Timewaster's Guide Archive
Local Authors => Brandon Sanderson => Topic started by: GeekMan on September 30, 2010, 08:53:30 PM
-
Ever since I finished the book I've been confused about a seemingly trivial, yet illogical and (in my eyes) inexcusable, point about the battles on the Shattered Plains.
The war has been going on for 6 years and not once have the Parshendi shot fire arrows at the bridges and bridgemen? How is it that the armies can't set up permanent bridges too far outside of their camps for fear of the Parshendi burning them down during raids, yet not once in 6 years have the Parshendi tried to burn the mobile bridges assaulting their plateaus? That makes no sense to me at all and I hope that Mr. Sanderson will address this in a later book because it made the assaults completely unrealistic to me. I cannot imagine that the Parshendi didn't think of it, so what I'd like to know is why they never did it. Honestly, after Kaladin started wearing their dead and they saw how the arrows were pulled towards him and embedded into his shield, how could they have NOT thought of shooting some fire arrows his way?
While we're at it, in the final battle at the Tower, the Parshendi jumped across the chasm and fired on Bridge 4. Why didn't they ever do that before? The bridgemen were always unarmed and basically undefended. The Parshendi could have jumped across en masse and killed nearly all the charging bridge crewmen during every assault. And it wouldn't have taken many Parshendi to do it, maybe 4 or 6 per bridge. Kill 10 bridgemen and then leap back across the chasm. Why didn't they ever do that?
And why didn't anyone think to assault a plateau from underneath? Send a few hundred men into a chasm, they work their way around to the other side while the main army fights as usual and then, using ladders, they climb up behind enemy lines. No one tried that, even once as an experiment, during 6 years of war?
And one last thing. Why didn't anyone on either side have any siege weapons? No arbalests, no catapults, nothing. After all the years of fighting for what were basically towers surrounded by deep moats, no one thought of using a siege weapon to kill more foes?
Sorry for the little rant here, but this is one aspect of an otherwise awesome book that has had me pulling out my hair in frustration. I really hope Mr. Sanderson has an explanation for all this, because I really want to know.
-
I can address a few, but they're just my opinion.
Assault from underneath would be risky because of the highstorms flooding the chasm, and they were said to be at least 40 feet deep with some being over 100 feet I think. That wouldn't be easy to climb up for anyone, especially not soldiers with weapons and all that. It just wouldn't be a practical way to fight, especially for only a few hundred soldiers, and it would be slow. These battles were about getting to the Heart. It wouldn't take long for the Parshendi to notice them, and everyone in the chasm would be screwed that hadn't already made it up, although, the ones who did make it up would probably already be dead, so... lose/lose.
Not sure that siege weapons would be very effective in a battle of this type, remember, they haven't really been trying to win for a long time. It's all about mobility and speed to get to the Heart first. A catapult would be pointless in this type of battle.
-
****POSSIBLE SPOILERS BECAME DEFINITE SPOILERS --- YOU'VE BEEN WARNED****
I would stress that a lot of your concerns from the Alethi point of view Dalinar is also annoyed with. Since the focus of their war has turned to primarily a game of speed-capture, seige weaponry would probably take too long to arrive at the battle field.
As far as assault from underneath - same logic. During the clean-the-chasm duty, they mention how easy it is to get lost in the chasms, and that getting to a specific chasm is very difficult and time consuming. By the time they reached the plateau, even if it were an easy climb, the gemheart would have already been taken.
As far as using fire on the mobile bridgemen...I think this goes towards something about the Parshendi that we haven't learned yet. Their is an odd sense of honor there, and there's definitely something...odd...about their behavior towards the bridgemen, even before Kaladin starts wearing their dead. Sadeas mentions how it was less effective to give the bridgemen shields, and that he wants to be able to focus the Parshendi arrow fire onto the bridgemen so that his calvary and foot soldiers aren't demolished.
A possible explanation -- the Parshendi are definitely a lot more similar to the Alethi than they realize. Look at their ability to utilize strategic withdrawl, their holding back of their shardbearers, and a few other moments in battle that seem to suggest they are more than simple barbarians. So to me, they understand that what the war has become is a skirmish over resources. Perhaps they feel that using fire on the bridgeman is either dishonorable, or that it would force the Alethi to really focus on destroying the Parshendi, instead of simply fighting for gemhearts.
-
brycex99
OK, the attacking from below was a little forced on my part, but I still stand by the other points. As for catapults not being useful, how about a few bucketfuls of Greek Fire (or similar)? Surround the plateau, shoot burning pitch all over it and the Parshendi, wait for the flames to die and then waltz over to harvest the gemheart. Seems like that might lead to a pretty decisive win to me. Especially since the Parshendi jump over chasms and thus couldn't bring their own catapults with them to return fire.
JustTee
The Parshendi may have a sense of honor that prevents them from using fire on the bridgemen, but why not on Kaladin after he started wearing their dead? It seems to me that the Parshendi saw Kaladin and the crew of bridge 4 as so vile that they were willing to change their tactics just for them by jumping across the chasm to fire on the bridgemen. Somehow, I don't think using fire against them is too hard to see happening in the future.
The siege weapon idea may have problems due to transport if you're trying to get to the plateau first, but if you only need to get there before the Parshendi can escape with the gemheart then I don't see why it wasn't used. As I said above, surround the plateau, shoot burning pitch all over it and the Parshendi, wait for the flames to die and then waltz over to harvest the gemheart. Seems like a good idea to me.
-
The war has been going on for 6 years and not once have the Parshendi shot fire arrows at the bridges and bridgemen? How is it that the armies can't set up permanent bridges too far outside of their camps for fear of the Parshendi burning them down during raids, yet not once in 6 years have the Parshendi tried to burn the mobile bridges assaulting their plateaus?
A couple points.
One, I don't think the bridge crews have existed in Sadeas' present form for all 6 years. If that were the case, it doesn't seem like we'd be reading as much as we did about the novelty of his tactic. I can hardly believe all the other Alethi High Princes would sit by for six whole years and let Sadeas have free reign over the hunts without trying to counter with their own similar bridge crew setups. As bad as Sadeas is, he still seems to have more honor and decency than some of the other High Princes.
Two, it's not clear to me how effective a tactic it would be to try lighting the bridges on fire. The gemheart battles seem to happen pretty quickly, and I don't think you're really going to be able to do much damage to a bridge before its crew can get it in place and the troops can start storming across it. Maybe you could burn it so the troops can't cross back, but except for [GIANT SPOILER] retreating across bridges never seems to be too big a deal.
Fire was an excellent weapon in ancient naval battles, but remember that (a) you're stuck on the burning boat once it starts burning, and (b) there's substantially more flammable stuff going into classical boats, like sailcloth and pitch. Wood alone just doesn't catch on fire that quickly.
-
Plus you're assuming that the Parsh or the Alethi have something like pitch or naptha. Without that medium, using fire as a weapon is more difficult.
As for attacking through the chasms, bear in mind as well that in addition to getting lost or having trouble climbing up, down in the chasms is where things like chasmfiends live. A single chasmfiend of decent size could potentially rip hundreds of men to shreds (it took three Shardbearers to defeat the one that we see in Chapter 12). And we don't even know what else lives down there... wild axehounds, giant megapedes, who knows?
-
Geek, I wasn't necessarily meaning the weapons themselves would be ineffective, but rather the time it took to get them there. Can't really force march a catapult. Depending on how things go in the next book, we'll probably see more siege warfare, that is if the Parshendi are even enemies in the next book.
I still don't have a good idea on why the Parshendi wouldn't use fire on the bridge crews... do they use fire in other parts of the book? The Alethi had a fear of the bridges being burned, but had they actually been burned before? Have they ever used fire on other living creatures? I'm not sure what the Parshendi relationship with fire is, and I can't recall much being said about it off the top of my head.
As for the jumping across the chasms thing.. there are a few things that I'm not sure about. Parshendi can clearly jump larger distances, but how large? Can they jump a chasm that needs a bridge to cross? Can they jump in and out as much as they want? Even if they can, jumping across into the bulk of the Alethi army would surely be a suicide mission, even if they managed to kill some of the bridge crews. If I were a military commander, I would say shooting arrows into the bridge crews is the most effective way to stop them, rather than needlessly risking 6 to 10 of my men per bridge on a jump across.
-
Alright, the fire thing may be a moot point if there's no equivalent to Greek fire and as I stated earlier the attack from the chasm idea wasn't fully thought through on my part. However, if the bridge crews were worried about fire, then I don't think it's too farfetched to believe that there's some Greek fire equivalent that could be used to burn attacking wooden structures. But let's look at this from another angle.
If the bridges are made of wood and they're the most important thing needed by the Alethi to get to a plateau quickly and efficiently, then by definition they become the linchpin of every battle. They are the one weak point in every attack made on the plateaus. As such, both the Parshendi and the Alethi would focus their efforts on those bridges. The Parshendi on destroying them quickly and the Alethi by protecting them. So, with that established here's a few simple but effective ideas for both sides.
The Parshendi could use caltrops on the likely Alethi approaches which would disable the bridgemen, or at least slow them considerably. They could use fire arrows on the bridges, and even if most of the bridges themselves didn't catch fire immediately, the arrows would still kill bridgemen and might set fire to other nearby bridgemen or even the bridges themselves causing them to collapse during the assault. They could set up a simple spearwall on the opposite edge of the chasm (the attacker side) to slow the assault giving them more time to shoot arrows. Lastly, and most simply, they could wait for the bridges to be placed and then push them into the chasm. They are mobile after all.
The Alethi should have built the bridges with the thought of protecting the bridgemen by encasing them inside the bridge completely. Then, the only thing the Parshendi could possibly shoot at would be their feet or the bridge itself. The people inside carrying the bridge should also have been able to run directly over the chasm, those in front lifting their legs while those behind pushing the bridge over the chasm. Each bridge would need to be longer and heavier, but with more men carrying it it would be quicker to get across. And those who are in the front could climb out from the sides and defend the bridge until the cavalry made it across. If people like Sadeas wanted to give the Parshendi something to shoot at then he could include an outer layer of slaves, murderers, etc, that could help carry the bridge and be the focus of arrows.
My ideas are simple and not fully fleshed out, but no matter how I look at it, it seems like the bridges would have HAD to be better protected than they seemed to be. 30 unprotected bridges running towards a chasm with no real support and the Parshendi never tried any other tactic than "shoot the bridgemen?"
Am I the only one who thinks that this doesn't make ANY sense?
-
Nope. Dalinar thinks so too. ;D
Covered bridges would probably be too heavy to carry... the bridges as they are require a couple dozen men at minimum, and preferably around 30-40. At one point Kaladin begins to make suggestions for how to protect his men, even going so far as to use the bridge itself as a shield, but he soon discovers that bridgemen are not meant to survive, they're meant to draw fire. Sadeas (and anyone else using his type of bridges) wants the Parshendi to shoot the bridgemen, because then they're not shooting his troops.
Pushing the bridges off during the initial contact or after is a concern which is mentioned in the text. This is why the Alethi army provides return fire with their own volleys, to try and push back the Parshendi before they perform a cavalry charge. Heck, in the final push across they sometimes even use soldiers with shields, as seen in Kaladin's first battle.
Caltrops as a Parshendi defense aren't a bad idea in principle, assuming that the Parsh have them and that they're views on fighting don't somehow preclude the use of such a weapon. Plus you really have to watch out that you don't end up stepping on them yourself (though if you throw them onto the bridge and opposing plateau you should be alright, so long as you stay on your side. But so far they haven't used anything except axes and swords, until the battle at the Tower when they're seen to be using spears (and which is noted as Parshendi finally changing their tactics, which indicates they have a rigid viewpoint on how battles are conducted, for some reason).
Remember that most of the Alethi generals don't care all that much about survival rates if they can win more gems. Dalinar cares, which is why he uses a series of siege towers to cross the plateaus. But that's because Dalinar is thinking like a general at war, and the rest of the Highprinces are thinking like coaches or team owners in a sporting event. The Parshendi may be doing something similar, which is why they so rarely bring out their Shardbearers (instead of using them as much as possible)... perhaps the Parshendi don't see this as "war" either, and the humans might want to be grateful for that.
-
Nope. Dalinar thinks so too. ;D
That's too funny!
-
That's actually a good point Inkthinker... Dalinar thinks the whole war is just weird in a way. Neither side is really acting "normal" when it comes to the fighting, and he spends a lot of time thinking about that in the book.
Still, other than the fire issue, I can't really see too much to question in terms of how the fighting went down throughout the book considering the attitude of the Alethi.
-
Yeah, its mentioned often that the Alethi aren't trying very hard to just outright witn the war. Also, like someone else said, it doesn't seem like the bridgecrews have been used for very long (I'd say less than a year for sure).
Parshendi aren't dumb, and neither are the Alethi, but neither side is trying to win the war either.
-
Alright. Let's say I accept all the reasoning so far and believe that the war has actually become a giant game of capture the flag with "rules" both sides are following for their own reasons about how to fight. For example; it's okay to shoot bridgemen with arrows, but not fire arrows and once the bridge is laid down they are to be ignored. Fine.
Then why doesn't someone other than Sadeas try smaller bridges that armored and armed men carry to the chasms? A ten-man team could carry a 30' walkway-type bridge while a few other warriors hold shields to deflect arrows. Lay the bridge and the small group of men cross to create a staging area for more bridges and men. Slower, larger bridges arrive later. The smaller bridges could even interlock to make a larger bridge for more men. That would be faster than a large bridge.
I don't know. I guess I'm just having trouble comprehending how the bridges and bridgemen survive even ONE assault when in every other piece of fantasy I've ever read and assault like that would fail spectacularly. As I said before, this is the one thing about the book that is causing me to pull my hair out in frustration.
I can't imagine why Dalinar hasn't gone berserk yet!
-
As for Caltrops, I'm not sure the Parshendi could make them. There are several indications in the text that their fine weaponry might be a relic of Natanatan. Where would they get the metal, and the fuel for the forge fires, when they're besieged in the middle of the shattered plains?
Actually, that's another thing. Where are they getting more arrows? Can wood be soulcast? I forget.
-
At several points in the book, the point is made that the Parshendi are not sophisticated warriors. Honorable, yes. Sophisticated, no. The answer you might be looking for is that they simply haven't thought to use fire in battle.
-
At several points in the book, the point is made that the Parshendi are not sophisticated warriors. Honorable, yes. Sophisticated, no. The answer you might be looking for is that they simply haven't thought to use fire in battle.
And indeed, the fact that they aren't good tacticians is the main reason they don't completely mop the floor with the Alethi. They have every physical advantage over them, but the Alethi can keep up because of their superior tactics.
-
Then why doesn't someone other than Sadeas try smaller bridges that armored and armed men carry to the chasms? A ten-man team could carry a 30' walkway-type bridge while a few other warriors hold shields to deflect arrows. Lay the bridge and the small group of men cross to create a staging area for more bridges and men. Slower, larger bridges arrive later. The smaller bridges could even interlock to make a larger bridge for more men. That would be faster than a large bridge.
I don't know. I guess I'm just having trouble comprehending how the bridges and bridgemen survive even ONE assault when in every other piece of fantasy I've ever read and assault like that would fail spectacularly. As I said before, this is the one thing about the book that is causing me to pull my hair out in frustration.
Many bridge crews don't survive, a good concentrated volley of arrows is sufficient to wipe out a crew (or at least stop them from placing their bridge). This is why Sadeas attacks with as many as 20 bridges in a single assault, and while Brandon doesn't call out numbers I would guess that maybe half those bridges are actually laid (he only says that enough bridges are laid to effect a cavalry charge).
You're right in that the tactics you describe would be more effective in saving lives, but as Kaladin comes to realize, bridgemen are supposed to die. They're moving targets, cannon-fodder who's apparent purpose is to lay bridges, but their actual purpose is to draw fire from the fighting troops, because the Parshendi don't appear to very discriminating in terms of target acquisition. I'm surprised that Sadeas doesn't make all his bridgemen wear giant bulls-eye targets on their tunics.
Parshendi appear to run out of arrows before too long, this is noted in a couple engagements (most notably Kaladin's final). And it really isn't clear how well-supplied either army actually is with arrows... archery isn't mentioned a lot, wood is in short supply, and I don't even know what they use for fletching (no birds on Roshar, remember?). So while they do fire arrows at each other in the initial stages of each battle, that seems to end pretty quickly and it gets down to the choppy work.
On the topic of "fire arrows", I'd point out that flaming arrows are very cool in Hollywood, but less so in reality.
Adding an additional weight (usually a tow made of pitch-soaked string or cloth which is then set on fire) to an arrowhead is a certain way to screw up its ability to fly true, because you've just messed up the balance. There are cases of them being used in warfare, but in all the examples I've heard (with the possible exception of naval warfare) it's usually employed for "plunging fire", where the archers release at a high angle and precise aim is not the point, but rather blanket coverage in the hopes of starting a blaze.
The exchanges of arrows in Plains battles are, I think, almost always "directed fire", with archers firing in low arcs directly at the enemy. While it's sort of easy to hit targets that are bunched together, I'm sure there's plenty of misses too (more so if they're shooting back), and I don't see the need for either army to waste a limited supply of ammunition on a tactic of questionable benefit. As Kaladin learns, in the Alethi army innovation is not rewarded. And it doesn't seem to be part of the Parshendi strategy at all.
-
I don't know. I guess I'm just having trouble comprehending how the bridges and bridgemen survive even ONE assault when in every other piece of fantasy I've ever read and assault like that would fail spectacularly. As I said before, this is the one thing about the book that is causing me to pull my hair out in frustration.
I don't think there would be enough time for the fire thing to work. The Parshendi get off 1-2 volleys before the bridge is laid down I think. So even if they were hit, I don't think they'd easily catch on fire. They don't have sails or anything easily flammable. It's thick wood. I would guess it would be easy to put out a fire on the bridge. Also, in the "bad" runs, they lost 5 out of 20 bridges, which is probably around 150 bridgemen or something which is at least 300 arrows fired (guessing here) and they only have 1-2 tries (I think). So it seems like bridgemen should be able to survive imo.
2 thoughts I have though:
We know the Parshendi provoked the Alethi but we have no idea why. They seemed to have planned the fight on the plains. It could be that they are just giving the Alethi enough resistance so that the Alethi keep fighting, but for whatever reason they don't actually want to win. Breaking the treaty makes no sense with all the information we've been given. I feel like the Parshendi wanted this long drawn out war for some reason. They want the Alethi where they are. If it was too hard for the Alethi, they might not keep fighting, but they could get suspicious if it was too easy. I think the Parshedi are giving just enough resistance to keep going. Although they really don't want to lose the tower, ever, which is why they always bring more people there. Also, once Dalinar and Sadeas joined up, they brought more men to even the match. It really doesn't seem like the Parshendi are trying to "win", just stall.
Has anyone seen the Parshendi burn the bridges? Or do they just assume it was them? Could something else want it to not be super easy for the Alethi so they burn just enough bridges to make them work building new ones? With all the scouts searching for the chasmfiends, which we know they still do at night, how has no one seen the Parshendi burning the bridges (or have they and I missed that?)
-
Inkthinker:
The supply theory actually seems to make the most sense to me and helps me to comprehend how the bridge runs can make sense. With a very limited supply of arrows it WOULD make a gruesome amount of sense to send in cannon fodder to soak up the enemy supply. It might not be the best (or even correct) answer, but if we take it as fact that arrows are in short supply then it would make enough sense that I'm willing to let it go. And now, thinking about it carefully, if the Parshendi run and jump to get to the plateaus then perhaps they can only bring the weapons they can carry themselves, which would mean limited arrows per engagement and not necessarily a limited supply of arrows.
But truthfully, all of this still leaves me (and Dalinar) feeling that there is something truly odd about the entire "war". Both sides don't act or react like any army I've ever read about which leads me to think that either:
1) Mr. Sanderson has a reason why the tactics of both sides work as they do and will explain why things were done this way in a later book, or;
2) He wrote something that seemed "cool" in his head and went with it without fully thinking it through.
Now, having read every one of Mr. Sanderson's books, I believe wholeheartedly that the answer is #1 because I cannot for the life of me believe he would ever do #2.
-
(no birds on Roshar, remember?)
Wow, I didn't realize that. It makes sense though.
Shinovar has at least chickens and doves though. I wonder why they don't sell fetching as much as they do horses. Maybe there's a Roshar plant that makes good enough fletching that no one's ever seen the need to use feathers.
-
I still think fire arrows wouldn't be as effective as you think they might be. Its pretty difficult to light a big log on fire, without drenching it in oil, or some other flammable liquid.. Clearly the Parshendi aren't the smartest (although smarter than the average Parshman) fighters in the world, they have the advantage of size, raw power, and agility. The fact that Alethi teams are getting ANY gemhearts is what should astonish you.
The Parshendi fail miserably in open combat because they don't know how to employ new tactics. The only things they ever changed in the entire novel were:
- Bringing more forces when Sadeas and Dalinar started working together, probably because they saw more enemies, and just thought they should have the same number.
- Focusing fire on Kaladin because he was wearing their dead as armor. But really, I don't think this was "tactical" considering how badly it hurt their chances of winning the battles.
-
To answer part of your question, keep in mind that Wood is not something that's readily available on the Shattered Plains. Most of it is Soulcast, which leaves me with no other conclusion than that is is an extremely dense type of wood since they're likely casting it from readily available Stone. From this we can also conclude that they don't have anything resembling pitch, and it's unlikely they have a source of Oil either.
Now comes the fun part. Take a wooden match. Light it. Hold it against a piece of Oak. Or even a common 2x4 of any kind. How much of it would you expect to ignite? I can tell you that unlike what you see in movies, real wood (or even Soulcast wood) isn't made from 6 parts gasoline and 3 parts gunpowder. It doesn't just ignite and get all explodey.
On top of the fact that wood (especially large, dense pieces of wood as would be necessary to hold the weight of an entire mobile army including Cavalry) is difficult to ignite in the first place, you have to consider the arrows themselves. They're thin bits of wood, out of necessity they can't carry too heavy of a payload before the whole idea becomes pointless. Ever try shooting an arrow with an incredibly heavy payload on front? It doesn't work. There's a reason real arrowheads aren't giant metal monstrosities.
So, we've got this thin piece of wood, and out of necessity a rather small flaming object stuck to it. Now, we have an additional problem. What happens to fire when you add lots of oxygen? Such as you might get when it's flying through the air! It burns hotter. Guess what happens to that arrow then? It burns up and becomes weak and breaks on impact if it even makes it there and generally becomes useless. Have you ever tried building a fire in the woods? Or even in a wood stove? There's a reason you don't use just a few very tiny sticks. Like wood matches, they burn out relatively fast and even if you do have large chunks of wood, it's just scorched and not really in danger of igniting. In Historical battles, you couldn't use a very strong bow to launch a flaming arrow because swift flight would actually put it out entirely. Which means the Parshendi would have to HAVE these special bows AND be relatively close AND have some manner of fuel. This means they have to stay closer and face devastating volleys from the Alethi archers who can likely shoot from a much greater distance.
So, if you add all of these together. Large, incredibly dense pieces of wood. Relatively small (if numerous) flaming bits stuck to arrows. Lots of air to burn up the limited fuel they already have. Lack of pitch or oil. Physics, even in a world of magic. It's just not a feasible means of accomplishing any kind of worthwhile end result. The Parshendi can accomplish pretty much the same thing just by focus firing the Bridgemen who sustain incredibly heavy losses anyway.
Also, like someone already said. Historically flaming arrows were so effective against wooden structures because an incredibly huge amount of pitch was used back in the day to seal cracks etc. It wasn't the wood itself that was flammable, it was the tar that was used as a waterproofing agent that helped everything burn so nicely.
-
The Parshendi could use caltrops on the likely Alethi approaches which would disable the bridgemen, or at least slow them considerably. They could use fire arrows on the bridges, and even if most of the bridges themselves didn't catch fire immediately, the arrows would still kill bridgemen and might set fire to other nearby bridgemen or even the bridges themselves causing them to collapse during the assault. They could set up a simple spearwall on the opposite edge of the chasm (the attacker side) to slow the assault giving them more time to shoot arrows. Lastly, and most simply, they could wait for the bridges to be placed and then push them into the chasm. They are mobile after all.
I think other people have addressed the issue of burning the bridges pretty thoroughly, but there is a point that's been touched on that I'd like to flesh out a bit. You ask why they don't use caltrops, or set up a spear wall. Besides possibly not having caltrops, the way they fight precludes them. The Parshendi do not fight on more than one plateau at a time. If you attack them, lose, and retreat, they let you go. They don't have to. They could jump chasms and harry you and bleed you white. But they don't. Similarly, they bring one one force to any given fight. Chasmfiend shows up, you get your army, they get their army, they meet you at the designated combat zone, and they fight you until one of you wins. That's it. We don't know exactly why they do this, but it clearly has to do with their beliefs about how combat is conducted.
I think the same thing explains why they don't use advanced troop formations. They fight in pairs, and each pair picks a guy, and takes him on. If they get beat, another pair might step up. And then another. But they don't do formations.
And you're right, BTW, that this isn't very smart. They know where these battles are going to take place. They don't need bridges to cross most chasms. They could send one force to a gemheart fight, and then have two more show up halfway through, attack the staging plateau, cut off the Alethi escape, and then overwhelm them.
But instead, they fight fair. One army of yours, one army of mine. Two armies of yours, two armies of mine. Each of your warriors gets to challenge a warpair, even if your warriors fight as a unit.
We don't know exactly what their code of honor is, but I think their way of conducting war is tied up in it, and that's why they fight the way they do.
-
The Parshendi could use caltrops on the likely Alethi approaches which would disable the bridgemen, or at least slow them considerably. They could use fire arrows on the bridges, and even if most of the bridges themselves didn't catch fire immediately, the arrows would still kill bridgemen and might set fire to other nearby bridgemen or even the bridges themselves causing them to collapse during the assault. They could set up a simple spearwall on the opposite edge of the chasm (the attacker side) to slow the assault giving them more time to shoot arrows. Lastly, and most simply, they could wait for the bridges to be placed and then push them into the chasm. They are mobile after all.
I think other people have addressed the issue of burning the bridges pretty thoroughly, but there is a point that's been touched on that I'd like to flesh out a bit. You ask why they don't use caltrops, or set up a spear wall. Besides possibly not having caltrops, the way they fight precludes them. The Parshendi do not fight on more than one plateau at a time. If you attack them, lose, and retreat, they let you go. They don't have to. They could jump chasms and harry you and bleed you white. But they don't. Similarly, they bring one one force to any given fight. Chasmfiend shows up, you get your army, they get their army, they meet you at the designated combat zone, and they fight you until one of you wins. That's it. We don't know exactly why they do this, but it clearly has to do with their beliefs about how combat is conducted.
I think the same thing explains why they don't use advanced troop formations. They fight in pairs, and each pair picks a guy, and takes him on. If they get beat, another pair might step up. And then another. But they don't do formations.
And you're right, BTW, that this isn't very smart. They know where these battles are going to take place. They don't need bridges to cross most chasms. They could send one force to a gemheart fight, and then have two more show up halfway through, attack the staging plateau, cut off the Alethi escape, and then overwhelm them.
But instead, they fight fair. One army of yours, one army of mine. Two armies of yours, two armies of mine. Each of your warriors gets to challenge a warpair, even if your warriors fight as a unit.
We don't know exactly what their code of honor is, but I think their way of conducting war is tied up in it, and that's why they fight the way they do.
This actually makes the most sense to me. It almost seems as if the Parshendi are either teaching or learning how to fight with some sort of honor code. Now I feel the individual fights make sense and maybe I can stop pulling out my hair and let it all grow back... if it can. ;D
-
As has been said already, the Parshendi aren't soldiers. They are warriors. They are brave, skilled fighters, but they seem to lack leadership. As far as I can tell, the Parshendi don't have any military officers, everyone is of the same rank. Each warpair fights as an individual unit with some buddies, not as a military unit supported by an army. Because of this disorganized system, it took them six years to try and stop a cavalry charge with a spearwall, and they only used it because it gave them a chance of capturing a shardbearer! They just don't think militarily, they don't innovate, they don't use tactics.
One more thing, keep in mind that there are ten highprinces, each with their own unique tactics. We've only seen two highprinces tactics. It's possible (if unlikely for reasons listed earlier in the thread) for one of these eight to use siege weapons or oil.
-
I like the caltrops idea, if they can create them somehow (pretty easy to send 10 guys to a neighbor plateau you expect the Alethi to come from).
2 thoughts I have though:
We know the Parshendi provoked the Alethi but we have no idea why. They seemed to have planned the fight on the plains. It could be that they are just giving the Alethi enough resistance so that the Alethi keep fighting, but for whatever reason they don't actually want to win. Breaking the treaty makes no sense with all the information we've been given. I feel like the Parshendi wanted this long drawn out war for some reason. They want the Alethi where they are. If it was too hard for the Alethi, they might not keep fighting, but they could get suspicious if it was too easy. I think the Parshedi are giving just enough resistance to keep going. Although they really don't want to lose the tower, ever, which is why they always bring more people there. Also, once Dalinar and Sadeas joined up, they brought more men to even the match. It really doesn't seem like the Parshendi are trying to "win", just stall.
Has anyone seen the Parshendi burn the bridges? Or do they just assume it was them? Could something else want it to not be super easy for the Alethi so they burn just enough bridges to make them work building new ones? With all the scouts searching for the chasmfiends, which we know they still do at night, how has no one seen the Parshendi burning the bridges (or have they and I missed that?)
Perhaps the Parshendi want the Alethi to help them take the gemhearts (lending credence to the idea that it's not good if the chasmfiends complete their pupation).
-
Just going to point out here that it's pretty easy for anyone with access to soulcasters to get oil, as it's one of the ten essences. Doesn't help much with the flaming arrows idea, but it could be how the Parshendi or other force burn the bridges. Just soulcast the top half of it into oil and set it ablaze.
-
So far, there have been a number of holes poked in the fire-arrow idea. Here's another. The Highstorms. Try leaving a piece of wood out in the rain and then try to light it on fire. Wet wood doesn't burn.
-
I can let the fire-arrow thing go now, after everyone here has spoken of all these fabulous reasons why it wouldn't work I'm man enough to admit I didn't think that particular point all the way through.
However, after re-reading the book again I do have a another question about the bridge runs. I'm sure there's a reason that I'm overlooking, but I can't seem to figure it out. Here's my question; why is it that as soon as the crew reaches the chasm with the bridge that the arrows stop? Put another way, why don't the Parshendi simply wait to fire their arrows until the bridge crews were at the chasms?
It's been discussed in another thread on this board that the width of the chasms probably isn't more than 25 feet, and is most likely closer to 15' or 20'. If that's the case, how could the Parshendi fail to kill most the bridgemen on each run as soon as they put the bridge down? In the book it's mentioned that after reaching the chasms the bridgemen put the bridge down and then push it across. Wouldn't that leave them completely exposed to arrows?
And no matter how "unsophisticated" they may be with tactics, a Parshendi who survives the first battle after seeing the bridgemen would have HAD to realize that holding back even ONE arrow until they got to the chasm would mean an almost certain kill.
Am I, once again, missing something obvious here?
-
Yeah, I think you are. Felling them sooner means Sadeas forces have to try to come across fewer bridges. If they waited until the bridgemen got there, it just means that there are 20+ bridges ready to go at the same time, arrows pretty much still already spent and the soldiers pushing the bridges across would be heavily armored. Think about defending ground against 8 bridges or 20 bridges.
I think you are getting too caught up in the limited exposure you have to the battles, it is a 6 year war after all. Perhaps they attempted fire arrows but they failed. Perhaps Alethi troops tried to sneak behind once and it worked but now any troops that try it are ambushed and killed. Perhaps they tried to wait until the bridges got to the chasms but then had to defend against many more troops at a time coming across. Perhaps it is strategy of Parshendi to lull the Alethi (and you, lol) into thinking that winning the battle is more important than winning the war.
-
Yeah, I think you are. Felling them sooner means Sadeas forces have to try to come across fewer bridges. If they waited until the bridgemen got there, it just means that there are 20+ bridges ready to go at the same time, arrows pretty much still already spent and the soldiers pushing the bridges across would be heavily armored. Think about defending ground against 8 bridges or 20 bridges.
I think you are getting too caught up in the limited exposure you have to the battles, it is a 6 year war after all. Perhaps they attempted fire arrows but they failed. Perhaps Alethi troops tried to sneak behind once and it worked but now any troops that try it are ambushed and killed. Perhaps they tried to wait until the bridges got to the chasms but then had to defend against many more troops at a time coming across. Perhaps it is strategy of Parshendi to lull the Alethi (and you, lol) into thinking that winning the battle is more important than winning the war.
You're probably right. I honestly don't know why I'm obsessing over the bridgemen charging the chasms so much. I know that it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the book so I should probably just "get over it" and move on. Maybe I can come to terms with it after another read-through. Lord knows I couldn't put it down the first two times!
One thing I'd like do though, is say "Thank you" to everyone here. Since I came here and voiced my thoughts I've realized that just because I might think something makes perfectly logical sense doesn't mean the rest of the thinking world will. You've all been very understanding and thoughtful in your responses and not once did anyone taunt, flame or mock with malice. Thank you all for making my first post a pleasant experience. I hope to be around this board for as long as Mr. Sanderson continues to write, if not longer.
Thanks!
-
Stick around. It's questions like this that can help an author perfect his books. If you have doubts about how feasible the battles are, others may as well. Perhaps Brandon will expand upon the history of the Plain's war to indicate why they do things the way they do.
-
It's also questions like this that keep the board thinking. A lot of times with the bigger questions people have about the books Brandon has intentionally not given us all the info, but these kinds of discussions keep us going through the books looking for details we may have overlooked. I, for one, haven't had this much fun since the Mistborn Trilogy.
-
WoK is special in the way that there is a lot of information in the book, not only in the actual written passages, but also in the artwork. I don't thing any other Brandon book has had this many hints and easter eggs in it (thought this may also be because it is the biggest Brandon Book yet).
I just can't wait for the annotations. There are usually some more hints and stuff which would keep us going for months, if not longer.
-
The survival of any bridgemen against archers firing from 20 feet away bothers me some too, but it's not a deal-breaker.
I think when we imagine the Parshendi shooting, we may see there being a thicker flight of arrows than is necessary. In movies, especially lately, arrows are shot in clouds that blot out the sun (see Hero, 300, etc). But we've also established (or at least theorized) that the supply of arrows is probably not that great. We know that the bridge crews are subjected to direct fire, but the fact that the Parshendi don't have enough arrows to slaughter every crew that approaches indicates that the flights are probably only a few dozen at a time directed at any one crew, spread out over 20 crews of 40 or so men each.
Arrows don't fly like bullets, even over short distances. They can curve and twist, and a near-miss is still a miss. Several arrows might hit a single man, especially since the outer layers help protect the inner groups, so it might take a couple rounds before you've killed enough men to force them to drop their bridge.
So if you imagine the volleys being like a cloud of arrows, you're overdoing it. I don't think Brandon ever actually defines how many archers are amongst the Parshendi army, and not every Parshendi is shooting at once. It's still enough that the first few rows of any crew should expect to die, unless they've got an honorspren twisting the wind for them.
;D
-
In a world of constant storms, and rocky barren lands, where does the wood come to make these bridges. In particular, how do the Parshendi make arrows when they are trapped in the middle of the Shattered Plains? A supply of trees is something that doesn't seem readily available here, and a lot of wood would be needed.
-
There's a "forest" beside Sadaes's warcamp from which he sells wood. The rest is soulcast by the king's soulcasters.
-
I just want to mention that in the book, it's mentioned a couple times that Alethi arrows fall very near the bridgecrews while they're placing the bridge. The reasoning seems simple enough: the Alethi are far enough away that their hail of arrows don't reach far past the gap. In addition to protecting themselves from counter-fire, they create a method of area denial: the parshendi who move too close to the edge die. This protects the landing zone from point-blank archers or soldiers attempting to push the bridge back into the chasm.
-
In a world of constant storms, and rocky barren lands, where does the wood come to make these bridges. In particular, how do the Parshendi make arrows when they are trapped in the middle of the Shattered Plains? A supply of trees is something that doesn't seem readily available here, and a lot of wood would be needed.
if I had to make something up, I'd say they make arrow shafts from the bones of something. Or they have a supply of wood that we don't know about (it's not as if we know what's in the central areas of the plains).
It's interesting that we refer to the world as barren, when it's really anything but. There's a vibrant ecosystem, it's just one that's adapted to frequent weathering and has evolved methods of concealment and/or armor that resembles the environment. Yes, there's a lot of rock, but that's hasn't stopped life from adapting and even thriving there.
-
I wonder if the shells of plants and grass can be used as a wood substitute?
-
Another thought would be how flammable is the wood of the world? And how flammable is cast wood? Perhaps they're not quite the same as the wood from our world. They could be denser, lighter, more/less flammable, etc.
-
And it really isn't clear how well-supplied either army actually is with arrows... archery isn't mentioned a lot, wood is in short supply, and I don't even know what they use for fletching (no birds on Roshar, remember?).
I was rereading some stuff last night, and noted that Parshendi arrows are fletched with something called scragglebark. If I remember right, the reference is on page 895.
-
Good eyes!!
Bottom of page 895 refers to "painted scragglebark fletching". So, plant matter for the fletching, at least on Parshendi arrows. Any references to the shafts or heads (heads would probably be easiest, as there's just... just HUGE precedent for stone arrowheads)?
-
I think there are a number of things about the "war" that are implied but never explicitly stated. For example, Sadeas thinks the Parshendi are dwindling in numbers and that he can defeat them without Dalinar. Yet we have some evidence that they fight with honor, and more importantly that they bring only enough #s to equal the alethi. Think about that...my interpretation is that the parshendi have vast numbers and frankly aren't really trying to win only to match the alethi.
The Parshendi don't follow bridge 4 and Dalinar's forces after the final battle yet they easily could have...and probably wiped them out. I would bet that if the alethi stopped using archers so would the parshendi.
In future books I expect Dalinar's efforts to turn the "war" from a game/race into a real war to evolve into multiple armies made of mixed units from different high princes stationed out on the plains. Perhaps at the ends of the permanent bridges. Specifically to be closer to the fights and allow them to use seige towers. Heck the alethi have enough #s to rotate troops out and establish foot holds farther out on the plains easily enough. :)
-
Have the Parshendi been using women warriors in all the battles, or is this just a recent thing as their numbers are dwindling?
-
I got the impression that they'd been doing it the whole time, but nobody had really bothered to pay attention.
The thing with Dalinar kicking the war up to the next level is that, if we're right about the Parshendi tactics, it's just going to kick their response up to match. And we really don't know what they might be capable of.
-
I'm worried that the Parshendi have had a constant influx of reinforcements as Parshmen (or whatever) get changed to become Parshendi. Or something like that. After all, their estimates of how the war is going is based on the assumption that they know how many Parshendi they are. They could be totally wrong.
-
Well, if we accept the theory that the Parshendi are not trying to win the war and are merely matching forces to the Alethi to make a "good" fight (for whatever ulterior reason), then we must also accept that the Parshendi are far more advanced in the art of war than the Alethi believe. This would mean that, contrary to the Alethi-held belief, the Parshendi are not simple barbarians who are only able to use rudimentary wartime tactics. And that most likely there are FAR more Parshendi out there than any Alethi actually believes there are, ready and willing to jump into the fight whenever the time is right. I hold that this would also mean that the Parshendi know of ways to neutralize or destroy the bridges that they are NOT using yet because for some reason only they know at the moment they WANT the Alethi to place the bridges and reach them to fight hand to hand.
-
I hold that this would also mean that the Parshendi know of ways to neutralize or destroy the bridges that they are NOT using yet because for some reason only they know at the moment they WANT the Alethi to place the bridges and reach them to fight hand to hand.
I just reread the Tower battle sequence, because I needed a little awesome in my life. And one detail that emerged more strongly to me is that the Parshendi Shardbearer was lookng for Dalinar. Well, phrased that way, it doesn't make any sense: Dalinar's location has never been a secret, and if they really wanted to talk to him, they would have done much better to honor their treaty with Gavilar.
The obvious answer is that they were looking for a person who bore a mantle, and didn't know who it was. From page 938:
Why didn't the Shardbearer just finish him? The Parshendi giant leaned down, then spoke. The words were thick with accent, and Dalinar's mind nearly dismissed them. But here, up close, Dalinar realized something. He understood what was being said. The accent was nearly impenetrable, but the words were in Alethi.
"It is you," the Parshendi Shardbearer said. "I have found you at last."
That chapter is titled "Eshonai", a word that is not used anywhere in the text of the chapter. So, here's the theory: the Parshendi Shardbearer (or PS) immediately recognized Dalinar as the Eshonai. I say "the" Eshonai because I think it's a title, not a name. Or a name-title, much as Elisha is a name-title in the Bible, which carries with it an associated mantle/role/responsibility.
This whole affair, ranging clear back to the assassination of Gavilar, up through the Parshendi tactics on the Shattered Plains, could have been designed to draw out the Eshonai. Not just to find him, but to create a situation in which the mantle would pass to someone. This implies a level of mastermindery that may well be beyond the Parshendi, but they could also have acted as servants of a Shard.
Which Shard they may have been serving is, I believe, a very key question. The obvious answer is Odium, since Parshmen are (if Jasnah is correct) the Voidbringers. But then what is the Eshonai? The only thing of cosmic significance about Dalinar (at least, that we've seen) is his visions...from the Almighty. He is best situated to unite mankind. He is best positioned to reestablish the Knights Radiant. In Odium's opinion, he ought to be public enemy #1, which begs the question, "Why didn't the PS off him immediately?"
Could it be that the Parshendi do not actually serve Odium? That the Almighty was somehow able to liberate them from servitude to the Enemy, and to raise them above the common Parshman? That this whole thing is really a design of the Almighty, to get mankind ready for the Everstorm?
Or could it be that Dalinar is the "one who will destroy us"? From the back cover:
There are four whom we watch. The first is the surgeon, forced to put aside healing to become a soldier in the most brutal war of our time. The second is the assassin, a murderer who weeps as he kills. The third is the liar, a young woman who wears a scholar's mantle over the heart of a thief. The last is the highprince, a warlord whose eyes have opened to the past as his thirst for battle wanes.
The world can change. Surgebinding and Shardwielding can return; the magics of ancient days can become ours again. These four people are key.
One of them may redeem us.
And one of them will destroy is.
The obvious choice of who will destroy is Szeth. But, Taravangian seems to think that Dalinar's success in uniting Alethkar would be disastrous. Does Odium want a united Alethkar? Why?
Sorry. This is long and rambling, and I have more questions then answers, but I think this is very interesting.
-
I know double posting is frowned upon, but I didn't want to mess with my epic mess of a last post. But, I DID want to explore a different angle that I somehow didn't manage to hit on in that long and rambling treatise.
The Parshendi could well be acting as they always do leading up to a Desolation. It's shown that they have a long memory, because they recognize Kaladin's use of Stormlight, are afraid of it, and give it a name in their language. Do they just always seek for Eshonai when the Desolation comes again?
My offhanded reference to Elisha in my last post got me thinking. Eshonai is a similar word to Elisha. It even sounds Hebrew. What if that's not just a coincidence, but a hint? The Elisha is a forerunner; John the Baptist was an Elisha who prepared the way for the coming of Christ. Is there always an Eshonai, called of the Almighty and bestowed with visions, to prepare the way for the coming of the Heralds and usher in the next Desolation? Do the Parshendi just always seek him/her when the time comes?
I'm off the edge of the map here. I know it. But holy cow, I'm smitten with this idea. Dalinar, Highprince of Kholin, Highprince of War, Eshonai of the Almighty, forerunner to the Everstorm, cofounder of the restored order of the Knights Radiant. *squee*
-
I raise the question, what if the person in the Dalinar's visions is not the Almighty, but someone pretending to be him (e.g. Odium or the B guy - can't remember his name)?
Anyway, great theory ryos. Missed it completely (should pay attention to chapter headings more often :-[) I think there is definitely something there.
With the Elisha thing, that could be a deliberate connection made by Brandon (just like Elantris (the city) = Atlantis), or he could be completely oblivious of it (like who he use to call Elantris (the book this time, not the city) THE SPIRIT OF ADONIS)
-
However, after re-reading the book again I do have a another question about the bridge runs. I'm sure there's a reason that I'm overlooking, but I can't seem to figure it out. Here's my question; why is it that as soon as the crew reaches the chasm with the bridge that the arrows stop? Put another way, why don't the Parshendi simply wait to fire their arrows until the bridge crews were at the chasms?
<snip>
Am I, once again, missing something obvious here?
I think so. Once a bridge gets to a chasm, soldiers help push it across, if too many of its bridgemen have died. Soldiers are armored, and have shields, making them much harder to kill. For those same reasons, they can't really carry the bridges. Take a bridge out twenty feet from the edge, it's down. Take it out at the edge, it's coming across anyway.
-
This is a great discussion. As far as using fire arrows on the bridges there are a few other things to consider:
Highstorms - These bridges are left out in highstorms. It is never mentioned if they are treated and if they are what they are treated with, but getting an extremely heavy rain every couple of days is going to make them much more difficult to set on fire.
Time - They get 2-3 volleys of arrows off now. With fire arrows they would probably only get off 1 (less range+time to light). You would also either need 2 people per archer, one to light one to shoot, or one man running down the line lighting arrows.
ROI - Return on Investment. Getting 4-6 (sometimes more) bridge crews down is more guaranteed with their current strategy. It would take a lot more time for the wood to actually catch on fire to the point that the bridge is unusable, especially with cavalry and soldiers running over it and helping stamp out the flames. And as far as pitch goes, there is an abundance of dirt/rock/sand to thrown down on pitch.
It is entirely possible the Parshendi tried something like flaming arrows, but I imagine they learned they got better results by just firing on the bridge crews.
Other things:
The arrows don't stop as soon as the bridge reaches the chasm. Dunny was hit by a Parshendi arrow after laying the bridge, and immediately after by a Alethi arrow. By the time the bridges reach the chasm the Parshendi are being hit by return fire so they are more disorganized and are moving back.
You couldn't just surround a plateau that the Parshendi were on unless you had a ridiculous amount of troops. Since the Parshendi can just jump across chasms they can very quickly move to the weakest point and jump across and break through. With the Alethi fighting independently they wouldn't have the numbers and they don't have that level of mobility.
Siege equipment is an interesting idea, I think this just comes down to time. Suprised Dalinar doesn't use them, as his bridges are considered more like siege towers being pulled by chulls but I imagine you would have to make the bridges much heavier. Dalinar and one of his officers discussed using a combination or man carried bridges and the "siege bridges" but it was determined that the bridge would end up being too unwieldy for men to carry. Overall I think this has more to do with speed, there isn't time for a proper siege. Laying siege to a tower would also give the parshendi more time to work on getting the gemheart and just running away with it.
-
One thing that's been rumbling around in my head for a while now, is that Parshendi are voidbringers, but they aren't evil, or even Odium's servants. First off, the evidences. They behave in an honourable fashion towards their enemies, as can be seen throughout the book and throughout this thread. Secondly, Jasnah's references that she brought up seem to strongly indicate that the Parshendi are voidbringers.
But how is this possible?
Voidbringer = Bringer of the Void? One whom the void follows?
Perhaps the Parshendi bring the void by accident? Or, are chased by the void? Perhaps the parshendi "migrated" to Roshar, and are being chased by "the void", much like a predator following a migratory animal.
This would explain their behaviour in wanting to bring the Alethi out to play war with them. Get the Alethi who have some twenty or so shardbearers into a position where they must fight "the void". Perhaps Taravangian understands this, and doesn't want Dalinar to unite the Alethi/crush the Parshendi because they need the Parshendi as allies in the upcoming war.
-
Incidentally with Jasnah's theory that "something happened" that turned the Parshmen into Parshendi, has anyone else thought of this:
“The Parshendi? That makes no sense.” Gavilar coughed, hand quivering, reaching toward his chest and fumbling at a pocket. He pulled out a small crystalline sphere tied to a chain. “You must take this. They must not get it.” He seemed dazed. “Tell…tell my brother…he must find the most important words a man can say….”
The crystalline sphere on a chain, I am thinking that is what caused the transformation.
-
Perhaps the Parshendi bring the void by accident? Or, are chased by the void? Perhaps the parshendi "migrated" to Roshar, and are being chased by "the void", much like a predator following a migratory animal.
This would explain their behaviour in wanting to bring the Alethi out to play war with them. Get the Alethi who have some twenty or so shardbearers into a position where they must fight "the void". Perhaps Taravangian understands this, and doesn't want Dalinar to unite the Alethi/crush the Parshendi because they need the Parshendi as allies in the upcoming war.
Sorry but this sounds really really similar to Jim Butcher's Codex Alera books.
-
It's probably because the more he says "the void", my brain transliterates "the Vord". Not to mention the whole issue of migration that plays a part in pushing the Alerans against the Canim.
-
It's probably because the more he says "the void", my brain transliterates "the Vord". Not to mention the whole issue of migration that plays a part in pushing the Alerans against the Canim.
And the Vord had always followed the Marat when they migrated.
-
Interesting. I have never read those books before, so the references are completely coincidental...