vikorr

That quote also struck me the first time I read it - but I can't quite work it out. There are 2 very important words in it : He - is singular. It refers to only one person. Title - is singular - there is only one title. That means that 'The Tower, The crown, and The spear' are all part of the Fallen Title - not three separate titles. Now it could be that The Tower & Crown fall, and The Spear becomes a part of The Fallen Title...but in any event, all three are part of 'the fallen title' - which is why I can't quite work it out.

The prelude to WoK's includes then end of a desolation, and comments of blasted out sections of rock where surgebinders had fought. The knights radiant lasted until the end of desolations...if they'd run out of power, the voidbringers would have targetted them and wiped them out. Humanity 'won' each desolation (though Honor says they are losing in one of the visions - in a later one he says to appoint a champion because Odium will take that chance rather than losing again) I think it's safe to say Surgebinders etc were still able to power themselves.

Hi Doc, it has it's own thread - which I mentioned near the end of my last post - this is the thread I think we'll disagree on this - redefining words and using them in a way that demonises (due to the true definition) in order to strengthen your argument isn't a 'right'. Two words already exists for what he wanted to say - Homicide, or killing Should you mean - it's his right to find both war and murder wrong, we can both agree. And just because I agree that holding different opinions is fine - doesn't mean I can't suddenly realise the reason and say 'hey wait a minute - the reason this debate has been so so circular is #### ' At no time have I called Moogle a name, attached any negative labels to him, attempted to reinterpret his words to demonise him, put him down, etc.What I did was summarise his views, because of a realisation that they were at the heart of several pages of very circular arguments. We've had several great discussions, and I think we'll have several more. It's this particularly one to which there is no point.

They could be inflammatory - if I had tried to present Moogles views inaccurately, or demonise those views - neither of which I've done. As is - they appear to be exactly what he thinks. By way of explanation - I've put my post in question in blue, his thoughts in red. I've 'quoted' my post in question as a format to help ease of reading. Legalized murder is still murder, as far as I'm concerned. This is a matter of feelings and opinions, though, so I imagine some other people will not agree with me there. He provides quite a bit of further clarification - some below I SAID “Said war is being conducted openly by known combatants, while no one knows who Szeth the murdering assassins master is He said "This is a difference between them, but why does this really matter?" I said :One you can face / attack, let the world know - the other you can't. One you can gather allies against - the other you can't. One puts his public name & reputation to the action - the other doesn't. He said "Again, I fail to see the important difference here." That was the first sentence in a paragraph. The remainder didn't change the meaning of the first. As per almost all the above, but also specifically: I said :One you can face / attack, let the world know - the other you can't. One you can gather allies against - the other you can't.' He said "Again, I fail to see the important difference here." He said : The Parshendi are not Alethi, do not swear allegiance to the Alethi monarch, and thus are not bound by their laws. I said : They were on Alethi land, in the Alethi Palace, and I doubt anyone else would ever try argue they weren't bound by Alethi laws while there, not to murder the Alethi King. To the Alethi, yes. I imagine non-Alethi might argue that Alethi law doesn't apply to non-Alethi. He said : Only four or five Parshendi were responsible for Gavilar's death, but the Alethi are killing them all. I said : 4 or 5 of the Parshendi leaders...invited to lead a treaty...were responsible for Gavilar's death...knowing it would lead to openwar...and Killed the King anyway. He said "And those Parshendi were promptly hanged, save for Eshonai. All the innocent Parshendi are now being harmed by Dalinar in his quest for power." While this is clear through his posts - perhaps mostly through his refusal to acknowledge the war as pre-existing to Dalinars decision to truly unite the high princes - the gist of his believing the two above 'things' to be similar is perhaps clearest in this single paragraph : Their methods are similar to me. Dalinar is attempting to lead Alethkar by killing anyone those who do not follow his orders (see: threatening the highprince with execution), and is attempting to unite the Highprinces by having them kill Parshendi together. Taravangian is killing anyone who could conceivably not follow his orders (maybe, we don't know his whole plan). There are differences, yes, but they seem rather similar in methods to me; Dalinar is just more open about what he's doing. Both are trying to unite people through slaughter. As mentioned earlier - what I said was simply a summary of his postings, and an acknowledgement that there's little point debating when their is no common ground in beliefs. Gloom started another thread - similar statements - though not quite as far. Rather than highjacking that thread, I posted here where the discussion started, because he would likely read this. If anyone feels how I've summarised to be inaccurate, please feel free to state which summarised statements are inaccurate - 'why' you believe it is inaccurate would be helpful too.

Hi Swimmingly - that is actually a summary of the things he's said. Everything is quotable. Nor is there anger as you percieve. Pretty much straight after this, I upvoted Moogles latest theory, which was quite good. My last post was simply an acknowledgement that the differences in viewpoint on this particular subject won't find a common ground...and therefore debate doesn't achieve anything.

I really like the gist of where Moogle went with this - the only problem I see is that the Parshendi would have used storm form during previous desolations (when they knew so many more forms)...so why weren't all the previous desolations 'Everstorms'?

Having thought about this - Moogle arguments lead to the conclusions that: He doesn't see any meaningful difference between: - assassinations and war - a murderer and a soldier - secretive and open - allowing one to defend yourself and not He also doesn't comprehend : - obeying the laws of the land you are in - that leaders of a peoples assassinating a king starts a war with those peoples Nor does he comprehend the difference between : - using a pre-existing and current war to unite your side; and - assassinating leaders around the world to take over (note the similarity in both is that they are trying to unit their people to save their peoples) Having a little time to think about it - the inability to comprehend such differences, and the views that incomprehension generate are so 'different' that there's little point arguing the difference between Dalinar and Mr T with such existing differences in posters.

Previous Thread - 'Darkness caused the recreance'

I note that in arguing against the differences, you are now starting to point out the differences, even though you don't appear to realise it. As for what the difference matters to the dead - it doesn't...nothing matters to the dead. It's the difference it makes to the living. In any case, I have to head off to work.

Uh...as can be clearly seen from his thoughts after...that was ill-conceived on his part, and something he was not going to carry through, and did not carry through. Mr T on the other hand, has thought his method through thoroughly, and does carry through to murder other leaders. One you can face / attack, let the world know - the other you can't. One you can gather allies against - the other you can't. One puts his public name & reputation to the action - the other doesn't. Hmm...now you are changing your own statement - you were arguing that Dalinar threatened to kill Elokhar if Elokhar didn't do as he said. It is obvious from his thoughts and reasoning that was not what he was doing. His pummelling of Elokhar was to prove that he did not wish to kill him. This is obvious. They were on Alethi land, in the Alethi Palace, and I doubt anyone else would ever try argue they weren't bound by Alethi laws while there, not to murder the Alethi King. 4 or 5 of the Parshendi leaders...invited to lead a treaty...were responsible for Gavilar's death...knowing it would lead to open war...and Killed the King anyway. Mr T...no comparable peoples have assasinated major leader in his country...with no declaration of war...is from secret... killing most all the leaders of other peoples. No...those two statements aren't similar. They have some similarities...but so would a statement about two people who have killed someone else - one in self defense, and one because he felt like it. Bearing some similarities does not necessarily make something 'similar'. There are so many differences it's amazing that you are attempting to argue how similar they are. ......................... Now if you want to say that both are killing other people - that is accurate And if you want to say that Dalinar wants to unite Alethkar and Mr T wants to unit the Human Race - that is accurate Putting the 2 statements together though is misleading for numerous reason, and treating those two statements as the whole and method is also misleading for numerous reasons. They are however, accurate as separate statements.

Huh...by it's very definition, legalised 'murder' is not murder. 'Murder' is otherwise known and defined as unlawful homicide. Now if you want to say homicide is homicide whether legal or not - that is actually the case. You also have no evidence for this statement. 'Gaining power'by the sword/through the sword' is always a phrase referencing gaining power over someone/a peoples through killing people with the sword - who are members of the people you are trying to gain power over (though there are more complex versions of this). This is not the case with Dalinar while it is the case with Mr T. There are some rather distinct differences between the two : - Dalinar wants to unite Alethkar/the High Princes and isn't murdering them to do it Vs Mr T is murdering the leaders of the ones he wants to Unite - the Parshendi murdered (in this case correctly used) Dalinars brother & king Vs the leaders Mr T is murdering didn't do any such thing - War was declared on the Parshendi for the above assassination of the Alethi King, Vs Mr.T's no such war existing for the ones he's murdering - Said war is being conducted openly by known combatants, while no one knows who Szeth the murdering assassins master is So it's rather bemusing that you would attempt to say they are both pretty much comparable in any way except the end goal (united Alethkar for Dalinar / United Human Race for Mr T.) Nothing (in terms of murder) - neither the codes, nor the Way of Kings allows him to murder...openly conquer maybe, but not murder. So no matter how you try to make his actions into a threat...it remains clear that he did what he did to show an immensely paranoid king & nephew that he did not, and never would, murder said king & nephew (because if he ever had wanted to, he simply could have)

Who made any statement that his actions were a Divine right? Err Moogle, Dalinar specifically states that he would never kill Elokhar. He did tell Elohkar that if Elohkar behaved like a child, then he (Dalinar) would treat him like a child...which he immediately started doing to a certain degree. .................... And you are also exactly right with the High Princes wishing to rebel. It's a foreseeable and understandable consequence - hence another plan is needed to bring them in line...without murdering people (yes, that's a shot at both Mr T, and Amaram) ...................... And they did however swear fealty to the King - they don't know what Dalinar did to become High Prince of War - and so they are in essence rebelling against the King.As Dalinar's general noted - if the proclomation doesn't work, it will undermine the throne itself. So the point with the King still stands. .................... The questions that appear pertinent to this discussion are : - what are you prepared to do to achieve a unified, just, and peaceful kingdom? - what are you prepared to do to save the world?; and more specifically - if it is necessary to unify to save the world, and people won't unify - what are you prepared to do in order to achieve that unification? In the first question, we see Nohadon's solution - which arguably isn't too much different than Dalinar's. Dalinar appears to be trying to do it without 'the sword', though he only got to that position through the sword several years prior. We see Mr T's method for achieving the last question. And it contrasts directly to Dalinar's method, though Dalinar is not quite as certain about the nature and breadth of the threat. You posit it as a question about justification, while I see it as a balance between necessity and human right/compassion/cohesion etc - in differing circumstances the weightings will be different.

Goodpoint Malazanwhiskey ! That said - was he fighting for shards, or just out to kill someone?

I can't buy Sadeas' duel with Rock's master as being cowardly. It seems to me that Sadeas looks down on anyone not Highprince, and probably anyone not Alethi. Cowardly wouldn't have come into his decision. Condescension and greed in quantities yes, but cowardice? And how do you reconcile this 'cowardice' with his desire for battle, including almost getting smashed to death by a dozen Parshendi - and then thinking it was the most wonderful of days? (that does bring up the definition of cowardice, but that's a more complex discussion) Personally I don't think Sadeas has dueled anyone else for shards because of his condescension for everyone else...he is way to proud to duel - even the son of Alethkar's most powerful High Prince. .................... And I find it an interesting perspective that what Adolin is doing is sleazy. Bullying, I would buy...and in adulthood, sometimes there's a time to be a 'bully', despite the 'bullying is always bad' extreme that well meaning people make of it. This is particularly notable in the military, where obedience is expected - as co-ordination saves lives, and disobedience is punished - as disco-ordinated operations costs lives. Take that further - when you have a need to work as one, and a section is rebellious - disarmament is a legitimate route to take...as other routes will again, cost lives. When you are a King - and you are faced with rebelliousness...disarmament is again a legitimate course.

The very biggest problem I see with this is that Odium doesn't like to lose - that discussion however, comes from Dalinars vision in the WoR released chapters.

No one has said they are closely regulated, nor that they are suspicious. It's not the spanreed that is suspicious - it's the person who wants it Vs motivation & need to have one Vs national interest. Quite frankly, any monarch who allowed a stormwarden access to senstive information, and then allowed him to willy nilly own a spanreed, deserves to have their plans and economy etc undermined. It would be plain stupidity. That said - I can't quite work out why Brandon has written in stormwardens as advisors in the first place - there doesn't appear to be any given justification for it. The only thing I can come up with is that Mr T has trained people not just to be stormwardens, but to be diplomats...and only the top of the class got sent out.

Stormwardens predict storms based on mathematical calculations. They write in glyphs (from memory). A problem with such a 'network need' arised because panreeds are paired. So the only way such a network would function properly at all, would be to have each stormwardens spanreed paired with a centralised set of spanreeds. From that centralised location, reports could then be sent to the appropriate receivers. Even with an East-West (or was it West-East) movement of highstorms, they are obviously wide, and you would still want to notify many people. So, the Kings & High-Princes would know that all the information is centralised...and they know that stormwardens are foreigners...and said foreigners sit in on their meetings / advise them / have access to their lords....they absolutely will want control over what information the stormwardens send & received... ...which is so easily solved by having the stormwardens pass & receive messages through the govt operated spanreeds (which will be just as effective as the stormwardens having their own spanreed) So there is no reason at all for a stormwarden to have a spanreed, and every reason for them not to. As I said - it would be suspicious of them to ask for a personal one.

Healers would be the least suspicious group to own spanreeds. Who is going to argue with a surgeon & wife team who says 'we use spanreeds to assist diagnosiis, share discoveries of cures, seek surgical advice' etc? Stormwardens on the other hand would arouse too much suspicion if they owned spanreeds - but they appear to be trusted advisers - which means they have access to much greater intel. If Mr T controlled both, then the solution is to have the stormwarden 'befriend' the healer.

It's a bit hard to see who will die throughout the whole book. Perhaps if we just limit it to WoR? I don't think Jasnah is going to die in WoR- she is an Elsecaller, with access to the Transportation Surge. I'm sure the boat will sink (or some such) with Jasnah presumed dead (hence Shallan is the one looking for Urithiru), but it's not too hard to see Jasnah surviving by porting out of whatever trouble has befallen the ship. Dalinar is likely the Bondsmith mentioned on the back cover of WoR, and Brandon did say he would have a book. His survival for at least 4/5th of WoR means he puts Kaladin in charge of the reformed Knights Radiant - which will make sense Dalinar once it's confirmed that Kaladin is bonded to an honourspren, is a natural leader as is, and has some practice with the surges. So using Kaladin's leadership of the KR as evidence for Dalinar's death doesn't work. I'm going Sigzil, Dalinar's general, and Danlan for WoR - no real reason except possible plot mechanics.

Oops on the Szeth thing. And even a king can break his own laws. And he's also ordered the assassination of leaders the world over, breaking those countries laws. In terms of High Prince deaths (etc), Taravangian is the equivalent of a world spanning mobster...he may not do the killing himself, but he does order his henchman to.

To Darkness, Justice is everything - more important than stopping a desolation. We see this in the Lift Interlude. What reason then, would Darkness have to allow Szeth to run free? What reason could he possibly have not to bring Taravangian to justice?

I don't see why it would be 'too convenient' for the Parshendi to be voidbringers...considering they are consolidated as voidbringers only near the end of WoK. The back cover of WoR, the Eshonai Interlude/chapter, and Syl's view point of the new spren all seem to very strongly back Jasnah's position.

If it's very difficult to invest something that is already invested (Brandon's words if I remember right), then you virtually can't affect someone else in shardplate - we see this with Szeth's battle planning. Just as obviously, in Dalinar's Starfalls vision, we see the windrunner flying, by using gravity for lift off, and the pressure surge on landing. Therefore there has to be an explanation for how the Windrunner can lash through shardplate. My explanation is that the invested shardplate is the exact same investment that invests the windrunner. It other words, the Windrunner does not attempt to affect things through an invested object...because the shardplate is the windrunners investment. This can only be possible through the windrunners spren...and it is why their was a betrayal at the recreance - they gave up their bond to the spren, and those spren went 'stupid' - effectively dying. If spren are living ideas...it will also explain Adolin's reactions to his sword. Funnily enough - he may even be able to bring it back to life - just because he believes so strongly that it is living. As Adolin duels more...we may actually find two honourspren on Roshar

Amaram's actions were certainly reprehensible. There was 'justification' - just no acceptable justification. Except perhaps a general betraying his men to be slaughtered by the enemy, or a leader slaughtering millions for their own enrichment (or his/her own countries glory), or ordering a minority slaughtered for the sake of your own popularity, or working people to death for no purpose except you can...etc. All that said...I'm glad your soldiers are in good hands.

In Dalinar's WoR vision, it appears that this is incorrect. The formation of the Knights Radiant surprised Honor.