Timewaster's Guide Archive

Local Authors => Brandon Sanderson => Topic started by: Kykeon on September 15, 2010, 07:39:46 PM

Title: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Kykeon on September 15, 2010, 07:39:46 PM
At the end of the book, a figure that seems to be the 10th herald breaks down in front of Hoid.
Who do you think will get his armor & blade, and do you think this will be important for the story?
Is it one of the "Dawnshards"?
Why are they sent to "hell" after each death?
I hope I'm not spewing nonsense, lol.
Title: Re: Who will get the 10th herald's blade? Is it one of the "Dawnshards"?
Post by: Munin on September 15, 2010, 07:52:57 PM
He's not dead.

Also, you should really edit the thread title so it doesn't give out huge spoilers.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Phaz on September 15, 2010, 08:25:25 PM
At the end of the book, a figure that seems to be the 10th herald breaks down in front of Hoid.
Who do you think will get his armor & blade, and do you think this will be important for the story?
Is it one of the "Dawnshards"?
Why are they sent to "hell" after each death?
I hope I'm not spewing nonsense, lol.

If you read the description of his blade it comes off as being very spear-like.  Thus I'd say eventually it ends up in the hands of Kal.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Random112 on September 15, 2010, 09:11:34 PM
Okay I'm confused.

I thought that if a Shardbearer dropped his or her Blade, it would dissipate, to prevent it being taken? It says the Herald's Blade didn't dissipate, so I would think he WAS dead?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Pechvarry on September 15, 2010, 09:26:48 PM
Read the Prelude again.  Heralds' blades behave the opposite.  They only disappear when their bearer dies.   Something else I find worthy of note: Taln leaned on his sword with the point into the ground, and it only cut a finger's breadth in.  A  normal shardblade would've, in theory, dropped clear to the hilt.

Of course, if it were his dawnshard or dawnblade or whatever you wanna call it, I would've expected it to be described more as more ornate than it was (see the Prelude again, on the beautiful flowing designs on all the other weapons).
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: VegasDev on September 15, 2010, 09:44:53 PM
I don't have my book in front of me right now so this is going more from memory but I thought that in the section where the King gets knocked to the ground by the Chasmfiend and his sword dissipates, that it mentions that a sword could remain solid if you willed it.

There may be differences in the blades themselves though because in one section it mentions that someones sword was really long and would be unwieldy by someone without full shardplate but in another section Dalinar mentions that the blades are practically light as air. He could of course be factoring in shardplate. In any case, I'll have to reread the book to come across the exact quotes again but I remember thinking, that it was odd.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: douglas on September 15, 2010, 10:39:10 PM
Something else I find worthy of note: Taln leaned on his sword with the point into the ground, and it only cut a finger's breadth in.† A† normal shardblade would've, in theory, dropped clear to the hilt.

As I recall, he dragged it rather than leaning on it, though I haven't gone back and checked the book to be sure.† If he angled it so that the flat of the blade is downward, it would naturally not cut very far.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Kykeon on September 17, 2010, 09:01:42 AM
Read the Prelude again.† Heralds' blades behave the opposite.† They only disappear when their bearer dies.† †Something else I find worthy of note: Taln leaned on his sword with the point into the ground, and it only cut a finger's breadth in.† A† normal shardblade would've, in theory, dropped clear to the hilt.

Of course, if it were his dawnshard or dawnblade or whatever you wanna call it, I would've expected it to be described more as more ornate than it was (see the Prelude again, on the beautiful flowing designs on all the other weapons).
Hoid has seen many things on many different worlds, so he probably wouldn't mentioned it in his mind...
A herald's blade disappears because they are reincarnated over and over again.
Since the catastrophe announced by the visions is called "The true desolation", this cycle is no longer necessary, and the blade remains when it's bearer dies.
Or maybe not, lol.  :-\

Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Castleguard on September 17, 2010, 10:19:38 AM
I don't think he is dead. If I where to guess I would say that you could only get one of the Heralds Blades if it is given to you.  Of course if you have one of there blades then maybe you would become a Herald.

 
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Cheese Ninja on September 18, 2010, 10:11:15 PM
I thought he might be dead, since he was prodded and didn't move, and since the sword didn't disappear (but, as well already mentioned, if it's his Herald's blade, it behaves by different rules.), but I was reading some of Sanderson's online interviews just now.

http://yetistomper.blogspot.com/2010/09/brandon-sanderson-interview-stompingmad.html

Quote
At this point I believe you have met every one of the major viewpoint characters for the series. I donít want it to spiral out of control. I think too many viewpoint characters is a danger to epic fantasy, putting a writer in difficult predicaments for subsequent books--whether to leave some characters out, or whether to show a little bit of each of them without getting any major plot arcs for any of them.

So youíve seen pretty much everybody. Now, at this point there are several who are major viewpoint characters for the series who we have not had many or any viewpoints from yet--Jasnah is one, a character who shows up in the epilogue is another, and there are a few others--but there are in my mind essentially eight or ten major characters in this series, and it will stick to that.

If Taln was dead, he wouldn't be getting any viewpoint scenes.  And I really don't know why he'd be waving around a normal shardblade instead of his Herald blade.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: AndrewMM on September 19, 2010, 04:25:56 AM
Okay, he is not dead. Also as has been stated previously by others the blades of the heralds do not dissipate when dropped. I am pretty sure that the blades of the heralds are dawn-shards. From the prelude one herald died in the final battle before the breaking of the oath pact. The other nine go their separate ways leaving the one who died still bound by the oath pact, this Herald being of course Talenel. His shard being spear like perhaps he will in time give it to Kaladin but, no he is not dead now.



AndrewMM


Life before Death, Strength before Weakness, Journey before Destination
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 19, 2010, 05:44:19 AM
So far, the only real information on the Dawnshards that we have comes from Jasnah's notes in the epigraphs:

'Taking the Dawnshard, known to bind any creature voidish or mortal, he crawled up the steps crafted for Heralds, ten strides tall apiece, toward the grand temple above."

I'm curious as to exactly what "bind" means in this context.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 20, 2010, 08:33:09 AM
So far, the only real information on the Dawnshards that we have comes from Jasnah's notes in the epigraphs:

'Taking the Dawnshard, known to bind any creature voidish or mortal, he crawled up the steps crafted for Heralds, ten strides tall apiece, toward the grand temple above."

I'm curious as to exactly what "bind" means in this context.

Binded to the oathpact maybe?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 20, 2010, 02:04:10 PM
So far, the only real information on the Dawnshards that we have comes from Jasnah's notes in the epigraphs:

'Taking the Dawnshard, known to bind any creature voidish or mortal, he crawled up the steps crafted for Heralds, ten strides tall apiece, toward the grand temple above."

I'm curious as to exactly what "bind" means in this context.

Binded to the oathpact maybe?
Well, it says it can bind "voidish" creatures, which I assume means Voidbringers. And it doesn't seem to make much sense to be able to bind them into the Oathpact.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 20, 2010, 02:14:00 PM
So far, the only real information on the Dawnshards that we have comes from Jasnah's notes in the epigraphs:

'Taking the Dawnshard, known to bind any creature voidish or mortal, he crawled up the steps crafted for Heralds, ten strides tall apiece, toward the grand temple above."

I'm curious as to exactly what "bind" means in this context.

Binded to the oathpact maybe?
Well, it says it can bind "voidish" creatures, which I assume means Voidbringers. And it doesn't seem to make much sense to be able to bind them into the Oathpact.

If a voidish creature can be binded in some way or form maybe we will see some bond between Kaladin and Shen?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 20, 2010, 02:45:40 PM
Or perhaps "binding" them is what changed the Parshendi into the Parshmen.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 21, 2010, 04:31:52 AM
Or perhaps "binding" them is what changed the Parshendi into the Parshmen.

Then what would happen if you bonded a creature mortal? (i.e. human)
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 21, 2010, 04:56:26 AM
Or perhaps "binding" them is what changed the Parshendi into the Parshmen.

Then what would happen if you bonded a creature mortal? (i.e. human)
You get a Surgebinder?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 21, 2010, 05:13:31 AM
Or perhaps "binding" them is what changed the Parshendi into the Parshmen.

Then what would happen if you bonded a creature mortal? (i.e. human)
You get a Surgebinder?

That would mean that the bonds where different, because one comes from the Almighty while the other comes from Odium. (assuming that the voidbringers come from Odium).
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Terrisman243 on September 21, 2010, 07:16:14 AM
Except for one thing- The Parshendi aren't of Hate (Which is what Odium means). They seem to have deep respect for their dead and for those in battle. When they are fighting Kaladin, they focus on the more experienced people rather than the weakest, which is what an Alethi would be more likely to do.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 21, 2010, 09:15:55 AM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 21, 2010, 02:18:56 PM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 21, 2010, 02:53:19 PM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.

How would you define assassinating Gavilar? It is not too much of a stretch to say he was killed because of hate. He have no idea what there motives behind that move was. How about declaring war? War is usually driven by hate. What's there motive behind the war? we just dont know. It could very well be hate.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 21, 2010, 02:56:34 PM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.

How would you define assassinating Gavilar? It is not too much of a stretch to say he was killed because of hate. He have no idea what there motives behind that move was. How about declaring war? War is usually driven by hate. What's there motive behind the war? we just dont know. It could very well be hate.
It is a stretch to say that he was killed because of hate, because so far, they haven't shown any emotional animosity towards any humans, and we have no idea why they killed him in the first place.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Stormblessed on September 21, 2010, 03:08:36 PM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.

How would you define assassinating Gavilar? It is not too much of a stretch to say he was killed because of hate. He have no idea what there motives behind that move was. How about declaring war? War is usually driven by hate. What's there motive behind the war? we just dont know. It could very well be hate.
It is a stretch to say that he was killed because of hate, because so far, they haven't shown any emotional animosity towards any humans, and we have no idea why they killed him in the first place.

My point exactly. We cannot say for certain it is hate, but neither can we rule it out.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Kierlionn on September 21, 2010, 04:28:12 PM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.

How would you define assassinating Gavilar? It is not too much of a stretch to say he was killed because of hate. He have no idea what there motives behind that move was. How about declaring war? War is usually driven by hate. What's there motive behind the war? we just dont know. It could very well be hate.
It is a stretch to say that he was killed because of hate, because so far, they haven't shown any emotional animosity towards any humans, and we have no idea why they killed him in the first place.

My point exactly. We cannot say for certain it is hate, but neither can we rule it out.
We might not be able to rule it out but I find it highly unlikely that it is hate due to the way they treat their enemy on the battle field. Why would hateful people show respect and honor.
Hateful people would have attacked Kaladin as soon as his back was to him and he was going for their shardbearer.
Hateful people wouldn't salute someone for being able to flee, to would be angry.
So where you can't say with 100% surety that it isn't hate, it doesn't seem very likely.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 21, 2010, 05:21:21 PM
We might not be able to rule it out but I find it highly unlikely that it is hate due to the way they treat their enemy on the battle field. Why would hateful people show respect and honor.
Hateful people would have attacked Kaladin as soon as his back was to him and he was going for their shardbearer.
Hateful people wouldn't salute someone for being able to flee, to would be angry.
So where you can't say with 100% surety that it isn't hate, it doesn't seem very likely.
Exactly.

In my opinion, "respectful violence" describes the Parshendi. Hatred really doesn't enter the equation.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Zahdemano on September 21, 2010, 06:05:54 PM
I am not convinced that the Parshendi are the ones to have Galivar killed. Maybe the alliance would have stopped the mass chaos that is sure to ensue in that world. perhaps the key to victory is in the shattered plains, after all if the Parshendi wanted Galivar dead why not kill him themselves or with there own assasin, why hire a Shin?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Munin on September 21, 2010, 06:56:39 PM
I am not convinced that the Parshendi are the ones to have Galivar killed. Maybe the alliance would have stopped the mass chaos that is sure to ensue in that world. perhaps the key to victory is in the shattered plains, after all if the Parshendi wanted Galivar dead why not kill him themselves or with there own assasin, why hire a Shin?
Then why did they claim responsibility for the assassination?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: happyman on September 21, 2010, 10:15:53 PM
I am not convinced that the Parshendi are the ones to have Galivar killed. Maybe the alliance would have stopped the mass chaos that is sure to ensue in that world. perhaps the key to victory is in the shattered plains, after all if the Parshendi wanted Galivar dead why not kill him themselves or with there own assasin, why hire a Shin?

Because Szeth is really, really good at it and they aren't?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: dria on September 22, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
I think it's possible that the Parshendi were misled by some other party into killing Galivar, but I don't have any doubt that they made the order. That said, I don't think it's very likely that someone else talked them into it. I think there is a reason that the Parshendi killed him, although we don't know it yet. The scene with Dalinar and the Parshendi Shardbearer near the end of the book could have something to do with it. They needed to get Dalinar out into the Shattered Plains for some reason, or something along those lines.
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: guy on September 22, 2010, 06:45:41 PM
the parshendi could be following the lines of Taravangian, maybe they didnt want all of the highprinces to become unified.  and why did the parshendi agree to the alliance in the first place if they would just kill him? and why did Gavilar want to make a peace treaty with them anyways?
Title: Re: RE: Hoids aquaintance at the end of the book and the nature of his sword. (SPOILER)
Post by: Ari54 on September 25, 2010, 02:17:07 AM
Do we really know enough about the parshendi to judge whether they are motivated by hate? Everything they have done is clouded in mystery, making it hard to discern their true motives.
We know how they act.

Either they're not motivated by hate, or their definition of "hate" is very different from ours.

Or this is how they act when they aren't actively touched by Odium. We have enough information to make a few assumptions, but even whether Jasnah's assumptions about the voidbringers are true is debatable. Trying to figure out Odium's exact connections with the Parshmen or Parshendi from what we have is reaching too far, imo.

I'm not saying we can't speculate, but that we don't really have a basis to treat any of our assumptions about the Parsh- whatevers as fact yet.