the D'riss warren ("D'riss" being half "D'rek" and half "T'riss" ?), so they can't both be sitting on the hypothetical "Throne of Stone" (unless QoD sat on it and D'rek was a tapeworm in her bowels). Point is, gods can have their own manifestations of a particular warren and as long as those gods get along sharing the warren they can have their own religions and their own mastery of their own versions of that warren. Same with Burn and Fener/Tennerock, for example.
So, in conclusion, god = super-mage with a religion (only for warren-gods of course)
As an aside - QB was a high priest of the shadow cult when it didn't have any god commanding Shadow (hence it being a cult).
This post has been edited by D'rek: 07 May 2010 - 08:00 PM
worrywort, on 14 September 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:
I kinda love it when D'rek unleashes her nerd wrath, as I knew she would here. Sorry innocent bystanders, but someone's gotta be the kindling.
I thought D'riss was the Queen of Dreams, just said differently than T'riss?
Edit: Ah hell. The Gods and warrens are confusing. Nevermind. D'riss is a warren. It just happens to look too much like T'riss.
This post has been edited by H.D.: 16 February 2010 - 02:05 AM
Trouble arrives when the opponents to such a system institute its extreme opposite, where individualism becomes godlike and sacrosanct, and no greater service to any other ideal (including community) is possible. In such a system rapacious greed thrives behind the guise of freedom, and the worst aspects of human nature come to the fore....
No, D'riss is the Warren of Stone. Mammot is a High Priest of it. T'riss was a human Ascendant mage of that warren, then became the Queen of Dreams, Goddess of Divination.
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
Si hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter educatus et nimis propinquus ades.
No, D'riss is the Warren of Stone. Mammot is a High Priest of it. T'riss was a human Ascendant mage of that warren, then became the Queen of Dreams, Goddess of Divination.
I edited to clarify my mistake. But, thanks for pointing it out for me again.
Trouble arrives when the opponents to such a system institute its extreme opposite, where individualism becomes godlike and sacrosanct, and no greater service to any other ideal (including community) is possible. In such a system rapacious greed thrives behind the guise of freedom, and the worst aspects of human nature come to the fore....
No, D'riss is the Warren of Stone. Mammot is a High Priest of it. T'riss was a human Ascendant mage of that warren, then became the Queen of Dreams, Goddess of Divination.
No, Mammot is a High Priest of D'rek ("hence the cynicism in his writings - the worm of autumn breeds an unhappy lot" - Rake). It's a common GotMism/DGism/MoIism that where D'rek should be written D'riss is written instead a number of times (one of QB's souls, for example).
worrywort, on 14 September 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:
I kinda love it when D'rek unleashes her nerd wrath, as I knew she would here. Sorry innocent bystanders, but someone's gotta be the kindling.
The point now is merely one of semantics, D'rek. HD asked what D'riss was. I said Mammot was a High Priest of D'riss when I probably should have said High Mage or practitioner. He is a High Mage of D'riss and also a High Priest of D'rek.
Although I suppose if you take gods as a manifestation of an aspect, then you are worshiping the means.
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
Si hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter educatus et nimis propinquus ades.
Now this is becoming a very informative topic. Somehow I hadn't gotten the impression that the gods were quite as obsessed with the status quo, nor that they were quite as corporeal as they seem. I was kind of put on this thought process by the human-like appearance of Hood, even though he is (or, was) a Jaghut. It took me going back to re-read things like how Paran found the throne of shadow in his own world to understand this a little more. I always thought it was more metaphorical.
This begs the question, though, of how much power warrens can sustain. If two gods can hold dominion over a warren, each granting power to millions of worshipers whilst simultaneously using their own power... seems almost like the warren would get drained like Karnadas was after allowing other Grey Swords to use his magic. Something would have to feed these warrens...
Then again, it could be like the Weave from D&D Forgotten Realms 3.5 (before they fucked everything up), which allowed access to magic for everyone and everything everywhere at all times. It was kind of symbiotic, deriving its existence from those who channeled it so that if Mystra, goddess of the Weave, were to cut off access to the Weave to everybody it (and she) would cease to exist.
I am curious to see if Erikson is going to elaborate on this...
This post has been edited by Vesper: 16 February 2010 - 04:21 AM
Kallor said: 'I walked this land when the T'lan Imass
were but children. I have commanded armies a hundred
thousand strong. I have spread the fire of my wrath
across entire continents, and sat alone upon tall thrones.
Help
