[Lisheo]

Ah. Good point lol.

[Zanth13]

maybe shadow warren/hold is alive and picked its own mortal sword

[Optimus Prime]

Aptorian;245146 said:

my faith in Eriksons writting was shaken after RG but I still believe that Erikson would have placed some character during the end commenting on Trulls death and some new appearance

Wow so you didn't like Reaper's Gale?

[Aptorian]

It was a great book. better than 95% of whats out there... probably, but it didn't live up the standards of what I've seen Erikson do in the other books.

My main problem is some of the big storylines just not making sense. What was the purpose of the Awl and the Shake storylines? They were boring and they ultimatly went no where. I also hated every page of Nimander Golits scenes.

But more importantly, what I have been impressed with earlier is Eriksons attention to detail, every little character is usually accounted for in the end. Most of the questions have been explained or been postponed. That was not the feeling I had at the end of the book. A lot things were left open.

[Mcflury]

well, SE will have to leave some threads open occasionally if he wants to end his series with a big bang really...

And about those lesser intresting or cool personae: experience has thought me that they usually become way cooler later in the series, so just wait for it

[Ain't_It_Just_]

Aptorian;245298 said:

It was a great book. better than 95% of whats out there... probably, but it didn't live up the standards of what I've seen Erikson do in the other books.

My main problem is some of the big storylines just not making sense. What was the purpose of the Awl and the Shake storylines? They were boring and they ultimatly went no where. I also hated every page of Nimander Golits scenes.

But more importantly, what I have been impressed with earlier is Eriksons attention to detail, every little character is usually accounted for in the end. Most of the questions have been explained or been postponed. That was not the feeling I had at the end of the book. A lot things were left open.

Well, the Awl scenes involved Redmask and Toc, important characters which needed the Awl storyline to be followed. And the Shake storyline showed Atri-Preda Yan tovis splitting off from the Letherii. Yeah not much I know but those characters are liked or at least known, and we want to know what happens to them.

[Urb]

Reaper said:

He paused, glanced back at her. 'Why do you think I am the Mortal Sword of the Black-Winged Lord? My good looks? My charming personality? My skill with these blades here?'
'Well,' she replied, 'you've just exhausted my list of reasons.'
'Ha ha. Hear me. Born in Darkness. Blessed by our Mother. The first in thousands of years -

...page 499
'All who dwell within the Andara,' Silchas Ruin replied, 'are dead. Slaughtered by Letherii soldiers and mages. Clip is the Mortal Sword of Darkness. Had he been there, they would now still be alive - his kin. And the bodies lying motionless in the darkness would be Letherii. He wonders if he has not made a terrible mistake.'

Ok, so Clip is Mortal Sword to both Rake and Darkness.
Brys is Mortal Sword to Emurlahn and ...

Consider this:
Is there a Throne of Darkness? And Light?
Mother Dark and Father Light are the creators of the Tiste Warrens (but not resident gods?).

A crazy theory is starting to take form here:

- Rake is the God of Darkness (reluctantly so, the Tiste Andii follow him)
- Clip is the Mortal Sword of Rake and Darkness
- Shadowthrone is the current God of Shadow(Emurlahn)
- Brys is the Mortal Sword of Shadowthrone and Emurlahn
- Osserc is the God of Light (so say the Tiste Liosan)
- Gesler is the Mortal Sword of Osserc and Light ( I took it too far)

[Aptorian]

I wonder if there's a throne inside the wagon being pulled by dragnipur.

[Skywalker]

The cart within Dragnipur carries the gate to Kurald Galain... so it isn't the throne per se. The throne would be within.

[D'rek]

another possible variant on the "mortal sword" versus "knight of ____" bit, there's a somewhat similar differentiation between sorcerors and magical priests. Perhaps 'mortal sword' is the title for that role in a priesthood-like aspect like Fener's following or the Perish where the Knight position reflects a structured house or warren aspect.

If it were true, this also adds some insight into how Hannan Mosag sees his would-be healed KE and how Clip sees Anomander...

[Optimus Prime]

I'm starting to think Clip really is the fourth son of Mother Dark...but that he is on his own, out to get revenge, for what he perceives is a betrayal of Rake walking away from his mother and people, some of whom worshipped him.

While this is revealed at RG's end....the question remains whether or not Clip is doing this on behalf of Mother Dark...or for his own reasons. Is he truly just a nut job?

And about Brys, I think we need more info. All we have so far is the Warlock King's mad ramblings...

[pastures]

There seems to me to be a great difference between Mortal Sword and Knight/Champion. I think the difference is the degree of investment of power by the patron god. As far as i can see, Mortal Swords are... mortal. Knights/Champions seem to be naturally immortal or are invested with immortality. Thus, this makes Knights/Champions much more ascendent-like (in terms of Paran's "influence" theory) since they have a longer time to act and be felt to act. Mortal Swords seem to have a much smaller sphere of influence and may not even have complete access to a warren.

However, iirc, Brys Beddict was a potential godling was he not? So, if he became Mortal Sword and was still a god, then that might just have thrown my theories out the window.

[Optimus Prime]

I think a Mortal Sword actually has the god's power invested in him...to some degree..while a Knight/Champion is a power unto himself...serving the House

[pastures]

I agree the Mortal Sword has access to a god's power, but i think it is quite limited. And i also agree that Knights/Champions typically are pretty powerful. In fact, they seem to already be ascendent or close to it. Mortal Swords, however, i think are much further away from ascendancy - which is why they need investment of power, and possibly also why that investment is limited.

[Optimus Prime]

It is difficult because we still don't know what decides ascendancy...or what gifts you actually get...but I think Mortal swords can be ascendants...but don't have to be.

I would think that a Knight/Champion is always ascendant...but I don't know....

[Paran]

Peeps, look at the House of Chains - it has both a Mortal Sword and a Knight.
Rhulad Sengar was Mortal Sword of the Crippled God, and Karsa Orlong is Knight of High House Chains.

However, it should be interesting to note that Brys' rise coincided with Trull's fall...

[Optimus Prime]

And I would say...Karsa is an ascendant and separate power unto himself..

While Rhulad was invested with the God's power and not ascendant...

Wait...when was it determined Rhulad was The Mortal Sword? Wasn't Karsa both Knight and Mortal Sword?

[Mentalist]

I'm pretty sure Rhulad was the King in Chains (read the card description in Fiddler's deck). Whether that prevents him from being MS--not sure

[Optimus Prime]

And Kallor is the Reaver right? But didn't Gethol tell him the CG needed a King?

[Paran]

Wasn't there an explanation in one of the books where some people were going through the House of Chains and they said that there was a mortal sword on another continent, or some such... hmmm.. I believe it was in House of Chains, but could have been Bonehunters. Can anyone help?