[Fooler]

Has SE ever addressed this issue (the apparent fact that Nightchill was dead before A'Karonys) directly?

I mean this is as far back in the series as it gets and he re-visted in MoI to put some finality on it, and now it doesn't seem so final.

Plus Calot has yet to be explained?

[Illuyankas]

Calot was killed by one of Rake's blasts re-directed from Tayschrenn blindly - Tays was just deflecting them in all directions, while attacking Moon's Spawn by himself at that point. Calot wasn't killed on purpose.

[Dolorous Menhir]

Also, Calot was failing to protect himself, diverting his power to aid Tattersail instead. I don't think he was a deliberate target of anyone (Tays or Rake), whether it was Rake directly or a deflected blast via Tays, there was no great motive to his death. Calot didn't matter to anyone except Tattersail.

[Dark Mac]

I think you'll recall that the blast that killed Calot was aimed at Tattersail. I've never understood why Tayschrenn would be so careless with his Mistress of the Deck. It was probably just poor writing/thinking on SE's part.

[Illuyankas]

He probably felt she could handle it, being High Mage in all but name and whatnot.

[Brys Beddict]

The people that recount the battle in MoI are Dujek and Whiskeyjack. But did either of them actually see it? Dujek might've but he wasn't even leading the attack so he could've been holed up in his tent. Whiskeyjack we know was in the tunnels. It could be that the version of the story that they have is what Tayschrenn told them to cover up stuff.

[Coin Bearer]

Tayschrenn's account of the Battle of Pale is clearly inconsistent with the actual sequence of events as they happened. So we have two possibilities: Erikson made in mistake getting Tayschrenn's story to jive with the facts, or Tayschrenn is lying, for motives which will become clearer later in the series.

Personally, I believe the latter, because I find the rest of the story Dujek told Whiskeyjack very difficult to believe. For example, Tayschrenn is just a high mage. He can read the Deck of Dragons, but not as well as even Tattersail. Yet, he claims that he was grooming Tattersail to assume the role of Master of the Deck. But, and this is a very big but, the MotD is one of the most powerful beings in existence, someone whose decisions even the gods have to accepts (they petition, not threaten, Paran to make a favourable decision with respect to the CG). The MotD has the power to enter into and use any warren. As I said, this is one uber-powerful position, though Paran hasn't yet figured out how to use the power. Yet, Tayschrenn has the temerity to claim that he was grooming somebody else to assume a position that controls GODS? Who is he?

The only thing that makes sense with respect to creation of the MotD is that it is part of the structure of magic, like the azath. It comes into being when there is an urgent need for it. The fact that Tayschrenn is claiming to be able to groom somebody for this position doesn't make sense, and it makes me doubt the motivation he advances for all the screwy things that went on, like busting WJ down to sergeant, trying to kill the bridgeburners in the tunnels and wiping out the cadre mages. I expect that a different explanation for all these events would be forthcoming later in the series.

[BridgeBurner]

Tayschrenn was ignorant of Paran. Him trying to groom the best DoD reader he knew for the position of MotD isn't that weird, in this light. Certainly with a High Mage's arrogance taken into account.

Even if Tattersail had lived, Paran would probably have taken the spot.

That's common a fantasy theme...

[tiam]

Personally i think it was bad writing and an inconsistency. But i find it funny how we refuse to believe the almighty SE can make mistakes so we make highly unlikely scenarios which end up with us saying well so and so was likely lying.

[Illuyankas]

You might be right. But, I like the possiblity that one of the accounts was a lie, purely on the ways SE could take it and run - why Tays would be lying, and what could result from that.

[Kage-za]

But what is the point of lying to Whiskeyjack, since he died anyway?

[Dolorous Menhir]

And Tays was supposed to predict that?

[Shurque's biatch]

Ok, this is pretty serious thread ressurection, but I am just rereading the battle of Pale and still don't get who/what was coming from the plain?

None of the mages were on the plain and obviously Rake wasn't sending stuff from there.

Anyone shed some light?

[Dolorous Menhir]

Always good to see this thread revived.

For some of the pertinent quotes (not a complete list) see this page on the wiki. I intend to include some analysis on the wiki, but have made a basic stab at an answer in this FAQ.

To summarise:

We have two pictures of what happened at Pale.

GotM view - Tayschrenn likely killed Calot, Nightchill and Hairlock (I realise he didn't die) for unspecified reasons, which can be distilled into "Tays is a shifty character in that book". It's not explicit who killed A'karonys, but there's no reason to blame it on anyone but Rake.

Rake's attacks came from above, Tayschrenn's from a different point on the plain. So when Tattersail speaks with shock of attacks on her position coming from the plain rather than on high, she realised the assaults came from her fellow Malazan mages.

MoI view - Nightchill killed A'karonys and Tayschrenn summoned his demons to kill her in turn. As I noted in the above FAQ, this is a flat contradiction of what we read in GotM. Since SE needs us to accept this latter explanation so the story will make sense, we have to ignore the picture that GotM gave us.

So Tayschrenn is the good guy, Nightchill was his target, and Calot & Hairlock were casualties of the general chaos, and may even have died by the hand of the Malazan's nominal opponent, Rake.

Why did Tattersail say the assaults on the unlucky pair came from the plain? The best theory I've seen is that they were casualties of Tayschrenn's "shunt Rake's assaults onto innocent bystanders" defence. We saw plenty of soldiers die this way. So it could have been Rake's magic that killed them, redirected from Tayschrenn's position.

This is not a very satisfying account, but if we ignore it then the actions of characters from MoI don't make sense.

Thoughts?

[Kurt Montandon]

Dolorous Menhir;217722 said:

Thoughts?

Yeah - Steve seriously needs to publish a slightly re-written version of GotM to account for stuff like this. Kind of like the "Kruppe is a eunuch" thing, though I'm not sure how many people caught that to begin with ...

[Dolorous Menhir]

I always feel nervous when I see kkmontandon has replied to one of my posts.

edit: Kruppe was supposed to be a eunuch? I missed that.

[Imperial Historian]

Quote

Kruppe was supposed to be a eunuch? I missed that.

That's because he's not, remember he she-boinged hetan back in MOI and left her with the possibility of little baby kruppe, though that possibility seems to have fallen away.

[Dolorous Menhir]

Imperial Historian;217743 said:

That's because he's not, remember he she-boinged hetan back in MOI and left her with the possibility of little baby kruppe, though that possibility seems to have fallen away.

Well, ok. I understand that Kruppe is supposed to have fathered Hetan's babies.

I thought his point was that Kruppe was apparently a eunuch in GotM, but then fertile in MoI. Which would make it another example of a GotMism, and the reason kkmontandon brought it up in the first place to go along with the Pale discussion. I'm just asking what bit of GotM (or other book) was supposed to make us think he was a eunuch in the first place.

[Shurque's biatch]

Dolorous Menhir;217722 said:

This is not a very satisfying account, but if we ignore it then the actions of characters from MoI don't make sense.

Thoughts?

Ok, so that helps a little. Tattersail seems to identify 'plain' with 'Tay's position'. And certainly attributes the casualities to Tay.

I haven't made it to the rehash by Rake yet, so I will have more thoughts when I get there.

Thanks