[panic]

xhentil;195978 said:

I agree. However, I've always seen QB as an enigma. Heck we didn't learn about HOW he had so many warrens until MoI, iirc. He always seems to have something up his sleeve, or some uncanny knowledge... I figure this will be revealed, and it will likely be a shaved knuckle in the hole again!

Plus, he did have a year of recovery and the evidence seems to point to trauma pushing mages power to increasing levels.

[Omras Ghum]

panic;195980 said:

Plus, he did have a year of recovery and the evidence seems to point to trauma pushing mages power to increasing levels.

I seem to remember a conversation between QB and Hedge where QB hints at having become more powerful than when Hedge was last around as a living being... i just can't find it in the bool atm

[mmdw45]

Dolorous Menhir;195813 said:

I think we have to view it this way: the vast majority of mages use the maximum level of power they can safely handle. We've seen Tayschrenn and Quick Ben at their safe limits (Coral & Icarium, respectively), and I think they're the examples to use when considering relative power levels (ignoring changes over time, of course). No doubt they could've gone further, but it would've killed them.

Yeah, one of the neat things about Beak's storyline was when I finally got what he was talking about with his brother hanging himself and how it related to the BH. The memory of his brother's death kept him hanging on, apparently long after his body was reduced to a little pile of ash, until his friends were safe.

-Max

[mmdw45]

Dolorous Menhir;195865 said:

The fight ended with Quick Ben's entire body spraying blood and him being thrown backwards - you can regard that as a magical assault by Icarium or the result of "magic strain," for lack of a better phrase.

I suspect the latter, since it sounds very much like the damage to Mallet when he healed Trotts or to Tayschrenn when he blew Kallor away. Those were admittedly more because of the chaotic poison than because of the raw power being channeled, but if chaotic poison makes the warrens more powerful and harder to control you might see the same effect with regular warrens when the power level goes high enough. And in MoI, Silverfox et. al talk a couple of times about how flesh and blood constrains the amount of power that can be channelled, and how age relates to ascendancy.

-Max

[ShadowOwl]

What if QB actually died fighting Icarium, and being a bridgeburner, ascended? That would give him a lot of new power, but he kept his corporeal body because he has all those other souls in him who are not bridgeburners and would not ascend?

[Abyss]

Re Beak - some excellent points and counterpoints above. I enjoyed Beak's storyline, and would add that, strictly speaking, SE could have left out most of Beak's pov, given Faradan Sort a random low profile squad mage, and not had the BHs face the mages' ritual at all, but the book would have been the poorer for it.

(Btw, Deux ex machina means ("god is a machine"), loosely, a mighty being intrudes into events out of absolute nowhere to bump the story because no other device was available or the author couldn't come up with one -ie: a random KN sykeep drops out of the sky and squishes all the mages before they could cast their ritual. SE wrote Beak into the story as a whole. He was a part of it and meant to be. That's typically called a 'plot', not deus ex machina.)

Btw, he didn't have 12 warrens, he had 'all' of them.

re: generally - Back in HoC, Fid noted the preponderance of Meanas amongst the squad mages of the army. A hint, maybe, that Shadowthrone and his warren were not as dissassociated from the Malazan army as it seemed, but more to the point, it seemed as tho EVERY squad in the army, or at least amongst the Marine contingent had at least one mage-type, however underpowered. That there would be a few more powerful ones only makes sense. There are enough powers and forces at work with the BHs (ST, Drek, Eres, the Wolves, Hood, Mommy D) that I can accept the notion that powers have bumped the odds where possible to be sure Tavore had the tools she needed.

I think the link noted between damaged personalities and power is a good one. Beak killed himself to save the marines. A 'typical' high mage, or a more healthy mind, may not have been able or willing to do that.

Re Bottle - Bottle isn't a powerhouse. He's well taught and intuitive and has a grasp of more minor skills than the average mage. We've never seen anything to suggest he could accomplish illusions on the scale of what Kulp was doing during Coltaine's evacuation training sessions in DG, at least without the Eres'al helping out. Faced with crazed fanatics in Yghatan, all he could do was mokra zap one and run like hell. he couldn't blast his way out of the tunels - he needed to brainride a rat and hope for the best.

Re QB - QB almost died facing Iccy - he pushed his powers to the absolute limit and barely lived through it. This resulted in a (forgive me) Dragonball'esque thing where, forced to stretch beyond his limits, he reached new levels of power. Bare in mind if Sheltana hadn't bitten Menandore's head off and Sukul decided to bail on her allies, QB and Hedge may not have won that one.

@Kerry, i think it's likely QB has plans in place for the event of his death. He's VERY wily, that one. What will be curious is whether, based on comments by Hedge and Kallor, his souls aren't released from him at some point, leaving his 'just' himself.


- Abyss, abracadabra!

[Bottle]

"Abyss" said:

(Btw, Deux ex machina means ("god is a machine"), loosely, a mighty being intrudes into events out of absolute nowhere to bump the story because no other device was available or the author couldn't come up with one -ie: a random KN sykeep drops out of the sky and squishes all the mages before they could cast their ritual. SE wrote Beak into the story as a whole. He was a part of it and meant to be. That's typically called a 'plot', not deus ex machina.)

I think people who saw it somewhat as a 'deus ex machina' (me included) thought so because even without the ritual, "hold magic" was perceived as a strong threat from the outset of Midnight Tides. Now we have had two books previously detailing the Bonehunters, neither of which mentioned or developed Beak.

And so you need to look at this in the context of a ten book series, rather then a single novel. The threat of Hold magic for the approaching Malazan marines was there before the book. And so no matter how much 'fleshing out' of Beak's character Erikson tried to do, it still seemed like he was simply the plot device introduced in this novel to solve that problem.

If say, hold magic had only been introduced in this book it would have been fine. (no-one saw the K'risnan as Deus ex Machina) Or if Beak had been introduced back in House of Chains, or Erikson had used Sinn in his place, it would have again been okay (in my eyes).


My personal preference would have been for Beak to have been developed in the earlier books, as to me his introduction in Reaper’s Gale hinted at a lack of foresight, when the opposite is what we have come to expect with Erikson’s writing.

(EDIT: Actually it would have been nice if it was Bottle who sacrificed himself, powered up by the Eres. As he was a much loved character, the loss would have been deeper felt for the reader - well for me at least - and it wouldn't have seemed like a quick plot fix.)

[xhentil]

Bottle;197150 said:

And so you need to look at this in the context of a ten book series, rather then a single novel. The threat of Hold magic for the approaching Malazan marines was there before the book. And so no matter how much 'fleshing out' of Beak's character Erikson tried to do, it still seemed like he was simply the plot device introduced in this novel to solve that problem.

This argument has been posed elsewhere as well. In a few of the books, we have characters that are only there for that single book. The shining example is Iktovian Others could be the Eberict brothers in MT. Kulp. Baudin. Torvald Nom (although Erikson said we'd see him again). Anyway, you get the picture. Yes we have our cast of people who have run for most if not all of the books, but throughout the books we run into people who come and go.

I don't see it as a deus ex machina, but rather as another tragedy in a number of tragedies, and a well written one at that. Parallels would be Iktovian, who gave his life. Both had extreme foreshadowing to their death, and both went out well.

[Bottle]

Your missing the point, I understand Erikson introduces characters who die by the end of the book. But as Polishgenius stated:

Quote

They weren't however obviously introduced purely to deal with an otherwise insurmountable problem - namely here, the Letherii sorcery. There's a lot of characters that if you actually analyse them are only really there for one pivotal point in the plot and can then fade away or be disposed of, but the others either are not obvious well in advance or are used to impact on other plot threads, even if they're not strictly necessary there, to give them some depth. Beak, likeable as the little guy was, just wanders about a bit, building his magical reputation with us, then goes all uber and dies.

Maybe you could say Itkovian simply solves another element of the plot, but the point is he was introduced at the same time as the threat and so it doesn't seem like he's a 'quick solution'. The point is, most readers were expecting something clever to solve Letherii Hold magic, something that has been previously introduced but solves it in a way we wouldn't have expected. But instead we're just given another high mage, one the reader can't really feel moved for when they die, for they simply don't know him enough to see beyond him being more then a plot solution.

[Abyss]

Look back to the beginning of Beak's storyline - he's lined up with all the other mages and selected to help Capt Sort keep in touch with all the Marine squads invading Leth. So 'poof' there he is, and for a chunk of the book, we see him do just that, and learn about him. He's not a Tays or Sinn-style powerhouse, he's not a QB-style manipulator, he's a messed up kid who finally finds something he's good at and eventually is willing to die for it. And the most impressive thing he did up until his big finish was set a stable on fire with some illusionary horses in it.

Hell, Coltaine was selected from all the Malazan army's High Fists and in the space of one book, look what he did. Or Gamet. Or so on. Was Coltaine just SE's plot solution to the problem of how to move 15 thou refugees across a continent?

I understand the above view, but i disagree with the notion that the character was introduced 'only' to deal with the obstacle. If we said the massive Hold magic ritual was introduced 'only' to kill Beak, would that make any more sense?

- Abyss, was introduced 'only' to drink coffee

[Bottle]

I can also see where you're coming from Abyss, but I'm just stating how I, and obviously others, saw Beak's storyline.

For me, I would see two levels of conflicts introduced in SE's books. Those that are contained within a single book, and those that span more then one book.

Conflicts contained within a single book, can be solved with solutions also introduced within that book. Where as it comes across as 'Deus ex' when SE introduces a solution of a series spanning problem in a single book.
I know this sounds odd, and really mechanical, but let me explain with some examples.

Coltaine et al (that you mentioned) are fine. Before DG, no-one was sitting around asking "How will Erikson solve the problem of all those refugees?", because we simply didn't know about them. It was a conflict and a solution both contained within a single book.

Same goes for Itkovian, and any others people have mentioned.

Now in Midnight Tides we have the introduction of hold magic as a book conflict. And the chaos aspected magic of the K'risnan is introduced as its solution. But this does not appear to be Deus ex machina, and why not? Even though in a sense it's the same as Beak - an answer to the incredible power of Hold magic. It does not appear "Deus ex machina" because at the time Hold magic was a conflict contained within a single book.

But unlike the chain of dogs, or other examples, Hold magic became a multi-book conflict. People began asking, "If the Edur could only defeat hold magic with the K'risnan's chaos magic, then what will the Malazans do?"

Thus if the solution had also been something that spanned more then one book, it would have seemed satisfactory. But the fact is Beak was introduced in RG in a way that made it look like he was the solution to Hold magic, with SE trying to cover that up by 'fleshing' him out with lots of plot.

For Multi-book spanning conflicts, the solution should also be multi-book spanning.

If a soldier, or mage rose out of the ranks (i.e. suddenly appears) with the power to destroy the Crippled God in the tenth book. (Even though it's possible it could happen by SE's own canon.) Would you be satisfied?

I wouldn't.

EDIT: Cleaned up my sentences (:

[Agraba]

Reading Bottle's argument, I must say that I'm inclined to change my opinion and agree with him. Now that I think about it, after the horrifying prospect of hold magic threatening the Malazans as we've seen in TBH, and Bottle's dire sentence: 'We don't want to fight a war against hold magic' (it was short, but just the tone of it foreshadowed horrifying tragedy to come), it seems that the climax of RG really didn't do justice to that feeling instilled in us in TBH, nor did it affect us with nearly the impact that sorcery seemed to in MT. Now that I think on it, there should have been tragedy at the point of the breach, because the set-up for it was perfect.

Beak was still a great character, and I did like that he sacrificed himself for such a noble cause, but he shouldn't have had that much power. The sorcerous ritual still should have been something that spelled a horrible moment for the Bonehunters.

[Abyss]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this, because both 'sides' to this debate are perceiving what the author did with Beak differently.


I'd mention that for all we could tell, Beak was channeling Hold magic too. At a minimum, he was channeling Elder Warrens, which predate the Holds. And NO ONE else at that particular confrontation was able to do that.


One interesting related point follows from Bottle and Agraba's posts above - i suspect that the Malazans expected Hold magic to be far worse than it was, underestimating the effects their own warrens would have against Leth. We saw more than once that Edur/Letherii were freaking about what the Malazans could do with sorcery - tho some of that was due to misimpressions about munitions being magic, i think.

Much like Malazan armour was better than Letherii steel, there was a great deal of anticipation leading to the conflict that undermined just how impressive the Marines and Malaz Army really were.

Plus, we can't account for things like the Edur being cut off from the CG's magic, Letherii morale, Holds weakening as Gothos' ritual faded...

- Abyss, will agree to disagree, even tho the other person is clearly wrong.

[Omras Ghum]

Agraba;197280 said:

Beak was still a great character, and I did like that he sacrificed himself for such a noble cause, but he shouldn't have had that much power. The sorcerous ritual still should have been something that spelled a horrible moment for the Bonehunters.

I think what made Beak that overly powerful was his unique perception of the warrens (candles and all that)... face it, Beak is quite the simpleton in many ways and thus able to pull things of in ways other (read: more educated) mages could never achieve because their perception of magic (warrens, most mages only being able to access one or two warrens etc.) prohibits them from interweaving magic as Beak (and QB, but he has multiple souls...) did it. He just lighted his candles...

I got the feeling at the end that Beak really could have rivaled QB, kind of. Thus I got no problem with him being as powerful as he was.

[Dark Mac]

Eh, it doesn't really matter to me if Beak's a DEM or not. His scenes were very well written; easily the most emotional in the past two books...maybe the saddest since MoI.

Bottle;197279 said:

For me, I would see two levels of conflicts introduced in SE's books. Those that are contained within a single book, and those that span more then one book.

Conflicts contained within a single book, can be solved with solutions also introduced within that book. Where as it comes across as 'Deus ex' when SE introduces a solution of a series spanning problem in a single book.
I know this sounds odd, and really mechanical, but let me explain with some examples.

Coltaine et al (that you mentioned) are fine. Before DG, no-one was sitting around asking "How will Erikson solve the problem of all those refugees?", because we simply didn't know about them. It was a conflict and a solution both contained within a single book.

Same goes for Itkovian, and any others people have mentioned.

The problem of the Imass was introduced in Book 1. It's a multi-book problem, and yet Itkovian, a one-book character, is the one who solves it.

[Bottle]

That's a Bit of a nitpick lol, but was the problem really addressed in GoTM and DG? I don't seem to recall it.
By that I mean Itkovian didn't "solve" the Imass, but the problem of their grief - or whatever it was. (My memory fails me the particulars.)

Agreed Abyss, looks like neither of us will convince the other. And both sides have been made clear.

[panic]

Bottle;197279 said:

I can also see where you're coming from Abyss, but I'm just stating how I, and obviously others, saw Beak's storyline.

For me, I would see two levels of conflicts introduced in SE's books. Those that are contained within a single book, and those that span more then one book.

Conflicts contained within a single book, can be solved with solutions also introduced within that book. Where as it comes across as 'Deus ex' when SE introduces a solution of a series spanning problem in a single book.
I know this sounds odd, and really mechanical, but let me explain with some examples.

Coltaine et al (that you mentioned) are fine. Before DG, no-one was sitting around asking "How will Erikson solve the problem of all those refugees?", because we simply didn't know about them. It was a conflict and a solution both contained within a single book.

Same goes for Itkovian, and any others people have mentioned.

Now in Midnight Tides we have the introduction of hold magic as a book conflict. And the chaos aspected magic of the K'risnan is introduced as its solution. But this does not appear to be Deus ex machina, and why not? Even though in a sense it's the same as Beak - an answer to the incredible power of Hold magic. It does not appear "Deus ex machina" because at the time Hold magic was a conflict contained within a single book.

But unlike the chain of dogs, or other examples, Hold magic became a multi-book conflict. People began asking, "If the Edur could only defeat hold magic with the K'risnan's chaos magic, then what will the Malazans do?"

Thus if the solution had also been something that spanned more then one book, it would have seemed satisfactory. But the fact is Beak was introduced in RG in a way that made it look like he was the solution to Hold magic, with SE trying to cover that up by 'fleshing' him out with lots of plot.

For Multi-book spanning conflicts, the solution should also be multi-book spanning.

If a soldier, or mage rose out of the ranks (i.e. suddenly appears) with the power to destroy the Crippled God in the tenth book. (Even though it's possible it could happen by SE's own canon.) Would you be satisfied?

I wouldn't.

EDIT: Cleaned up my sentences (:

Since we have been intoduced to Hold magic, we have been told that the warrens are more sophisticated and potentially more powerful. Remember Seren meeting the Crimson guard? The Hold magic would generally lose to warrens unless the rituals are involved...and from what I understand warren magic can be used in rituals too, correct?

[Bottle]

geez, Well replace "Hold Magic" with 'Letherii Sorcery' then. In MT we saw it could destroy entire homelands (e.g. the destruction of the Edur villages.)

What are you trying to argue? That the holds aren't a threat? The Warrens may be more sophisticated as you say, but the Letherii we know to employ very very powerful and devastating sorcery, (As seen in MT)

As far as I see it, the warrens are simply more refined, i.e. you can do fancier things with them. Where as the Holds are closer to chaos, and as a result have a greater potential for 'raw' power.

Anyway, my idea of conflicts is hardly set in stone. Just how I see the books, and a criteria for me to feel satisfied from 'solutions'. If you don't think Hold magic was a problem to begin with, then that's fine. But as with all the other arguments here stating otherwise, I saw it indeed as a great threat, and one that was 'solved' in an unsatisfactory way, (for me), that is: with Beak.

[Kichiro]

Maybe he'll return as Magi of High House Death? That position is still vacant isn't it?

[mmdw45]

Kichiro;197553 said:

Maybe he'll return as Magi of High House Death? That position is still vacant isn't it?

Hmmm, I wonder if that has anything to do with QB's recent "stretching." He's been playing around with Death for a long time now...

-Max