[Aptorian]

haroos, on 05 April 2010 - 06:37 PM, said:

you make it seem as if ascendency is a mechanic response of "nature".
but it was his actions of holding oppon in thrall, and taking in shadow blood (influence) and his opposition to omtok phelack (the raest affair),
and traveling with in the sword's darkness.
it made me think that his involvement with all those warrens gave him some influence over them.

Ascendancy is a natural selection type fair as far as we understand it. There's not an Elder God sitting in an office somewhere keeping ledgers on mortals picking out random ones of interest and slapping an Ascendant sticker on them. You can make a person ascendant artificially/by endowment, etc. but ascendants do occur naturally, simply through pure excellence or baddassitude.

The Master of the Deck position how ever is not the same as ascending. For a very long time it seems that there was no Master of the Deck. For all we know there hasn't been a Master in the entire time the House system has existed. However the House system chose a new Master because one was needed. A pantheon war was on the verge of breaking out and a mediator would be needed to settle scores and pick up the pieces.

Parans ordeals certainly makes him special, he was "noticed" by the powers that be, but that doesn't make him exceptional. Bad and awesome things happen to mortals across Wu all the time, if all you needed to become Master of the Deck was to go through a lot of shit then the Master would have emerged earlier.

Paran became the Master of the Deck because it was time for a Master of the Deck and he was convinient pawn who was already inserted in the middle of things.

EDIT: IMO of course, it's up to interpretation...

EDIT2: On second thought if you want to persue the idea that there was personal involvement in Paran becoming Master of the Deck, it is possible that K'rul interfered and made Paran the next Master...

This post has been edited by Aptorian: 05 April 2010 - 07:09 PM

[Vesper]

Right, so I finally found my copy of Gardens and went back to re-read that scene, and for some reason I had thought Rake came out to relieve the other Eleint of the fight in the plains in Chapter 22. I see now that my memory had warped the events. Maybe in reading about Rake's later exploits I somehow got the idea that he was even more bad ass in this book...

Well now, my point still remains... Silanah and a troop of soletaken Eleint managed to turn Raest's physical form to shambles, but it damn near killed Silanah -- the biggest of the bunch. Had Raest been at his full power, I don't think he would have been stopped. The only part of the book that makes it seem that new players in the game (i.e. humans, not thousands-of-years-old-soletaken) are a match for ancient enemies is Kruppe... but that's because it's motherfucking Kruppe! The guy survives Caladan Brood creating a new mountain range at his feet and outwits everyone in every book in which he's ever appeared... including himself.

I think the notion that elder powers are of inadequate strength is errant. It took the Azath to finally take Raest down... after he's survived a point-blank explosion from Hedge's munition.

Dubious... dubious...

[Aptorian]

I agree with you that the notion the young conquers old every time is flawed. Of course a soldier versus a 12 foot tall giant with a personal warren and a magical sword, isn't going to stand a chance, like wise a squad mage specialising in making pretty illusions isn't going to stand a chance against some Jaghut Horror that can pull dragons out of the sky, freeze continent and survive getting torn to pieces and blown up.

The point is that the game has changed. The elder beings no longer walk among the mortals any longer, they have been buried or secluded, they exist in their warrens and they have grown old. Blood sacrifices and chaos no longer dominate civilization, everything is a bit nicer. Now the worshippers actually make demands of their gods rather than the other way around. And the humans might even be so ambitious that they'd send assassins with invested weapons into your warren to try and kill you!

[Gothos]

On the finnests themselves now... Since it seems that, somewhere it was written that power is limited by the channeling capabilities of the body (I think it was with Silverfox, that she needed to grow to access her full power, no?) if I recall it right. Coming from this, having some poor sod's soul and power sealed in an acorn or a wooden dildo could bypass the usual barriers and limitations: just channel the power through it's mindless, indifferent self and you can go all out, putting forward your own and it's power. I think it could have the potential for incredible burst damage.
Spoiler for MT incoming

Spoiler

it's a bit like Hannan Mosag using the queen and prince to divert the warping aspect of the CG's chaotic power

[flea]

Aptorian, on 05 April 2010 - 07:03 PM, said:

haroos, on 05 April 2010 - 06:37 PM, said:

you make it seem as if ascendency is a mechanic response of "nature".
but it was his actions of holding oppon in thrall, and taking in shadow blood (influence) and his opposition to omtok phelack (the raest affair),
and traveling with in the sword's darkness.
it made me think that his involvement with all those warrens gave him some influence over them.

Ascendancy is a natural selection type fair as far as we understand it. There's not an Elder God sitting in an office somewhere keeping ledgers on mortals picking out random ones of interest and slapping an Ascendant sticker on them. You can make a person ascendant artificially/by endowment, etc. but ascendants do occur naturally, simply through pure excellence or baddassitude.

The Master of the Deck position how ever is not the same as ascending. For a very long time it seems that there was no Master of the Deck. For all we know there hasn't been a Master in the entire time the House system has existed. However the House system chose a new Master because one was needed. A pantheon war was on the verge of breaking out and a mediator would be needed to settle scores and pick up the pieces.

Parans ordeals certainly makes him special, he was "noticed" by the powers that be, but that doesn't make him exceptional. Bad and awesome things happen to mortals across Wu all the time, if all you needed to become Master of the Deck was to go through a lot of shit then the Master would have emerged earlier.

Paran became the Master of the Deck because it was time for a Master of the Deck and he was convinient pawn who was already inserted in the middle of things.

EDIT: IMO of course, it's up to interpretation...

EDIT2: On second thought if you want to persue the idea that there was personal involvement in Paran becoming Master of the Deck, it is possible that K'rul interfered and made Paran the next Master...

OT: anyone want to take bets about whether Paran return in tCG? Book one starts with Paran, book 10 needs to end with Paran. He has been brought up as a character with a destiny. Of course SE might go and flip a middle finger to narrative logic here...

[haroos]

OT: anyone want to take bets about whether Paran return in tCG? Book one starts with Paran, book 10 needs to end with Paran. He has been brought up as a character with a destiny. Of course SE might go and flip a middle finger to narrative logic here...
[/quote]

it would seem he would, in the 8th book people who are unwilling or pushed into godhood\ascen. are mentioned as the deadliest.
i'm not sure if it refers to the new god in koral, or to paran, maybe even rake's oldest son (forgot the name).
maybe karsa ?

but it would mean that the one or ones it refers to are going to confront the CG.

btw, i'm still waiting for the 9th book in paperback to come to israel, so you talking about the 10th book realy makes me blah.

[flea]

[quote name='haroos' date='06 April 2010 - 10:34 AM' timestamp='1270575250' post='747659']
OT: anyone want to take bets about whether Paran return in tCG? Book one starts with Paran, book 10 needs to end with Paran. He has been brought up as a character with a destiny. Of course SE might go and flip a middle finger to narrative logic here...
[/quote]

it would seem he would, in the 8th book people who are unwilling or pushed into godhood\ascen. are mentioned as the deadliest.
i'm not sure if it refers to the new god in koral, or to paran, maybe even rake's oldest son (forgot the name).
maybe karsa ?

but it would mean that the one or ones it refers to are going to confront the CG.

btw, i'm still waiting for the 9th book in paperback to come to israel, so you talking about the 10th book realy makes me blah.
[/quote]

I simply refused to wait and ordered it from Amazon.uk. I think I received it about a week after the others. I should probably pre-order tCG right now.

[Aptorian]

Paran will surely be there.

Another one who has to be there is Quick Ben. He made a promise to Whiskeyjack before the commander died, he promised him that he would handle the CG problem. That's a pretty big promise.

[flea]

I'm hoping Paran castrates the Errnat. I do not recommend he does a Feather Witch with it, however.

[Aptorian]

I hope that the Errant nudges Paran and he fall down a flight of stairs breaking his neck.

[Vesper]

Aptorian, on 06 April 2010 - 08:52 PM, said:

I hope that the Errant nudges Paran and he fall down a flight of stairs breaking his neck.

Not a fan of the noble-born Master of the Deck?

I agree with Flea that Paran is definitely a central character to the series... arguably the most central in spite of not appearing in several books. Narratively speaking Erikson would display tremendous talent if he brought it all full circle to end with the very character with which he started.

My only concern is that he may be too focused tying in loose ends in tCG. Though, he has managed to largely do that with each novel itself (subject to glaring retcons and egregious cliffhangers).

[Avious]

As an answer to the first fight question since everything else has been clarified. The entire basis of the Malazan plan to release the Tyrant was that Rake would do anything to stop him from gaining his Finnest and so be weakened in the process, allowing the Empire to take down one of their greatest threats. If Raest would be able to weaken Rake without the Finnest, he would most likely defeat him with it. Correct me if any of this is wrong.

[amphibian]

Avious, on 08 April 2010 - 03:18 AM, said:

As an answer to the first fight question since everything else has been clarified. The entire basis of the Malazan plan to release the Tyrant was that Rake would do anything to stop him from gaining his Finnest and so be weakened in the process, allowing the Empire to take down one of their greatest threats. If Raest would be able to weaken Rake without the Finnest, he would most likely defeat him with it. Correct me if any of this is wrong.

Not necessarily, the plan might have been to make Rake engage with Raest while the Malazans took a shot at his back. They had Tool, several mages, Lorn and a Galayn Lord in the area. With that collection of powers, it's theoretically possible that something could get through and severely damage Rake or cause Darujhistan to willingly embrace Malazan rule - a possibility that comes into play if Raest beat back Rake.

What's odd about the plan is that it's a heck of a risk to take down or drive away an opponent who is probably not opposed to the existence of the Empire at the time (the Crimson Guard were, but Brood and Rake seemed only to oppose Malazan expansionism).

[Vesper]

amphibian, on 08 April 2010 - 03:28 AM, said:

Avious, on 08 April 2010 - 03:18 AM, said:

As an answer to the first fight question since everything else has been clarified. The entire basis of the Malazan plan to release the Tyrant was that Rake would do anything to stop him from gaining his Finnest and so be weakened in the process, allowing the Empire to take down one of their greatest threats. If Raest would be able to weaken Rake without the Finnest, he would most likely defeat him with it. Correct me if any of this is wrong.

Not necessarily, the plan might have been to make Rake engage with Raest while the Malazans took a shot at his back. They had Tool, several mages, Lorn and a Galayn Lord in the area. With that collection of powers, it's theoretically possible that something could get through and severely damage Rake or cause Darujhistan to willingly embrace Malazan rule - a possibility that comes into play if Raest beat back Rake.

What's odd about the plan is that it's a heck of a risk to take down or drive away an opponent who is probably not opposed to the existence of the Empire at the time (the Crimson Guard were, but Brood and Rake seemed only to oppose Malazan expansionism).

I agree. I believe that, up until the Empire released Raest, Rake would have been content to simply move on. It was only when the Empress' Xanatos Gambit failed horribly that Rake really recognized that the Empire's expansion -- under the command of a woman like Laseen -- posed a serious threat, and decided to stand his ground.

Also, if it had been Rake vs. Raest and the Galayn Lord, it's unlikely that Rake would have won. Against the Galayn Lord he took a rather serious hit to his shoulder, though he had many allies nearby with healing abilities (like Caladan Brood) to fix it. Raest kicked the crap out of Silanah and two Eleint before he took on a new body, which makes me believe that Rake and him one on one would have not been so decisively in Rake's favour as the Tiste Andii and everyone on his side (and even Laseen) seemed to assume.

It would have been a spectacular fight, for certain, but I highly doubt the outcome would have been favourable for everyone's plans... except maybe Raest's.

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

Seguleh, you might wanna delete or at least spoiler the stuff in those last two posts. This is only the MoI forum and you're discussing stuff that doesn't happen for 6 books.

[The Seguleh 46th]

WhiskeyJackDaniels, on 08 April 2010 - 03:36 PM, said:

Seguleh, you might wanna delete or at least spoiler the stuff in those last two posts. This is only the MoI forum and you're discussing stuff that doesn't happen for 6 books.

Apologies here. BTW, how do you make a spoiler post? (sorry again for being a tard....)

Went ahead and deleted them.

This post has been edited by The Seguleh 46th: 08 April 2010 - 06:24 PM

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

[spoiler] at the beginning and (/spoiler) at the end. But with brackets, not parentheses. Also you can highlight it and click on other styles.

[Aptorian]

Hetan has made some "newbie" instructional posts in the New Members area, you should check it out.

To put something inside a spoiler box, write [spoiler] what ever text you want to hide[/spoiler******] but with out the asterisks I added.

[The Seguleh 46th]

Aptorian, on 08 April 2010 - 07:49 PM, said:

Hetan has made some "newbie" instructional posts in the New Members area, you should check it out.

To put something inside a spoiler box, write [spoiler] what ever text you want to hide[/spoiler******] but with out the asterisks I added.

Thanks for the help!