junior

Sometimes there's a very fine line. "Encouragement" can apparently sometimes (though not always - it might depend on the judge) be as little as offering to sell something to the suspect or asking the suspect if they can provide something. In any event - getting away from the details of entrapment - the individual in question is often taken into account as well when the reader stumbles across a situation like this. What gives Jasnah an out here is her proclaimed interest in finding wrongdoers to punish and her apparent desire to "repay" Taravangian, coupled with the fact that we have no reason to disbelieve her. If Gaz were to engage in similar behaviour without stating his reason for doing so, we'd likely take a dimmer view of it because we'd be more suspicious of why he did it.

The one objection that I have to this is - what would she explore? The Parshendi are completely hemmed in, with limited room to maneuver. Exploration implies the opposite. Aside from that niggling little detail, though, it seems to fit.

Well, yes and no. Stings are legal. But "entrapment" is the term used to describe police pushing things just a bit too far when they set up their sting. And that's illegal. Sometimes there's a very fine line between the two. Also, Jasnah's killing of the fleeing mugger would be illegal in most modern societies, as she was no longer in any immediate danger.

I don't entirely agree with this. Kaladin himself is uncomfortable with a lot of what he does - including, as it turns out, fighting the Parshendi. But the difference is that pretty much everyone around him would happily do all of the more questionable things that he does without even thinking twice. So we don't get the moral objection that Shallan provides. Syl might object - and does from time to time - but likely has settled on the idea that Kaladin's in a situation in which you sometimes need to do unpleasant things just to stay alive. As long as he stays away from the really bad things (as opposed to the merely unpleasant), she'll keep her protests to a minimum. Note, though, that while she doesn't complain about many of the things Kaladin does, she *does* try to learn why he's doing those things. And she's hardly a saint herself. Some of the stunts that Kaladin pulls might very well amuse her. As for the armor? Who knows? Kaladin isn't removing the "armor" to take trophies or do something obscene with the body parts. Plus, they're already dead. Disturbing dead bodies is usually seen as objectionable, but it doesn't make the dead people any more or less dead. This might be why Syl doesn't object when Kaladin does what he does to the Parshendi corpses. Finally, Kaladin versus Gaz is the plucky underdog versus his cowardly jerk of a boss. It's an archetype situation that we recognize, and we already know which side we prefer. As for Jasnah, she killed people. And while the killing of at least some of them was legimately self-defense, she intentionally provoked their attack. In other words, she appears to have hypocritically abused a legal technicality of the law in order to side-step the claim of murder when she killed people that she appears to have wanted to kill even before they attacked her. If the would-be assailants hadn't been Bad Guys, then there'd be no question that she'd committed murder. It's only the fact that her victims were muggers that provided any moral ground for her to stand on. And one last item, only semi-related. Some of the comments on the previous page about how Jasnah's actions might square with the presumed oaths of the order her surge-binding would put her into caused me to consider one possible point. She makes a bit of a deal about the debt that she owes King Taravingion (even if he himself is seemingly unaware of the debt). It's possible that one of the oaths of the order she falls under involves that very thing.

A fun, if short, read. And Abraham! Say it ain't so! How can you not like a dog! Prof's responses to David's questions about weaknesses at the end of the novella seem a bit misdirecting and cagey. It seemed to me as if on some level Prof actually has realized where weaknesses come from, but is unwilling to admit it even to himself. On another note... Megan... Think she left after Steelheart died? Or is she hiding somewhere in the city?

This seems very possible. At the very least, she's clearly aware that some words need to be said. And it's not a big jump to assume that she actually knows the words in question.

Good point. Though it's possible that the words are provided by the spren at the critical point via the bond - with the caveat that the spren can only provide the words if the human is living up to the ideal.

There are a instances when Kaladin draws in power without realizing that he's doing it. Teft is responsible for at least one. iirc, he accidentally performs a surgebinding at one point. And while I can't remember the details off the top of my head, there's another incident where he starts to become angry and unthinkingly draws in enough power to start noticeably glowing before someone else points it out. The real problem with the "Elohkar drained them himself" theory is that we never have any indication of Elohkar glowing. Dalinar does. But Elohkar never appears to. And given the amount of power drawing that would presumably be required to crack a gem, he should have been at some point. Unless he somehow gifted the power to Dalinar when the latter started glowing.

Random thought... We know that Nohadon was having trouble figuring out how to deal with spren who were forming bonds with questionable individuals. We know that spren are somewhat chaotic in nature, but can be forced into a more ordered existence when something about them is written down. The example of this that we see is a flamespren that keeps changing size until its size is recorded. Then it stops changing size until the record is erased. What if The Way of Kings is Nohadon using item #2 to address item #1? Namely, the mere existance of copies of The Way of Kings prevents spren from fully bonding with individuals who don't adopt the relevent lessons from the book? Is that possible? I don't know. But it might explain why Kaladin's recitation of a phrase (i.e. the second oath) that he was already more or less living would have such a dramatic and immediate impact on the battlefield.

Regarding the TES comment -

A couple of items. First, I agree that Elohkar probably unconsciously drained his gems. However, I don't think that the energy was wasted. He'd just been unceremoniously thrown off of his horse, and people die from that in real life. It's possible that - even while wearing shardplate - he was injured during the fall (perhaps a twisted ankle). And the energy that he absorbed was used to heal himself. Second, Elohkar's ability to see cryptics in mirrors might be some form of scrying. In popular folklore mirrors are supposed to show things as they really are (which iirc is related to why vampires don't appear in them - they have no soul). And that's what appears to be happening here. Mirrors are also popular devices for use as scrying tools, probably for the same reason mentioned above. Elohkar appears to be aware of the fact that he's very inexperienced, and that there's probably a lot going on that he doesn't see. As such, a likely desire on his part would be to pierce the veils of secrecy around him so that he can keep his kingship secure. And he might very well have achieved his desire - in a very unexpected fashion. As such, it's possible that he's gained the ability to scry, and his mirror is scrying tool. Unfortunately, since he only expects to see a reflection when he looks in the mirror, it's showing him exactly that... and including things that don't ordinarily cast reflections.

It seems to me that if you're going that elaborate in your defenses, then you're merely buying time. Playing pure defense means that you'll never defeat the other side. You'll merely slow down the rate at which they reach you. Sooner or later they *will* get through. There's a parallel here with modern military static defenses. Mine fields, barbed wire, and other positional defenses are great at slowing an enemy down. But that's all that they'll do. Instead, military planners use them to channel enemy forces into following certain preferred paths. And they *always* make sure that such defenses are covered by actual weapons in some fashion. Otherwise there's nothing to stop the enemy from coming through - just more slowly than they would otherwise. In many ways, the open path drawn during the final confrontation in the dorm is just as effective as the squares above. Yes, the chalklings can get through. But by forcing the chalklings to repeatedly go out of their way to reach their targets, you slow them down - just as is done with the multiple squares above. And you don't end up trapping yourself inside as is the case with the typical defense.

Eh... I wouldn't mind seeing Gaz pull a turnaround. He's in a bad spot (overseeing the bridge men appears to be the *second* worst position in Sadeas's army - three guesses what the *worst* position is, and the first two guesses don't count ), and for whatever reason likely can't get himself out of it. The people that he associates with all day long are people that he *cannot* under any circumstances afford to get close to because they're probably going to be dead by the end of the month. And if he screws up in any way, shape, or form, he's a dead man (either executed, or sent to a bridge crew; and ironically Kaladin's the *only* bridge leader that wouldn't try to kill him on the first run). Stick anyone in that sort of situation, and they'll get run down. All but the most idealistic would probably be a lot like Gaz after just a year or so. Enforced cynicism with regard to human life will do that to you. The big question is what he did to end up there in the first place. That's what could make or break him as a character who grows to be likeable.

Then they'd be following the alternate plan, which is to stay out of the way and let the guards do their jobs.

There's another problem with the idea of the Ghostbloods wanting the shardblade back. Namely, why would they have loaned it to begin with? We suspect that a shardblade (and shardplate) was loaned to a member of the family, and that was to go after Amaram on the battlefield. Shardblades aren't the kind of thing that you just loan willy-nilly, especially to someone who's going to sit on it and not use it.

When Szeth attacked Gavilar, Dalinar was an insensate drunk. It's not too difficult to imagine that Jasnah and Navani were similarly indisposed (further, they weren't the target; if they were aware of what was going on, then they were probably trying to stay out of the way). Sadeas, on the other hand, *was* present and tried to make himself useful. And Szeth killed a number of guards on his way to the king. Mere custom dictates that someone like Dalinar is almost never alone. He's an important nobleman and a member of the royal family. He's pretty much always going to be guarded because of his obvious value as a target. And the end of WotK makes it clear that he expects to become even more of a target with the changes that he and his nephew are about to institute. That means that the watch on him is going to be even tighter. Catching him alone is going to be well-nigh impossible.

Or to quote Kirk in Star Trek IV - Kirk: He had to much LDS back in the '60s. On a more serious note, interesting read. And the influence tends to be subtle.

Not sure that this needs spoiler tags, but...

As opposed to 4 of 6? (Or 4 of 7, if you want to count the murdered king) The problem right now is that we don't have any idea what triggers it. We only have one clue, and that's because Syl seems to have been attracted to Kaladin's focus on Honor. If that's the case, any personal focus might be enough to do the trick. And Adolin has definitely shown a focus on *something* with his ability as a duelist.

If that were the case, then I would think that the holders would be influenced by it. But if anything, the exact *opposite* seems to happen...

You know, that raises an interesting thought... What if the Ghostbloods are bluffing about the whole thing? What if the "broken" soulcaster never really worked, and the Ghostbloods never loaned it to begin with? What if Luesh tipped them off to the existance of the "broken" soulcaster, and the Ghostbloods decided to claim that it was theirs' as some sort of way to gain additional influence over the family? Actually, I'm skeptical about this. But I thought I'd throw it out there because it is a possibility. The better point of focus, imo, is the blade. I'm guessing that the Ghostbloods never even knew that it existed (or they would have asked about it). Which means that they never loaned it. Which means that the family has been sitting on something that's worth a king's ransom... and not doing anything with it. Why? With the shardblade, the family wouldn't have needed to resort to cheap transmutational "mining" tricks to keep generating wealth. Dear old dad could have just had a suit of armor crafted for him, and ridden out to the Shattered Plains. Any of the Brightlords there would have gladly retained his services because of the blade. But instead, the blade remained hidden and apparently unused. Why? Edit - In response to Aether's point above, the Ghostbloods clearly knew about one thing but don't appear to have known about both. And Luesh, the steward, who also happened to be a Ghostblood, knew about the soulcaster. So I don't think it's too big of a stretch to assume that Shallan's brother is correct about what the Ghostbloods wanted. Additionally, their approach seems a bit low-key for a group that's looking for a missing Shardblade as opposed to a missing Soulcaster.

RE: Adolin - It's been noted by other characters that Adolin is an extremely skilled duelist - quite possibly one of the best duelists in the entire Alethi nation. While I can understand the reluctance to have all three of the males in the family turn out to be radiants, there's a possibility that Adolin's skill as a duelist is an unconscious use of radiant powers, much as Kaladin was doing early on. Just thought I'd point that out. As for the OP - congrats! And good job!

I think it would need to be someone who actually had never heard of Steelheart - and possibly didn't even know that they were shooting an Epic (which by itself could cause fear, given the reputation that epics have).

They do still retain their free will. It's just that their outlook has changed. Prof becomes rather harsh and unfriendly while his powers are active, but he doesn't suddenly turn on his team. Megan uses her powers frequently during David's confrontation with Nightwielder, but she doesn't kill David. The epics are influenced by the use of their powers, but they don't suddenly turn into marionettes dancing on strings.

I'm pretty confident that it's meant to be Superman's 'S'. Superman is physically almost identical to Steelheart. Both are incredibly strong, can fly, and are completely invulnerable except for one small weakness. Steelheart, in essence, is Superman gone bad. Thus Superman makes a perfect moral foil for Steelheart. From a more in-universe perspective, Superman would also be the shining ideal for the Faithful. Superman is quite literally unstoppable (aside from Kryptonite, which turns up far more often than it realistically should in the comic books). But unlike the epics, his powers don't corrupt him. And the combination of his incredible power coupled with his selfless morality, is the shining example of "what ought to be" for the Faithful. The video game "Injustice", which came out earlier this year, covers similar ground. An alternate universe Superman becomes twisted due to events, and pretty much takes over the world as there's no one capable of stopping him. The result - at least on the local level - is not all that different from Newcago.