What Sort of Ending Do You Want for the Series?

[rubbernilly]

"of the Pattern" is different from "in the Pattern"

 

You do not violate RJ's quote at all to say that Fain is not *of* the Pattern, since he is still *in* the Pattern just not directed *by* the Pattern (under this interpretation).

 

You seem to enjoy getting lost in the fog of a discussion when a page long post comes your way. Too much room for crawling through the cracks and leaving most everything unanswered. However, when called out for answers on specifics, you fall strangely silent.

 

Tell me this... suppose, for a moment, that Fain not only side-stepped the Pattern, he is still to the side of the Pattern. Using the sentence below (only changing the conjugation of the verb), how would you relate this piece of information?

Fain (side-step) the Pattern.

 

(and, "It can't be done" isn't an option, because it can)

 

Let's call that #1.

 

Here's #2...

Noting that there is the RJ stated prohibition against anyone within the Pattern altering the destiny of the Pattern...

and supposing that the Pattern's destiny did not originally include interference from the DO...

Would the DO gaining access to the Pattern constitute a violation of that prohibition?

 

Here's #3

Suppose, as in #2, that the Pattern's destiny did not originally include interference from the DO. If anyone within the Pattern managed to kill the DO (or render him impotent from returning to the Pattern), how would that constitute a violation of the mentioned prohibition?

 

Three simple questions, all based on 'if's, so don't get hung up on 'things aren't really that way.' Just answer them.

[Nightstrike]

"of the Pattern" is different from "in the Pattern"

Fain is of the Pattern. Fain is in the Pattern. He has threads in the Pattern. The Wheel weaves his threads. I just gave one quote where RJ discussed these things.

 

You do not violate RJ's quote at all to say that Fain is not *of* the Pattern, since he is still *in* the Pattern just not directed *by* the Pattern (under this interpretation).

The Wheel weaves his threads just like any other threads. I just gave one quote where RJ discussed these things.

 

 

Tell me this... suppose, for a moment, that Fain not only side-stepped the Pattern, he is still to the side of the Pattern. Using the sentence below (only changing the conjugation of the verb), how would you relate this piece of information?

Fain (side-step) the Pattern.

 

(and, "It can't be done" isn't an option, because it can)

 

Let's call that #1.

 

Here's #2...

Noting that there is the RJ stated prohibition against anyone within the Pattern altering the destiny of the Pattern...

and supposing that the Pattern's destiny did not originally include interference from the DO...

Would the DO gaining access to the Pattern constitute a violation of that prohibition?

 

Here's #3

Suppose, as in #2, that the Pattern's destiny did not originally include interference from the DO. If anyone within the Pattern managed to kill the DO (or render him impotent from returning to the Pattern), how would that constitute a violation of the mentioned prohibition?

 

Three simple questions, all based on 'if's, so don't get hung up on 'things aren't really that way.' Just answer them.

Meaningless stuff that I should respond to?  "Fain side-step" the Pattern? What kind of nonsense is this? No, I prefer to go by what RJ told us.

[Nightstrike]

Netherlands tour 7 April 2001, Elf Fantasy Fair - Aan'allein reporting

RJ: The threads work in the way, in the same way that the thread of any living thing works. It is part of the Pattern. They are not outside of the Pattern. Neither are the Forsaken. But the Pattern in a thing that is open, that's change. It is not a matter of the lives being forced necessarily. It's wide, you have the Pattern, the Heroes that are bound to the Wheel, they're not always heroes in the way of someone who rides in galloping with a sword, or carries out daring rescues. The people, the Heroes who are bound to the Wheel, are the corrective mechanisms. Human behavior is throwing the Pattern out. It's throwing the balance off. And the Wheel spins out the proper correctives. Put everything back in the balance. So not even the Forsaken are a part of that, they're not outside. The only things that are outside are the Creator and the Dark One. Neither affected by the Pattern.

 

[OptimusPrime]

Meaningless stuff that I should respond to?  "Fain side-step" the Pattern? What kind of nonsense is this? No, I prefer to go by what RJ told us.

 

I DEMAND that you look at this.

 

9. Has the Padan Fain/Mordeth character been present in previous Ages, or is he unique to this particular Age?

 

He is unique to this particular Age. A very unique fellow, indeed. In some ways, you might say he has unwittingly side-stepped the Pattern.

 

http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Wotmania_and_Dragonmount_Q&A_December_9,_2002

 

Oh my. RJ said nothing is different about this Age. But he also said Fain is unique to this Age. Both are true. It means nobody has ever sidestepped the Pattern the way Fain has. But people have sidestepped the Pattern before.

[Nightstrike]

Oh my. RJ said nothing is different about this Age. But he also said Fain is unique to this Age. Both are true. It means nobody has ever sidestepped the Pattern the way Fain has. But people have sidestepped the Pattern before.

1. Only things outside the Wheel & the Pattern is the Creator & the Dark One.

2. Creatures have free will.

3. The Wheel spins out the proper corrections to try and maintain balance.

4. The Dark One can actually win.

5. Noone inside the Pattern can destroy the Wheel or change the destiny of the Great Pattern.

6. There's nothing that makes this turning any different than other turnings.

7. There are always lots of things that are different in each turning.

8. The general Pattern of the Ages form a tapestry that (generally speaking) is very similar each turning.

9. There is an ordinary afterlife, apart from the Heroes in t'a'r.

10. The Bore will be drilled again when (or "if", for future turnings) the third/whatever Age comes again.

 

 

There is no contradiction.

[Nightstrike]

It is within the usual variation.

[OptimusPrime]

Someone lock this thread, it died a long time ago

[Luckers]

I'm not going to lock it, but I want you all to calm down and be nice to each other. Cool?

[rubbernilly]

Tell me this... suppose, for a moment, that Fain not only side-stepped the Pattern, he is still to the side of the Pattern. Using the sentence below (only changing the conjugation of the verb), how would you relate this piece of information?

Fain (side-step) the Pattern.

 

(and, "It can't be done" isn't an option, because it can)

 

Let's call that #1.

 

Meaningless stuff that I should respond to?  "Fain side-step" the Pattern? What kind of nonsense is this?

 

It is really very simple.

 

"Side-step" is the verb infinitive. Put it in the correct tense to convey that Fain not only side-stepped the Pattern, but that he is still "to the side" of the Pattern's "will."

 

 

[rubbernilly]

Here's to being patient.

 

...and hopelessly optimistic.