PDA

View Full Version : The Art of War


Erial
07-10-2011, 11:09 AM
Hi all,

I'm relatively new to WoT, and am currently reading the 5th book (and am therefore somewhat inexperienced, so please bear with me.)

@-*-**-**-*-EDIT: Please try to limit plot spoilers beacause of this, but don't be at all afraid to go into detail about objects, methods or basic ideas, even if you present them in a mysterious or in non-canon form :) Thanks! -*-**-**-*-@

However, something that's always seemed strange to me was the way magical battles are fought.

From what I understand, weaves can be tied off to be continuous and sustained, and from that time no longer require channelling to maintain them.

Source:

RJ, on TOR Questions of the Week, December 2003 to April 2004 said:

Week 7 Question: I would like to ask about knotting a weave. Does a channeler determine how long it will last when she knots it or is it dependent on her strength? If a channeler who knotted a weave died, would the weave dissipate immediately?

Robert Jordan Answers: The length of time the knot lasts is the choice of whoever makes the knot. It is not strength-dependent. And the knot would continue in existence if the channeler died, at least if the channeler had not set it to unravel in a certain time. Remember, tying off a weave is a way to keep the weave in existence without having to actually channel to maintain it, so once it is tied off, there is really no need for the channeler to continue living for the weave to be maintained.

In all the battles I've seen so far, weaves have been directly channeled, which seems a strange way to do battle. For example, when Nynaeve originally battled Moghedien in Tanchico, the two struggled with weaves of air and spirit in an attempt to encase and still each other, having to spend almost the entirety of their strenght on maintaining their weaves, eventually reaching an impass at which the only way Nynaeve could overcome Moghedien was to divert her attention momentarily.

Why do 'magical' battles (I hate using that word with regard to WoT as it feels so cliché - apologies) in Wheel of Time do this? Surely would it not be more profitable for the weaver to tie off a weave that was designed to encase their target, leaving the target to struggle to fight off/slice the weave, and the weaver free to produce more weaves?

For example, a channeler could create a weave intended to hold their target with Air and Spirit, and then tie it off, meaning that not only did it no longer require their attention (which they could then give to weaving other flows), but it also no longer required OP/TP to feed it against the opponent's defences. Certainly, it would be less versatile in the sense that you couldn't strengthen it (unless the channeler somehow untied the weave to feed back OP/TP into it - not sure if that's possible having not completed the series) but conversely, it would allow the channeler the opportunity to spend their energy (if they had suitable strength) on other weaves whilst the intended target still struggled against their opening 'tied off' weave.

Could channelers not then even lace their tied off weaves with other weaves that benefitted them, such as traps against various attempts to break the tied off weave. I imagine a tied off weave of air being woven with a thread of fire to burn any who channeled at it, effectively making it even more offensive, whilst still the weaver was free to create more weaves. It seems a logical way of fighting with OP/TP, rather than the clumsy (if multiple) weaves that I've experienced channelers fighting with thus far. It would at least alleviate the 'strike-counter-strike-defend-strike-counter-defend-grapple' ping pong style of power combat I've seen so far?

--------------------------------------------------

Imagine for example, a battle between Rand (R) and Ishamael (I):

R: Shield of Air+Spirit to encase I (tied off.)
I: Spends time (even if minimal, is still an advantage for R) defending against R's encasing weave which R no longer has to maintain.
R: (In meantime) weaves stilling weave of Spirit (tied off.)
I: Now has to deal with/break 2 strong weaves.
R: Fire+Spirit inlay upon the earlier weaves of spirit+air as a trap (tied off.)
I: Strikes trap, is now struck by the 'curse' like weave.

etc, etc.

I know battles likely escalate by the end of the series with weaves flying everywhere, which likely makes this fight seem a little simplistic :o Obviously I've probably also made some kind of newb mistake with the situation above, upon which the hounds will descend, but even if I have made a technical mistake with the possibilities of OP/TP, I hope the idea is clear to see.

--------------------------------------------------

I've thought long and hard about this, and the only thoughts I could come up with as to why weilders don't use more tied weaves in battle were:

1 - They don't realise the possibility. As is stated multiple times in the book, only some channelers can/know how to tie off weaves, and it is possible that those who can have not realised the potential versatility this would grant during battle.

2 - It is difficult/impossible to tie off weaves quickly enough for the heat of battle, which is possibly why weaves are only tied off once a captive is held/once an opponent has been overcome. Trying to tie weaves in battle could take too much time for the channeler and leave them open.

3 - By not maintaining the weave manually, a channeler is less aware of their control over OP/TP, and is therefore susceptible to weaving too many weaves (some of which may be timed to kick in - and therefore draw energy - at a later point - if this is possible?) and as such could be burned out as they struggle to draw enough power to sustain the weaves.

4 - By doing this, there could be too much reliance placed upon weaves which the channeler no longer has any control over, and therefore could leave that channeler open if their weaves were overcome.

5 - A tied off weave could possibly be manipulated and weakened/overcome/corrupted (not sure if this is possible, but I'm just posting any ideas at all.)

--------------------------------------------------

So, TL;DR:

Why aren't tied off weaves used more in channelled combat, as they appear, to my mind, able to grant the channeller more advantage, power and opportunity in a magical battle?

Thanks for your time,
-Er

Kimon
07-10-2011, 11:25 AM
I think you're over-estimating the potential usefulness of tied-off threads in a duel, at least as offensive weaves. We do know of one such type of a tied-off offensive (by book 5 anyway, I can think of at least one other tied-off offensive weave from later books) weave that is used in such a situation, a shield. But besides a shield, what other tied-off weaves do you have in mind as potentially useful? I suppose one might be able to come up with a weave for a pulsating, or repetitive fireball or lightning weave, but besides a shield, most offensive battle weaves would likely be more useful if woven once, and under direct and immediate control rather than placed on auto-pilot. The shield is the obvious exception to this, but its use is known. Defensive weaves on the other hand might be much more useful when used with tied off threads.


Edit:
Beyond that, as for more explicit use, you're stuck with the obligatory RAFO.

Erial
07-10-2011, 12:28 PM
But besides a shield, what other tied-off weaves do you have in mind as potentially useful?
One could continue the existance of balefire beams (caging a target for example, or funneling them in a specific direction by creating balefire walls - that would be very useful during battles with large numbers of skirmishers), create 'curse' like weaves which are triggered upon certain circumstances being met (or not being met, such as Siuan's self-destructing box of secret letters.)Whole traps could potentially be layed that whilst admittedly reactive, were no less offensive. For example, Rand creates a weave that is a trap for anyone attempting to channel Callandor at Tear, indicating that this is possible. Egwene supposedly wards her room with a trap that will suspend someone with air like bonds. Darkspawn can be warded away, or their notice averted as Moriane is shown to do in the very first book. Whole swathes (or 'zones') could be given similar traps, which if woven 'thin enough' I believe the term is, could be greatly useful in a duel. If a channeler had the ability to create such 'traps' during a duel, effectively boxing in the safe possibilities for their opponent.

Equally fire could be channelled into existance on the location of the target and then tied off.

Practically any weave that required continual effort to sustain could be tied off and left to function.

I suppose one might be able to come up with a weave for a pulsating, or repetitive fireball or lightning weave

That's a good idea - simple as it is, I hadn't considered very far down that avenue, besides a repetitive fireball.

besides a shield, most offensive battle weaves would likely be more useful if woven once, and under direct and immediate control rather than placed on auto-pilot.
What makes you say this? I can imagine the possibilities, but I'm interested in learning the definitive reason? :)

Defensive weaves on the other hand might be much more useful when used with tied off threads.
That's a good point. Why then, do you think, is this not more often the case?

Edit: Beyond that, as for more explicit use, you're stuck with the obligatory RAFO.
Sorry to seem stupid, but what's RAFO?

Thanks,
-Er

Kimon
07-10-2011, 12:43 PM
What makes you say this? I can imagine the possibilities, but I'm interested in learning the definitive reason? :)


In a duel, one is more likely (with certain exceptions) to prefer one's offensive weaves to be simple, and immediate. Even a repetitive fireball might be dangerous to yourself in a duel, as if you don't have direct control of the weave, what if it accidentally hits you rather than the enemy? If merely sending weaves against an enemy army on the other hand, sending such a weave would make much more sense. Defensive weaves on the other hand would have much more reason to be useful in a continued sense, but again, since you're only at Book 5 it's difficult for me to point to more specific examples, but keep in mind, Rand, and his enemies will get more sophisticated as the series progresses, hence the RAFO - Read and Find Out - one of RJ's favorite responses during interviews...

Kimon
07-10-2011, 12:47 PM
One could continue the existance of balefire beams (caging a target for example, or funneling them in a specific direction by creating balefire walls - that would be very useful during battles with large numbers of skirmishers)

Balefire is like an eraser, of all the weaves that could be tied-off to lengthen their effect, balefire seems the most pointless such application.

The Unreasoner
07-10-2011, 01:00 PM
Rafo is a word I believe coined by RJ himself, an acronym for read and find out. To mean either read future books and get all of the facts or reread past ones and pay attention.

are you on book 5 in a reread? Or is this your first read through? If it's the latter, you may want to specify no spoilers somewhere or you will get pricks like me telling you rand is short a finger when he returns to the shire.

Oh, and as to tied of weaves, maybe if you could set up some sort of wide area volley of fireballs it'll work, but for me, I'm walking around balefire, as per the old maxim: balefire never (should need to) hit(s) the same place twice.

Erial
07-10-2011, 01:15 PM
Balefire is like an eraser, of all the weaves that could be tied-off to lengthen their effect, balefire seems the most pointless such application.

The most deadly, destructive weave known, not only destroying whatever it strikes totally (with the exception of when Rand and Ishamael's beams cross, or when Perrin is struck in the Dream - though I realise that's different) but also burning out its past actions from the pattern. What better way to cage someone, or prevent them from moving in a certain direction than to present them with a wall that they cannot, and will not cross/touch? :)

As for the spoilers, I'm sorry, you're both right. However, I am one of these people who does research ahead. If I find something I want to know more about I tend to head straight to the WoT wiki and learn about it, but in general I try to steer clear of plot points, preferring to research individual characters, items or powers/methods. I think 'minimise spoilers' might best apply to me :P

RAFO - haha, that's great :) Thanks :P

-Er

Juan
07-10-2011, 01:34 PM
The thing about balefire is that it's destructive to the pattern so it wouldn't be beneficial for anyone in the long run to go around weaving balefire.

As to tied-off weaves, the problem is in the time you waste tying them off you sacrifice other possible weaves. The enemy channeler can simply unravel what you make as easily as a non-tied off weave. So I don't think it would be very useful. The traps in environment idea is a good one, but again, laying the traps in the middle of the battle is a bit silly. Realistically for that to be possible, you'd need to set up the traps before the battle which means you knew where the battle/fight would be, which is highly unlikely in most situations.

Kimon
07-10-2011, 01:47 PM
The thing about balefire is that it's destructive to the pattern so it wouldn't be beneficial for anyone in the long run to go around weaving balefire.

As to tied-off weaves, the problem is in the time you waste tying them off you sacrifice other possible weaves. The enemy channeler can simply unravel what you make as easily as a non-tied off weave. So I don't think it would be very useful. The traps in environment idea is a good one, but again, laying the traps in the middle of the battle is a bit silly. Realistically for that to be possible, you'd need to set up the traps before the battle which means you knew where the battle/fight would be, which is highly unlikely in most situations.

Of course, we have seen this, but again, spoilers apply since Erial has only read through FoH...

Erial
07-10-2011, 01:50 PM
The thing about balefire is that it's destructive to the pattern so it wouldn't be beneficial for anyone in the long run to go around weaving balefire.
Oh, now that I didn't realise. Makes sense really.

As to tied-off weaves, the problem is in the time you waste tying them off you sacrifice other possible weaves. The enemy channeler can simply unravel what you make as easily as a non-tied off weave. So I don't think it would be very useful. The traps in environment idea is a good one, but again, laying the traps in the middle of the battle is a bit silly. Realistically for that to be possible, you'd need to set up the traps before the battle which means you knew where the battle/fight would be, which is highly unlikely in most situations.
Thanks :) My one point of disagreement (and trust me I do this with great trepidation :P ) is when you say:

laying the traps in the middle of the battle is a bit silly.

Isn't Rand able, very early on (by book 4) to weave multiple, multiple threads without so much as breaking a sweat? Surely if one can bend the weaves (or turn them inside out) to hide them, then one who was powerful enough to create and sustain multiple threads could hide the placing of a trap during an actual battle? Placing traps before a battle would allow more time for their discovery, whereas in the heat of battle, surely it would be beneficial to block some avenues offence, at a point where your attacker was already committed? :)

Haha, I'm sure I'll be well and truly snubbed, but thank you all for your patient replies! :)

-Er

Kimon
07-10-2011, 01:52 PM
Isn't Rand able, very early on (by book 4) to weave multiple, multiple threads without so much as breaking a sweat? Surely if one can bend the weaves (or turn them inside out) to hide them, then one who was powerful enough to create and sustain multiple threads could hide the placing of a trap during an actual battle?



RAFO

The Unreasoner
07-10-2011, 02:18 PM
Interesting thoughts. If it were possible to hide weaves, I guess I would have just accepted it and moved on. These theories on the mechanics are fascinating.

BTW, you know of scenes in much later books, would it be okay for us to just mention specific weaves or ter'angreal and techniques without giving details on who/where/when?

Juan
07-10-2011, 02:24 PM
That's why I'm being very careful not to mention any specifics or examples. But keep in mind some weaves are more complex than others and I believe time is better spent in defending against attacks, countering, and doing direct attacks than trying to be subtle in the midst of a fight. Just not enough time IMO.

Erial
07-10-2011, 02:35 PM
Interesting thoughts. If it were possible to hide weaves, I guess I would have just accepted it and moved on. These theories on the mechanics are fascinating.

In answer to this (spoiler if you don't know anything about reversing/inverting weaves):

Aside from simply inverting weaves after they have been woven, a weave can also be reversed while it is being woven, preventing anyone from ever seeing it.

And just in case she (Alivia) proved to be what they called a wilder, Cyndane prepared a small present for her, a reversed web she would not even see until it was too late. -- Winter's Heart, With the Choedan Kal.

The full article is can be found here:
http://library.tarvalon.net/index.php?title=Hiding_Weaves_and_Masking_the_Abil ity_to_Channel

BTW, you know of scenes in much later books
Mostly by accidentally researching too far, it's easy to stumble upon something plot definining whilst researching.

would it be okay for us to just mention specific weaves or ter'angreal and techniques without giving details on who/where/when?
Certainly, but try to ruin as little as possible. I edited my OP to say that it's fine to mention specifics, so long as you try not to ruin whole plot arcs/twists for me :P But I understand that sometimes a plot twist holds the key point you're trying to make, so it may be unavoidable.

Just not enough time IMO
I by no means suggest that this would be a practical method of battle for channellers who could only hold a few weaves maximum, but for wielders who could hold and maintain multiple weaves all at the same time (I'm thinking Rand, Ish, etc.) then would this not be an effective way to fight? If they were adept at this form of combat surely they could tie the shields, tie their defences and tie various traps all at once, leaving them totally free to focus on their offence, whilst their target struggled to fight off not only focused attacks, but also tied shields and encasings, all whilst having to navigate around various traps that would only add to their danger. The channeler tying everything would surely feel their defences break/falter, and then replace/strengthen them at the appropriate point? Even for those who were less than gifted at tying off like this, they could at least engage in "standard" combat (if there is such a thing) whilst weaving a few of these traps against a foe at the same time?

The fact that channelers such as Rand can weave multiple threads at a time indicates to me that they can almost partition their focus, or at least wield the power without much effort at all (beyond the obvious.) Surely time to weave secondary weaves isn't a factor, because your primary weaves (basic offences and defences) are the only ones that would rely on timing?

I'm sorry, I'm probably making a lot of assumptions which may be incorrect, but I just thought it would be interesting to mull over the possibilities.

-Er

Kimon
07-10-2011, 03:07 PM
The fact that channelers such as Rand can weave multiple threads at a time indicates to me that they can almost partition their focus, or at least wield the power without much effort at all (beyond the obvious.) Surely time to weave secondary weaves isn't a factor, because your primary weaves (basic offences and defences) are the only ones that would rely on timing?


Circumstances would play a large role in this. If facing an army, and with a few minutes to prepare weaves, one could obviously create intricate weaves, even tie those weaves off. In a duel, however, the same is not true. If you're facing a dangerous enemy, you're fighting for your life, and not likely to waste time and effort on pointlessly intricate weaves. That is not to say that one might not have taken the foresight to have laid some traps in advance and then cleverly draw one's enemy into such traps, but otherwise, one is likely to keep things simple. This doesn't necessarily exclude intricate weaves, after all balefire is intricate, but while one might want to use balefire, tying your balefire weave would just be silly. In a duel the only tied off weave one would be likely to employ would be a shield, and that would be the end of the duel.

Erial
07-10-2011, 04:07 PM
Circumstances would play a large role in this. If facing an army, and with a few minutes to prepare weaves
Is that how long it would take? I'm not so sure. I know I'm talking about complex matters with someone who is obviously a lot more experienced than me, but I have to disagree on some points, at least so as to learn better. When Rand faced Ba'alzamon in the Heart of the Stone of Tear, Ba'alzamon fled and Rand gave chase. During this chase, which was a pretty quick and fluid event, Ba'alzamon layed a multitude of intracate and complex traps that Rand sprung. Another example was when Rand sent out a Shadowspawn seeking projectile in the Stone of Tear when it was attacked after he declared himself there, all in the heat of battle. Certainly it might take a weaker channeller minutes to prepare weaves, but would it not take much less for a stronger channeller, say, one of the Forsaken, or Aviana/Egwene/Nynave (or even Taim)?

In a duel, however, the same is not true. If you're facing a dangerous enemy, you're fighting for your life, and not likely to waste time and effort on pointlessly intricate weaves.
But would they be useless? Certainly, they would not rely on brute force, yet any scheme or trap that gave an advantage: do you not see that as profitable? :)

Another point I'd like to make quickly is that whilst you are fighting for your life, battles or duels rarely begin at 100% danger and continue this way. Instead, they increase in danger and ferociousness until a critical point is reached -- THAT is the point at which you are truly fighting for your life.

It is never profitable in any sense, unless you are going for a quick kill, to engage your opponent with all your might (and therefore rouse a matching and equally dangerous response - if they are capable) as not only does it betray your total ability, it also means that you are not able to pace yourself effectively, and cannot rise further to meet any possible rising challenges. Throughout history, especially at the time of Sun Tzu in ancient Japanese history (one of the masters of practical and philosophical warfare) this has been a common fact - hidden units, complex unitary manouvres, tactics - all these things are the epitome of the Art of War (which was funnily enough written by Sun Tzu.)

An example of this in the WoT universe is Ba'alzamon fighting Rand. He consistently goads Rand, and right up until the very end of his life, he does not use his full power. It is only when he realises the battle has reached that critical point that he reaches for the True Power. I by no means suggest that TP is more powerful than the OP, but we know it is 'more destructive', and capable of things that the OP is not capable of - it was his full might, which he chose not to use until the end (it seems clear that it was a choice because Ish was always said to have used the TP for even the most simple tasks, and when in the Heart of the Stone at Tear, after having watched Moriane kill Be'lal, he floats down to join the battle - a feat that supposedly only the TP is able to sustain.

Certainly, if a fight began at full ferocity, with all the channeller's effort being needed to sustain his life - every single weave he is capable of producing being needed for the simple requirement of defeating his opponent using brute force, then I agree, there would be no spare energy to set aside for complex tactics such as tied weaves. However, if that critical point in the fight had not yet been reached, then I see no reason why it would not be profitable to lay all sorts of traps using energy which was not yet necessarily needed for defending the caster's own life?

one is likely to keep things simple.
Even when you *can* create such advanced, complex weaves? When you have the 'computing space' left over to quickly work such weaves into the battle? :)

tying your balefire weave would just be silly.
I think you have visions of meteors of balefire hurtling down upon opponents, tied off and repeating, or streaks of balefire spinning around uncontrolled, with which I agree, would be totally ridiculous and down right dangerous. When I envisage the use of tied Balefire weaves, I think of thin bars of balefire acting as a cage to entrap an opponent, which would be an incredibly effective method of keeping someone inside the confines of the cage (for who would willingly step into Balefire?) It would be even more effective then, if the captive could be stilled or trapped from the Source, as they would be unable to travel out of the cage.

Again, forgive any mistakes I've made, and ignore any sense of impertinance you get from my posts - it's not at all meant to come across so, but I do so enjoy debating ideas :)

-Er

The Unreasoner
07-10-2011, 04:12 PM
In answer to this (spoiler if you don't know anything about reversing/inverting weaves)

Lol I know of reversing and inverting. I didn't want to spoil it though. I never thought of the mechanics, turning a weave inside out sounds interesting though.

One of the main problems though is time: it takes time (though not necessarily much) to knot, and knots can be unknotted without too much difficulty.

Another is lack of control. If you set a field to burst into flame every five minutes, it might not be particularly useful once they figure it out, but it will pin your forces as well. And if it's unknotted, it'll be without your knowing.

The Unreasoner
07-10-2011, 04:21 PM
Also there is a weave, though few have used it, that works as well as a shield and a cage of balefire. It's sort of like a taser/shocklance pistol.

Or you could just knock them out with a bat.

There is a sort of shield that stops everything short of balefire that could be used too, but it would have to be modified, as the version we have seen keeps out air as well.

Kimon
07-10-2011, 04:23 PM
Is that how long it would take? I'm not so sure. I know I'm talking about complex matters with someone who is obviously a lot more experienced than me, but I have to disagree on some points, at least so as to learn better. When Rand faced Ba'alzamon in the Heart of the Stone of Tear, Ba'alzamon fled and Rand gave chase. During this chase, which was a pretty quick and fluid event, Ba'alzamon layed a multitude of intracate and complex traps that Rand sprung. Another example was when Rand sent out a Shadowspawn seeking projectile in the Stone of Tear when it was attacked after he declared himself there, all in the heat of battle. Certainly it might take a weaker channeller minutes to prepare weaves, but would it not take much less for a stronger channeller, say, one of the Forsaken, or Aviana/Egwene/Nynave (or even Taim)?


A stronger channeler can make more weaves obviously, think of Elayne and Egwene's surprise and dismay at the number of weaves that Rand effortlessly made in tDR, but that would not change preparation time. If an enemy is afar, you have time to prepare for intricacy, if the enemy is nigh and throwing their own weaves at you, you are both on the offensive and defensive, and this will effect what types of weaves you will employ. Distance is also a factor, in later books we are introduced to weaves that are effective against enemies from afar, but dangerous to yourself if too proximate, just as we are introduced to weaves that are lethal against particular types of foes. Both of those unmentioned, since spoilerific, weaves would likely be quite useless in a duel, regardless of whether tied off, but potentially of great use in other situations. Concerning the shadowspawn-seeking weave, it may have been tied off, but again, that was situationally dependent usage.

Beyond that, all I can say is keep reading.

When I envisage the use of tied Balefire weaves, I think of thin bars of balefire acting as a cage to entrap an opponent, which would be an incredibly effective method of keeping someone inside the confines of the cage (for who would willingly step into Balefire?) It would be even more effective then, if the captive could be stilled or trapped from the Source, as they would be unable to travel out of the cage.

That might work if it was one continuous bar of balefire, but if it was more than one, they would likely erase each other, and that is best case scenario. But again, why use balefire? A shield would be far more effective if you wanted to take them prisoner, as that would disconnect them from the ability to channel, and if you wanted to kill them, why not just use the balefire to erase them. We have seen (already by FoH) use of weaves of air, however to do something similar to what you are suggesting. Considering the negative effects of balefire, unless your intent is to erase your opponent's existence, use of balefire is properly verboten.

greatwolf
07-10-2011, 04:35 PM
Erial,

There are many factors to consider in a OP battle, some of which you've already mentioned yourself and also in Kimon's last post.

Time, speed and strength are essential for obvious reasons. And there's also knowledge and battle skill. For instance which would be faster: weaving air and tossing it at your opponent or weaving air, tying it and the tossing it at the opposition?

Of course weaving air and fire would take longer than weaving air alone, but again this depends on what is being woven. As Kimon noted, simpler and faster is generally better for offense.

As for the Moghedien/nyn match up, I think the problem arose with the attempt to shield. (Have you read new spring?) Once commited, each protagonist had to follow through. Diverting strength to another make another weave like spirit to slash would have allowed the opponents weave to fall into place.

The other thing is that it takes your opponent the same amount of time to slash a weave that has been tied off as one that hasn't been tied. One could therefore toss more of the untied weaves in hope that one would get through than losing time trying to tie off the weaves.

Note though there is a difference between tying a weave and resetting one.

Erial
07-10-2011, 07:03 PM
It is clear to me that whilst we all hang upon a line of reasonable fact, I am merely clinging, fumbling my way along, whilst you sprint - your feet planted :)

I still disagree with the fact that the heat of battle totally dictates what weaves are woven. Whilst I totally see your point that there is little time, as battering of assualts threaten to sweep the channeller away, and that there are specific weaves tailored for specific situations, I myself - always impressed most by the innovative - can at least hope that there is/has/will be some wise channeller in RL who has/will learn(ed) to master elements of what I'm trying to explain in combat and use them to the effect that I can envisage, strange/clunky as they sound :)

I totally get that the mechanics don't work quite as I assumed however, and I have learned that there are clearly more conventional ways to do it.

I don't think there's anything more I can really add with regard to the original intent of the thread.

Thanks for the debate anyway, and it was nice meeting you all.

My water is yours; your honour is mine.

Thanks again,
-Er

Kimon
07-10-2011, 08:26 PM
Consider one of the finest duels in cinema - Indiana Jones vs. random Middle Eastern swordsman in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Sure the original script called for some ridiculously elaborate duel with Dr Jones using his whip, but then time and money constraints led to a more logical conclusion, namely the fact that Indy (Indie?) had a gun on him, so why the heck would he fight a swordsman with his whip when he could just shoot him.

Same concept applies here.

Res_Ipsa
07-11-2011, 01:00 AM
Consider one of the finest duels in cinema - Indiana Jones vs. random Middle Eastern swordsman in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Sure the original script called for some ridiculously elaborate duel with Dr Jones using his whip, but then time and money constraints led to a more logical conclusion, namely the fact that Indy (Indie?) had a gun on him, so why the heck would he fight a swordsman with his whip when he could just shoot him.

To paraphrase, "Anakin, I have the High Ground, its over!" -Obi Wan

Anakin - "Good thing we aren't at Waterloo in the early 19th century then."


All George Lucas's previous good works are negated by Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and the immaculate conception of Anakin Skywalker (not to mention Jar Jar Binks).

A) You know your character is bad when only the French can write good reviews of the character (Jar Jar)

B) Wouldn't it be easier to just have said Shmi Skywalker was a space tramp caught up in the mystique of some random Jedi and/or normal dude.

Juan
07-11-2011, 01:17 AM
Idk, Res... Jar Jar has a pretty badass unique accent. Pretty original at least. I just like the fact a 20 year old girl fell in love with an 8 year old boy. That's probably why Anakin turned out to be a creep. :P

greatwolf
07-11-2011, 03:09 AM
Thanks for the debate anyway, and it was nice meeting you all.

My water is yours; your honour is mine.

Thanks again,
-Er

Thanks for the refreshing thread. You should know - a lot of your questions are answered later. Enjoy!