arders are Power-Wrought Weapons
by Souvrashan: 2005-08-14 | 4.9 out of 10 (20 votes)
Before someone starts shouting about the Three Oaths, allow me to explain.
Theory: Warders are Power-Wrought Weapons, and thus their Aes Sedai's commands to them are subject to the Three Oaths, defining/ limiting the Warders purpose and use.
First of all: What is a Power Wrought weapon anyway?
I believe RJ answered this one. A power wrought weapon is any weapon made by the One Power (ie. metal taken from the earth and forged), or any weapon that has been enhanced by the one power. Most of the swords that we have come across have no specially ability other than being almost unbreakable and never requiring sharpening.
Warders are weapons. How many times have we seen Jordan state that a Warder does not just use weapons, he becomes one? RJ thinks that Warders are weapons, owned and operated by their Aes Sedai.
Therefore, Warders can be considered power wrought weapons because of the enhancement provided by the bond (increased endurance, fast healing, shadow sense and such).
Next (and I know that you have been waiting for this one): Why does this not violate the Three Oaths?
The exact wording of the Three Oaths from New Spring (when the Aes Sedai involved were not rushed):
1. Under the Light and by my hope of salvation and rebirth, I vow that I will speak no word that is not true.
2. Under the Light and by my hope of salvation and rebirth, I vow that I will make no weapon for one man to kill another.
3. Under the Light and by my hope of salvation and rebirth, I vow that I will never use the One Power as a weapon except against Shadowspawn, or in the last extreme of defending my life or that of my Warder or another sister.
The second oath involves making a weapon for one man to kill another. It does not violate it to make a weapon for oneself, another Aes Sedai, or any woman in general. But once made, the uses of the weapon (commands to the Warder), must obey rule 3.
Aes Sedai consider their Warders to be weapons (mostly for defensive purposes, uless they are Green). Sometime in the last three thousand years some Aes Sedai somewhere started considering the ethical uses of Warders.
We know that Aes Sedai are responsible for the actions of their Warders. That is why only full Aes Sedai are allowed to bond Warders, because of the responsibility involved. I feel that that responsibility stems directly from an Aes Sedai's oaths, which are what make her Aes Sedai. They establish a code of conduct for the Aes Sedai and her Warders. Not that Warders don't act without orders or in direct rebellion, if you disagree, go look at the fight when Siuan was deposed as Amyrlin. But an Aes Sedai's commands to her Warder are governed by the Three Oaths.
Recap of my reasoning:
1. Warders are weapons that belong to their Aes Sedai (the relationship is more complicated, but this is a forgivable simplification).
Evidence:
General possessive attitude of all Aes Sedai towards their Warders, and the reason that they generally seek Warders (mostly for protection). The Warder is there partly to watch their back, but also as a visible threat that keeps violence at bay.
The tales of Aes Sedai bonding against some men's will in ancient times. The Warders were needed as weapons in a very dangerous time and “taken”.
2. Commands to a Warder are subject to 3rd law through the bond, which is One Power initiated.
Warders are soldiers that the Aes Sedai have used the one power to enhance, thus making them an extension of their abilities and putting their use under the Aes Sedai Code.
Aes Sedai restraint in use of her Warder, the known uses of Warders by Aes Sedai, namely personal protection, and fighting Shadowspawn, which are exactly the same uses under which Aes Sedai can use the One power.
An Aes Sedai's responsibility for and towards her Warder as enforced by the White Tower
Likely Objections and Counter Arguments:
Second Oath: Warders are weapons that do not come under the second oath because of their status as weapons and defense for their Aes Sedai.
Passing the Bond: An Aes Sedai can use the one power in defense of her sisters. Thus, she can command her Warder to defend another sister, or even give the Warder to another sister.
Rebellion led by Hammar and Coulin to free Siuan: Not Aes Sedai initiated. In fact, the Warders felt that they were going to the defense of a sister.
Lan's threats to kill for Moiraine and her cause: So far, Lan has only threatened others. And Moiraine has never commanded him to preemptively attack, more frequently she held him back.
Lack of direct Evidence: And when has that stopped any of us? It is a theory after all.
In conclusion, I invite those who read this to comment on it, whether they are convinced or not. I would be happy to see any evidence that disproves my case, or any evidence that you feel supports my case. Thank you for taking the time to read my theory.
You cannot rate theories without first logging in. Please
log in.
1
Tamyrlin: 2005-10-03
Souvrashan, you could also say about the second oath that the Aes Sedai did not make the weapon, they bonded it, which could be a loophole. Maybe that is why bonding without asking was frowned upon, because while possible, it stretched the limit of that loophole, since they were making the weapon, versus a Warder being responsible for allowed himself to be bonded...beyond the whole slavery issue involved in bonding without permission. But I do like the implication of the use of Warders. Not only are they important bodyguards, they were specifically "created" as a means to circumvent the second oath, because Aes Sedai knew that such an oath would put them in mortal danger. And the interesting part, the Warder uses himself, uses the one power bond enhancements, so technically the Aes Sedai is not responsible. A very unique way of looking at the Warder-Aes Sedai relationship, thanks.
2
Ozymandias: 2005-10-03
Very interesting idea here, but I just don't agree. Shouldn't the Three Oaths (or at least the second two) prevent the Aes Sedai from making something which will obviously be used as a weapon? Its not like Aes Sedai just fall into using Warders as protection, that is their purpose, their only reason for being, as you say. So the Oaths should detect this and prevent it.
Now that I formulate a response, I feel like I lost you in places, but then again maybe I'm just tired. If Warders were not under the Second Oath, then how does one justify their creation? The fact that someone like Lan hints that he can eliminate someone who has overheard them or might disrupt them gives very very strong circumstantial evidence that he has done so in the past. Any agreement on her part would be using the Power to kill another person (assuming Warders are power wrought).
And in response to your little comment about how Warders become one with their weapons: well, thats not unique thing among Warders. How many times do we hear about Rand or other blademasters (Gawyn or Galad, for example) being spoken of as one with the sword? Its a result of extensive training, not the power. I'll get a few hours of sleep and repost after other people have said stuff
3
Callandor: 2005-10-04
**Theory: Warders are Power-Wrought Weapons, and thus their Aes Sedai's commands to them are subject to the Three Oaths, defining/ limiting the Warders purpose and use.**
Aes Sedai commands can be as vague as they want, to only imply, and the Warder can carry out what she wants.
**Warders are weapons. How many times have we seen Jordan state that a Warder does not just use weapons, he becomes one? RJ thinks that Warders are weapons, owned and operated by their Aes Sedai.**
But they're people.
**Therefore, Warders can be considered power wrought weapons because of the enhancement provided by the bond (increased endurance, fast healing, shadow sense and such).**
We've only heard the term "power-wrought" used in conjunction with objects of metal and weaponry (actual weaponry, like swords and spearheads). When asked about this, Jordan responded:
**"The Power was used in blending the metals (and other materials...) and altering the structure. There is no source of the Power in these weapons, nor do they draw on the Power like angreal...." [from RJ letter 4/95]**
**But an Aes Sedai's commands to her Warder are governed by the Three Oaths.**
Please quote that.
**Not that Warders don't act without orders or in direct rebellion, if you disagree, go look at the fight when Siuan was deposed as Amyrlin.**
Which contradicts what you said here:
**RJ thinks that Warders are weapons, owned and operated by their Aes Sedai.**
A weapon doesn't think for it's own. It does what it's told. And, the Three Oaths are quite easy to get around, especially if it's a nonverbal interpretation of an order (and Aes Sedai nods to her Warder, he goes to do something).
**Warders are soldiers that the Aes Sedai have used the one power to enhance, thus making them an extension of their abilities and putting their use under the Aes Sedai Code.**
Then Warder's shouldn't be able to kill their own Aes Sedai:
**TITLE: Winter's Heart, CHAPTER: 10 - A Plan Succeeds
"At times, Asne wondered how much of Eldrith's apparent vagueness was real. No one so unaware of the world around her could have survived this long. On the other hand, she had been unfocused enough to let the masking slip more than once before they reached Samara, enough for her Warder to track her. Obedient to Moghedien's orders to await her return, they had hidden through the riots after her departure, waited while the so-called Prophet's mobs swept south into Amadicia, stayed in that wretched, ruined town even after Asne became convinced that Moghedien had abandoned them. Her lip curled at the memory. What had sparked the decision to leave was the arrival of Eldrith's Kennit in the town, sure that she was a murderer, half convinced she was Black Ajah, and determined to kill her no matter the consequences to himself. Not surprisingly, she had been unwilling to face those consequences herself, and refused to let anyone kill the man. The only alternative was to flee. Then again, Eldrith was the one who had pointed out Caemlyn as their only hope."
You might make the case that since Eldrith is Black Ajah that this wouldn't apply, but that hardly seems justified by other accounts of Aes Sedai fearing to deal with Warders for possibly being killed (like Myrelle's reactions to Lan being near her).
4
Astra-al: 2005-10-04
**But an Aes Sedai's commands to her Warder are governed by the Three Oaths.**
The only way the Three Oaths would be able to affect what the Aes Sedai commands her Warder, would be to tell no word that is not true.
Also, Warder's cannot be power-wrought weapons. It could be said that the Warder's choose to become skilled with weapons and to learn combat. The bond with the Warder's is more to bind them together to make them work together better, being able to sense emotions etc.
Also, nowhere in the three oaths does it say anything about what an Aes Sedai can command a Warder to do, that is merely general protocol. Also it doesn't say that an Aes Sedai cannot convince one man to kill another, simply that they cannot create a weapon with the power for one man to kill another.
Also, there are many loopholes through the second one, for example, an Aes Sedai could make an axe meant for cutting down trees. But a man could still use it to kill another man. I think that as long as the Aes Sedai does not have the intent for the use of a weapon to be for men to kill men, they could make it. Therefore, they could make weapons if they had the purpose of using them against shadowspawn in mind for example.
5
The Leveler: 2005-10-04
Actually,I can rationalize a way around that oath. "I'm not making this weapon to be used on men, I'm making it so this Warder/Borderlander can kill more Shadowspawn. Everybody knows that borderlanders dont fight other humans to kill."
6
Tristin: 2005-10-04
Yeah...I think it's all a matter of utility in some sense. A hoe, rake, walking stick, umbrella, etc., can be used as weapons (they can be put to that function), however their form is not that of a weapon. Similiarly a Warder can be used as a weapon but he or she is clearly first and foremost a person. Surely an Aes Sedai could make a Cuendillar figurine. But if that figurine is put into a slingshot and thrown at the enemy its going to be a weapon. That doesn't mean that the Aes Sedai who made it, made a power wrought weapon. Even if she tells someone to fling it at the enemy. It's the same with advice. An Aes Sedai adviser can tell a monarch how to win a war and kill everyone on the other side, and when her plan is put to use, alot of ppl will die, but that doesn't make her advice a weapon. At least not in her head...which as we know is all that really matters.
7
Traveller: 2005-10-04
I think the simple problem I have with this is that warders are humans:
I know what you are saying, but they were not made by the Aes Sedai, but bonded by them- they have emotions and lives- I truly think that they bare no more than extremely well trained fighters that are somehow linked to Aes Sedai, gaining certain gifts from the bond.
Other than the fact that in principle I disagree with you, this is a very good and well-presented theory that is worth giving some thought to.
8
: 2005-10-04
I have to agree with Souvrashan. I do believe that Warders are power wrought weapons.
Callandor mentions a quote from RJ that says to create a power wrought weapon the power must be used to blend the materials, altering the structure. This can be seen when Elayne bonds Birgette. Birgette was vanishing as a result of her removal from TAR. After the bonding she was altered (became stable and/or solid) through the use of the power; not only gaining the opportunity to exist in the real world but getting the added benefits that Souvrashan mentions a warder possesses.
The whole issue with the violation of the three oaths should not come to play. We see that warders only attack people that might affect the safety of themselves or their AS. This includes shadowspawn, darkfriends or anyone that possibly can't hold their tongue or is a little to nosey; all of these people can fall into the three oaths.
The third oath actually justifies the purpose of warders stating that the one power will not be used as a weapon except against shadowspawn or in the last extreme those that endanger the life of the Aes Sedai, her Warder or another Sister.
*What had sparked the decision to leave was the arrival of Eldrith's Kennit in the town, sure that she was a murderer, half convinced she was Black Ajah, and determined to kill her no matter the consequences to himself.*
Going back to the example Callandor gave about the Black sister Eldrith; we see that her warder is convinced that she is a black sister and because of the oaths is allowed to kill her and any other black sister because they are of the shadow.
*Rebellion led by Hammar and Coulin to free Siuan: Not Aes Sedai initiated. In fact, the Warders felt that they were going to the defense of a sister.*
The Warders and mainly warders in training were able to battle because they suspected that something was not right. Siuan and Leane's Warders would of course come to the rescue of the Aes Sedai because it is part of their duty and is justified by the third oath.
All in all the AS are experts in manipulating things to their benefit. Sure Warders are not intended to kill any man or woman, just those that might endanger the safety of their AS or themselves. The influence of the AS on her warder can extend protection to others as we see with Lan and Nyn, where he vows to come to her aid whenever she might need him (only able to do so with the permission of Moiraine) while being bonded to Moiraine.
Warders seem to have been a huge loophole around the three oaths and I believe are looked at as a valuable power wrought tool, (that RJ mentions as weapons) even by the forsaken who do not (or did not) know the weave of bonding, to aid in any quest, keep you warm at night (Greens) and for protection so much so that Red sisters at times have considered bonding warders.
9
Yaga Shura: 2005-10-04
"Shouldn't the Three Oaths (or at least the second two) prevent the Aes Sedai from making something which will obviously be used as a weapon?"
But it's not a weapon for one man to kill another. it's a weapon that one woman can use to kill just about anything she likes.
That isn't to say I agree with the theory, but callandor pretty much has it covered.
10
JakOShadows: 2005-10-04
In general, what you said has a bit in truth. The details aren't quite there though. The fact that bugs me on this is that, yes, warders are a weapon. But in that case, any one who can fight and have really good abilities at protecting someone could be considered a weapon. And when I think of a power wrought weapon, I think of making a sword out metal alloys from the earth that are super strong. Warders are more like soldiers you have bonded to you so that you can guarantee that they will obey and protect you at all cost. In fact, that is what they are, just like soldiers protecting the king. But I wouldn't call them a weapon. It is more of a figurative term.
11
Garayur: 2005-10-04
I like this theory Souvrashan. While I don't agree with everything it has a lot of merit.
Ozymandias, It is all a matter of perception and interpretation of the oaths. We can already see that the Aes Sedai get around the first oath fairly well, why cant they wiggle thier way around others?
Warders are almost a custom for Aes Sedai, many have them if not all, perhaps the origonal intent was for them to be weapons, but I think that has been forgotten over the years.
*"Once, Aes Sedai were not required to swear oaths. It was known what Aes Sedai were and what they stood for, and there was no need for more. Many of us wish it were so still. But the Wheel turns, and the times change. That we swear these oaths, that we are known to be bound, allows the nations to deal with us without fearing that we will throw up our own power, the One Power, against them. Between the Trolloc Wars and the War of the Hundred Years we made these choices, and because of them the White Tower still stands, and we can still do what we can against the Shadow."* TGH
This indicates a rough estimate of when the oaths were adopted, given the time estimate we know that warders were used before the oaths were taken.
* In the Trolloc Wars, I knew an Accepted who bonded a fellow. Barashelle was due to be tested the next day for raising to full Aes Sedai, and certain to be given the shawl, but she was afraid that a woman testing that same day would take him. In the Trolboc Wars, the Tower tried to raise women as quickly as possible, from necessity.”*
TFoH
Perhaps the origonal purpose of warders was forgotten by time the oaths were adopted, or perhaps they used Souvrashan's loopholes.
Callandor, a person can be considered a weapon, look at how rand views the Asha'man.
I can't remeber where but I believe at one point RJ defines a powerwrought weaponas any weapon made with the one power. If someone has it can you put up the full quote?
Many of the abilities that a warder gains indicate his use as a weapon,
*The bond gives the Warder the gift of quick healing, the ability to go without food, water, or rest for long periods of time, and the ability to sense the taint of the Dark One at adistance. He can also sense certain things about his charge, including her death...* Glossary
These are all benifets you want your, weapon/protector to have, especially when fighting dreeadlords and shadowspawn during a war, such as what was done during the Trolloc wars. Aes Sedai also have certain certain abilities built into the bond as a fail safe.
*"If you had to bond a man without asking him," Kiruna demanded in that commanding voice, "why, by the Light most holy, have you not used the bond to bend him to your will? Compared to the other, that is only slapping his wrist."* TLoC
an Aes Sedai can force her warder to do things, such as not kill her if he gets a tad angry over being bonded without permission.
12
Anubis: 2005-10-04
Well Aes Sedai can compell their warders if they want....
so... i agree, yet i wonder what exactly your point is
13
Callandor: 2005-10-05
**Callandor mentions a quote from RJ that says to create a power wrought weapon the power must be used to blend the materials, altering the structure. This can be seen when Elayne bonds Birgette. Birgette was vanishing as a result of her removal from TAR. After the bonding she was altered (became stable and/or solid) through the use of the power; not only gaining the opportunity to exist in the real world but getting the added benefits that Souvrashan mentions a warder possesses.**
You have an extremely loose definition of "altered" then. And, again, Jordan only refers to power-wrought objects as metal or weaponry -- never people.
**Going back to the example Callandor gave about the Black sister Eldrith; we see that her warder is convinced that she is a black sister and because of the oaths is allowed to kill her and any other black sister because they are of the shadow.**
People are not Shadowspawn. Play whatever definition game you want, but it comes down to the fact that the Warder knows he is killing an Aes Sedai, and a person. The only explanation is that Aes Sedai's Oaths do not extend to Warders.
And, it doesn't explain Myrelles's (and others) fear of being killed by Lan.
**Callandor, a person can be considered a weapon, look at how rand views the Asha'man.**
Yeah, that's great -- being considered a weapon doesn't make you one.
**an Aes Sedai can force her warder to do things, such as not kill her if he gets a tad angry over being bonded without permission.**
Which should not be possible for the Warder to do if the Three Oaths extend to the Warder.
I'll put it this way. Alanna as far as we know is not Black Ajah. I don't think anyone has even made that claim (or if they have, they have a long uphill battle to go through). Her Oaths would extend to Rand then. How many non-Shadowspawn people has Rand killed?
14
Cyberkil: 2005-10-05
You may be correct to, an extent, that Warders are Power Wrought weapons. The fact is that there is a way around any Oath made by the Oath Rod. Belief.
Any Aes Sedai can say a word that is untrue as long as they firmly believe that it is so. Any Aes Sedai can kill any person she wants as long as she firmly believes that that person is a darkfriend. In this case, no Aes Sedai has ever considered taht Warders might be Power Wrought Weapons, so there is no conflict for them.
I'll give you an example: During the time that Egwene was leashed as a damane, the sul'dam were training her. Either the leash prevent's damane from using weapons or, more likely, one of the sul'dam ordered her not to touch a weapon. At one point, Egwene picked up her water pitcher intending to bash her sul'dam in the back of the head. She fell over retching and was unable to go near the pitcher as long as she believe that it could be a weapon. She had to convince herself completely that it couldn't be used that way to even go near it.
As long as Aes Sedai don't consider Warders to be Power Wrought weapons, bonding them doesn't violate the second oath and ordering them to kill anyone they like (darkfriend or not) doesn't violate the third.
15
wolfbrother10: 2005-10-05
**You have an extremely loose definition of "altered" then. And, again, Jordan only refers to power-wrought objects as metal or weaponry --never people.**
Callandor it seems to me that you offer definitions (or part of a definition) as you see fit. Altered means that something has been changed from its original state. Birgette was changed or altered from a vanishing and almost non-existent being into a solid existent one. If you don't see the change, I can't help you.
You say that RJ only refers to power wrought objects as metal weaponry...what was the (other material) you mentioned?
** People are not Shadowspawn. Play whatever definition game you want, but it comes down to the fact that the Warder knows he is killing an Aes Sedai, and a person. The only explanation is that Aes Sedai's Oaths do not extend to Warders.**
People can be darkfriends and AS can attack and kill darkfriend as well as a Warder if they affect their safety--Black sisters are extremely dangerous to someone that is of the light and knows they are of the shadow this would justify the threat of killing a black sister.
16
Anubis: 2005-10-05
I think that it is the NRA argument. A gun is just a tool that can be used as a weapon.
Actually a better example would be a saw or Perrins hammer.
If an Aes Sedai made a powerwrought blacksmithing hammer it would not be a weapon, yet it could indeed be used as one and would be better because of its enhancement. Same goes with the Warder, sure its a weapon, but its primary use is different.
17
Callandor: 2005-10-05
**Callandor it seems to me that you offer definitions (or part of a definition) as you see fit. Altered means that something has been changed from its original state. Birgette was changed or altered from a vanishing and almost non-existent being into a solid existent one. If you don't see the change, I can't help you.**
So, by your definition, every single person ever Healed is a power-wrought weapon, correct?
There is more limiting factors to power-wrought weapons.
**People can be darkfriends and AS can attack and kill darkfriend as well as a Warder if they affect their safety--Black sisters are extremely dangerous to someone that is of the light and knows they are of the shadow this would justify the threat of killing a black sister.**
Actually, it doesn't. They have to be in danger for the Aes Sedai to rationalize a just attact (or, like Egwene, Elayne, and Nynaeve, they simply have to be not bound by the Oath Rod). If you noticed, there hasn't been an Aes Sedai attacking a known Black Ajah or Darkfriend or even Forsaken, without being in combat with them. Why? Because they are not Shadowspawn.
18
A-train: 2005-10-06
"The second oath involves making a weapon for one man to kill another. It does not violate it to make a weapon for oneself, another Aes Sedai, or any woman in general. But once made, the uses of the weapon (commands to the Warder), must obey rule 3."
If this is the case, then how come sisters don't make power-wrought swords for their warders? The weapons would be for self defense only. Yet this doesn't happen, as evidenced by their rarity. Sorry, but I don't think this theory works.
19
Darren: 2005-10-07
Great theory, Souvrashan.
Now obviously, paradox proves you wrong. They can't be power wrought weapons, or the Three Oaths would not permit AS to bond them, but still a great theory.
People aren't weapons. A weapon is an inanimate object. A tool. Warders are living beings, and have free will.
Now, before anyone says anything about using the bond to compel, I think you will find no instances in the texts where the bond has EVER been used to compel a warder to kill another man. The reasons warders are bonded is because they have the free will to decide - all on their lonesome - to commit murder. (And no, so far Lan has NOT "only threatened others." He's definitely gotten his hands bloody.)
The third oath deals with channelling, though, not warders. Warders are in service, they are NOT thralls.
I do not believe that the Three Oaths would prohibit the genetic manipulation of animals into much more dangerous animals, either. Decency would, I hope, but not the oaths.
20
wolfbrother10: 2005-10-09
Callandor:
To respond to your comment...no not everyone that has been healed with the OP is a weapon. They are not changed but returned to their original state of health unless they have a severed limb which will just close up. Still they are not changed but regenerated or mended up in the case of missing limbs. :') You R so matter-of-fact...we could be good friend. lol.
21
Callandor: 2005-10-10
**To respond to your comment...no not everyone that has been healed with the OP is a weapon. They are not changed but returned to their original state of health unless they have a severed limb which will just close up. Still they are not changed but regenerated or mended up in the case of missing limbs.**
Ah, so normal people when Healed aren't weapons -- but Warders would be?
Your words:
**Altered means that something has been changed from its original state.**
A person who walks around is unaltered. They get stabbed -- now they're altered. They're Healed -- they're altered again, it's just hopefully back to normal. It's also important to remember that Healing isn't always a complete return to normal (not just in the removal of limbs as you said -- but even in that case, it's a big altering).
By your definition, they are power-wrought.
Again, we've only had power-wrought be used for actual combat weapons like swords and spears, and refering to metal alteration -- not people.
22
therobotbadger: 2005-10-10
I don't know if the Healing analogy would work. I mean, if you are using the word "altered" as a description of what happens to a Warder, then yes, Healing is an analogue.
However, a better word for what happens to a Warder is "enhanced". The Power is used to enhance them beyond what is possible for a normal human being. They are not simply made different than a regular person, but made different in such a way as to augment and improve natrual traits.
Also very crucial to this theory is the fact that the change is permanent, or relatively so. While the bond is in place, these benefits stay in place. Healing, on the other hand, is a one-shot deal. Once it's done, it's done; there isn't some sort of connection to the Aes Sedai and you stay Healed completely while that connection is up. The bond, however, does work that way. While the bond exists, the Warder has constant augmentation.
Another reason Warders could be seen as weapons is the nature of their enhancements. They all seem to have been specifically engineered to increase the capacity of the Warder to kill. Kill in protection of his Aes Sedai, certainly, but kill and kill efficiently. Even if some Aes Sedai use their Warders for other purposes (such as Browns who have Warders carry books, or Greens who have Warders..... um, let's move on...), the benefits given by the bond are of a type to make a Warder more deadly. In other words, the bond (not the Aes Sedai, mind) the bond bestows on a Warder the implied purpose of inficting death. If something (person or not) has as its very purpose the killing of a living being, what else could that thing be called but a weapon?
Regardless, this is all a moot point. Sure, Warders CAN be considered Power-wrought weapons, IMO. And If some Aes Sedai were to also hold that opinion, the Oaths would restrict her from bonding one. But since oodles of Aes Sedai do have Warders, we can infer that they do not consider their Warders Power-wrought weapons. So what does it matter?
23
Callandor: 2005-10-10
**I don't know if the Healing analogy would work. I mean, if you are using the word "altered" as a description of what happens to a Warder, then yes, Healing is an analogue.**
I'm not using that -- wolfbrother is saying that.
**Also very crucial to this theory is the fact that the change is permanent, or relatively so. While the bond is in place, these benefits stay in place. Healing, on the other hand, is a one-shot deal. Once it's done, it's done; there isn't some sort of connection to the Aes Sedai and you stay Healed completely while that connection is up. The bond, however, does work that way. While the bond exists, the Warder has constant augmentation.**
Really? I am not aware of a statement saying that a Warder would lose the ability to suffer wounds that would kill normal men, when the bond is broken. On the contrary, you might say it's still very much in place, and one of the reasons they tend to avenge their Aes Sedai if they're killed and such.
**And If some Aes Sedai were to also hold that opinion, the Oaths would restrict her from bonding one. But since oodles of Aes Sedai do have Warders, we can infer that they do not consider their Warders Power-wrought weapons. So what does it matter?**
It matters as evidence that Warders are not power-wrought weapons. If you don't think Warders are power-wrought weapons, then no, it doesn't matter.
24
therobotbadger: 2005-10-11
therobotbadger: **While the bond exists, the Warder has constant augmentation.**
Callandor: **Really? I am not aware of a statement saying that a Warder would lose the ability to suffer wounds that would kill normal men, when the bond is broken.**
I didn't see anyone mention a broken bond. All I'm saying is that WHILE THE BOND EXISTS, the Warder has constant augmentation. Please relpy to my ideas if you quote my statements.
25
Sampson: 2005-10-13
This debate is all about semantics. I disagree with this theory.
A Warder (not counting Rand or Bridgett) is a highly trained professional warrior. What makes them a Warder is the Bond between them and an AS. There is a process and steps involved in becoming a Warder.
There is a pool of resources, the candidates are chosen from this pool to see if they have the necessary abilities (Mental Emotional Physical Spiritual). I would believe that through the training process the candidates are tested and must reach a minimum level of expertise before they can be deemed ready to become a Warder. The result of this training has created an above average warrior.
The candidate is then selected through some kind of process to become an AS s Warder. The OP is used to create a Bond between AS & Warder. The positive & negative results that are caused by this action can be debated per ones point of view.
The point of this is that the Bonding of the Warder using the OP DOES NOT ALTER the Warder. The Bonding ENHANCES the abilities of the Warder. The abilities of being able to sense Shadow Spawn and being able to feel/sense what their AS is feeling etc.. I would say is also an Enhancement of the Warders senses.
So the highly trained warrior is a Weapon prior to being Bonded. The Bond only created the link which enabled the title of Warder. The OP has not been used to create anything except a link which allows better communication and enhancement of trained and natural abilities.
In my opinion, power wrought weapons that can be used by one man to hurt another; would be a physical item that was meant to be a weapon from the moment of its creation.
I do not think the Three Oaths apply or affect the Warder. A Warder can kill a farmer passing by on the road and it will not effect the Bond or the AS (we are not talking morals or what is right or wrong). The AS can tell her Warder to kill the farmer with the same result. It is just like if an AS told a King that a person should be put to death, that doesn t break or affect the Oaths. The King & the Warder has a mind & will of their own, they can choose to do the action or not.
WAIT!!!! What about the ability to Compel their Warder? I do not know all the details but my opinion is that an AS can only Compel her Warder only so much (not like Logain, that is a different weave). I think they are able to Compel their Warder to come and go or follow certain orders (i.e. If an AS is going into a room, her Warder knows that if she enters that room she will be killed. So the Warder does everything with in his power to stop her or enter the room before her. She would be able to Compel him to either let her do what she wants or to enter the room after her). I do not think the Bond can take a Warders will away (i.e. like Grenny or Moggy can; I should have said Forsaken). If an AS tried to use the Bond to force her Warder to kill somebody that he felt he shouldn t, I do not think she could force him. A Warder HAS TO HAVE a strong will or he wouldn t have met the minimum criteria to become a Warder.
Now the last point: Everybody wants to live and not feel pain or die. This is inherent to Every Living Entity (except some bad apples i.e. sadist). Since the Bond has created a link between AS & Warder which enables sharing of senses, Both parties involved would do their best to ensure the other member doesn t get into harms way. I do not think that the Warder is inherently meant to kill but he is meant to Protect (to ward an object or person). In some cases he will have to be able to kill to accomplish this Primary role of Protector. If you have to kill, knowing how to do it in the most effective and efficient manner is essential in prolonging your life and that of your AS.
26
Davian93: 2005-10-15
Of course its a loophole. AS aren't stupid (at least not all of them). They understand there are times when's its very very good to have a walking weapon at their beacon call. It skirts the 2nd Oath but at the same time the Warder is mainly used for defensive purposes so its in keeping with the spirit of the 3 Oaths.
I would say that Commands to warders are not bound by the Oaths at all. Having your Warder kill someone is not the same as doing it yourself. Just like Warders can lie, they can kill without provocation. So an AS could order her Warder to go against the Oaths.
