Tomas

[Luckers]

So, ok, this may be reaching at straws, but something occurred to me when doing the write up for the DMDB Very Helpful Verin listing--specifically, Verin's behaviour was scoured prior to tGS for actions that were out of the ordinary (aka Verinisms). After tGS, though, we've not really paid attention to new abnormalities--oh people discuss her notes to Mat, but the spotlight on her seems to have faded.

 

Yet she does say some very weird things about her Warder, Tomas.

 

"Tomas. Does he know what you've done?"

 

"He was a Darkfriend himself, child," Verin said. "Wanting a way out. Well, there really isn't a way out, not once the Great Lord has his claws in you. But there was a way to fight, to make up for a little of what you've done. I offered that chance to Tomas, and I believe he was quite grateful to me for it."

 

Egwene hesitated, trying to take all of this in. Verin was a Darkfriend . . . but not one at the same time. "You said he 'was' quite grateful to you?"

 

Verin didn't answer immediately. She simply took another sip of her tea. "The oaths one makes to the Great Lord are quite specific," she finally continued. "And, when they are placed upon one who can channel, they are quite binding. Impossible to break. You can double-cross other Dark-friends, you can turn against the Chosen if you can justify it. Selfishness must be preserved. But you can never betray him. You can never betray the order itself to outsiders. But the oaths are specific. Very specific." She looked up, meeting Egwene's eyes. " 'I swear not to betray the Great Lord, to keep my secrets until the hour of my death.' That was what I promised. Do you see?"

 

Egwene looked down at the steaming cup in Verin's hands. "Poison?"

 

"It takes a very special tea to make asping rot go down sweetly," Verin said, taking another sip. "As I said, please thank Laras for me."

 

Egwene closed her eyes. Nynaeve had mentioned asping rot to her; a drop could kill. It was a quick death, peaceful, and often came . . . within an hour of ingestion.

 

"A curious hole in the oaths," Verin said softly. "To allow one to effect a betrayal in the final hour of one's life. I cannot help wondering if the Great Lord knows of it. Why wouldn't he close that hole?"

 

"Perhaps he doesn't see it as threatening," Egwene said, opening her eyes. "After all, what kind of Darkfriend would kill themselves in order to advance the greater good? It doesn't seem the kind of thing his followers would consider."

 

"You may be right at that," Verin said, setting the cup of tea aside. "It would be wise to make certain that is disposed of with care, child."

 

"So that is it?" Egwene asked, chilled. "What of Tomas?"

 

"We made our farewells. He is spending his last hour with family."

 

[tGS; 39, A Visit From Verin Sedai]

 

My problem with this is why is Tomas spending his last hour doing anything? Why does he have a last hour at all? The last hour prescription is a function of the binding Black Aes Sedai undergo, so why was it applicable to Tomas?

 

Verin says he was looking for a way out, and that there were none but that there was a way to fight back. The assumption here is that that way ended for him with Verin's death, yet it is curious--Verin clearly had plans for beyond her death--she did not actually want to die, and only did so because the removal of the Oath Rod left her no other options. So why did Tomas have to die? He clearly was on her side, and she could have released his bond so he didn't suffer the Death Absortion Effect.

 

Brandon has told us we should still be asking questions about Verin, and prior to her revelation this sort of thing would have rung alarm bells--yet no one questions it. Why go into such detail about Tomas? Why act like he was as bound by the Oath against betraying the Great Lord as she was?

 

I don't really have an answer--maybe he is persuing her goals, the ones she implies to Egwene she has set in motion. Yet why does she conceal him doing so whilst trusting Egwene with everything else? Or if she is to conceal him, why doesn't she just shut up about him?

 

As I said this may be reaching, but most the Verinisms began so, and Brandon has suggested we should continue in this light....

 

 

So yeah. Thoughts

[Val Mickey]

Death Rage.

[Luckers]

Death Rage.

 

Not necessary, she'd need only release the bond.

[Phelix]

I think that he probably took poison as well, voluntarily, because as Verin's Warder, he likely reported to her as a Darkfriend. She was his immediate superior, and how he was connected to other darkfriend cells. If she released him from her bond, someone else who knew she was black, perhaps someone on the Supreme Council or a member of her heart, would wonder why he had survived Verin. Tomas would have been snapped up, and he has no defense against a channeler taking him.

 

If he was taken, he would have been able to reveal a lot about Verin's movements, plans, and her ways of thinking. He would be an invaluable resource to the Shadow, if they knew how to use him.

 

Or there could be a secret motive that Verin had, and a mission she sent Tomas on while lying to Egwene. :D

[Barid Bel Medar]

Death Rage.

 

Not necessary, she'd need only release the bond.

 

This is true. And as you said, she wouldnt have known she was going to die when they parted ways.

 

However, I think I can answer on both accounts.

 

 

As for not knowing she was going to die, I would say that she said something like "Hey Tomas, I am going to try and get round the DO oaths, Ill find the Oath Rod, but if I cant, Ill poison myself. So, just in case, you may want to spend the time with your family. If I come back for you, sweet, but theres a possibility...

 

As for releasing the bond.

 

I dont think he WANTED to live. As she says, he was looking for a way out. If Verin was going to die, Tomas was left all alone, still bound to the DO. I think he wanted to die. And what better way to die than with the Death Rage, taking as many servants of the Dark One as possible.

 

I think Verin's answer to egwene was to avoid stating the obvious, it would be tedious if she said

 

"Tomas is with his family, I told him I might die, so just in case, he can visit them. I said i might come back, and fetch him, but i could not be certain."

 

Remember, she had taken poison. She was dying at this time, I dont think she would bother explaining everything about Tomas and his family. There were more pressing matters. Besides, the fact was, she was dying at the time, so in her mind there was no need to state the possibility.

 

Anyway, I do agree with you, there is definitely something up with everything she said, and we should be questioning it, but i am not sure about this particular thing.

[Sharaman]

Death Rage.

 

Not necessary, she'd need only release the bond.

 

This is true. And as you said, she wouldnt have known she was going to die when they parted ways.

 

However, I think I can answer on both accounts.

 

 

As for not knowing she was going to die, I would say that she said something like "Hey Tomas, I am going to try and get round the DO oaths, Ill find the Oath Rod, but if I cant, Ill poison myself. So, just in case, you may want to spend the time with your family. If I come back for you, sweet, but theres a possibility...

 

As for releasing the bond.

 

I dont think he WANTED to live. As she says, he was looking for a way out. If Verin was going to die, Tomas was left all alone, still bound to the DO. I think he wanted to die. And what better way to die than with the Death Rage, taking as many servants of the Dark One as possible.

 

I think Verin's answer to egwene was to avoid stating the obvious, it would be tedious if she said

 

"Tomas is with his family, I told him I might die, so just in case, he can visit them. I said i might come back, and fetch him, but i could not be certain."

 

Remember, she had taken poison. She was dying at this time, I dont think she would bother explaining everything about Tomas and his family. There were more pressing matters. Besides, the fact was, she was dying at the time, so in her mind there was no need to state the possibility.

 

Anyway, I do agree with you, there is definitely something up with everything she said, and we should be questioning it, but i am not sure about this particular thing.

 

Possibilities

1) Verin may be lying for obscure reasons. For one, she might be wanting to give Tomas parole by letting everyone (on both sides of the fence) think he's dead. All she has to do is release the bond, then he can change his appearance a little and disappear into the sunset.

2) Tomas would, like any other warder, feel his AS was in distress/ mortally ill and that would tell him his time had come (assuming she hadn't released him).

 

More interesting, does he have a further role to play?

[he who comes with a bong]

well maybee he can channel with the wanting a way out was wanting a way out to not go insane from the taint when verin first bonded him im probally wrong but yah never know

[Barid Bel Medar]

well maybee he can channel with the wanting a way out was wanting a way out to not go insane from the taint when verin first bonded him im probally wrong but yah never know

 

I am not sure about the channeling. Could be I suppose.

 

But Tomas "wanting a way out" refers to him being a DF and wanting to switch back to the light.

[sdelu]

Do we know for certain that the "hour of death" Oath is ONLY for Black Ajah/channelers in general? The most I can recall about it is that someone must channel into it, but it doesn't have to be the person who is being bound, considering there are those who were bound against their will (Galina comes to mind). We also see things like Compulsion and the Warder Bond work on those who are non-channelers, so I don't see why we should discount the possibility that Tomas is tied to the Oath.

 

Now we have to consider that if Verin betrays the Dark One, if (IF) Tomas is held to the Oath, might he have to kill himself also? Is he not inherently betraying the DO by not stopping Verin? What would his other options be?

 

Of course, "family" could always mean something other than what we're assuming it means. Perhaps by "family" Verin means "darkfriends" (someone had to initiate him, no? maybe DF Warders?) and he is indeed going on a killing rampage. That type of comment seems to fit in with Verin's sometimes quirky and sarcastic personality.

 

However, I really have a hard time believing that after Verin's betrayal that Tomas will do something as simple as a killing rampage. Verin was smart (very smart) and could have easily figured out ways for Tomas to do some real damage. Besides, one would think she would want him to feel a real sense of redemption. Killing a few measly Darkfriends just isn't on the same level as revealing ~200 Black Ajah members.

[Sharaman]

An oath on the Binder can't hold a non-channeler, regardless of who does the channeling.

Tomas shows no signs of having slowed. He's not a channeler unless of course, he's using Mask of Mirrors.

[sdelu]

It really doesn't make sense that the Binders wouldn't hold a non-channeler. I don't mean to argue whether it can or cannot (RJ's comment on the Binders seems to imply that it cannot), I mean it really literally makes no sense. How useful are they if they only bind channelers? What did they make up in the AoL, 3% of the population? Sooo...what about all those non-channeler criminals?

 

I would have enjoyed if there was a quote with an explanation of just why it only worked on channelers. It's almost indistinguishable from compulsion in my eyes, and we see other ter'angreal work with non-channelers, so... I don't get it.

 

There is nothing concretely ruling it out, which is annoying. All we get is "If you committed a violent act, or some sort of criminal act, with a binder, someone who could channel could be constrained from ever doing that again, and the result of having three of the Oaths, is the ageless appearance." Which (and I know it's splitting hairs, but still...) is not the same thing as saying "this doesn't work on non-channelers."

 

So I ask again, do we actually know for CERTAIN certain, or are we just inferring based on omission?

[Barid Bel Medar]

There is nothing concretely ruling it out, which is annoying. All we get is "If you committed a violent act, or some sort of criminal act, with a binder, someone who could channel could be constrained from ever doing that again, and the result of having three of the Oaths, is the ageless appearance." Which (and I know it's splitting hairs, but still...) is not the same thing as saying "this doesn't work on non-channelers."

 

So I ask again, do we actually know for CERTAIN certain, or are we just inferring based on omission?

 

The short answer, no. RJ has not specifically said "The Oath Rod is only for channelers"

 

Aside from that quote the only other reference (AFAIK) is from Sammael aCoS Chapter 40: Spears. Says something to the effect of "can only be used on channelers"

 

Of course, its highly possible that he is lying.

 

So yeah, its up for debate.

[Grig]

It really doesn't make sense that the Binders wouldn't hold a non-channeler. I don't mean to argue whether it can or cannot (RJ's comment on the Binders seems to imply that it cannot), I mean it really literally makes no sense. How useful are they if they only bind channelers? What did they make up in the AoL, 3% of the population? Sooo...what about all those non-channeler criminals?

 

Why is this so hard to believe, but not that 13x13 can only be done to channelers? As such, as early as TDR it's been canon that ability to channel is a weakness that makes you vulnerable to certain things.

 

Why are they called Binders? Because they bind channelers with their own power. Can you think of a reason why, if non-channelers can be Bound, that stilling removes the Binding?

 

I would have enjoyed if there was a quote with an explanation of just why it only worked on channelers. It's almost indistinguishable from compulsion in my eyes, and we see other ter'angreal work with non-channelers, so... I don't get it.

 

Because it uses their ability to channel (connection to the True Source?) to bind them according to whatever oaths are made. Non-channelers don't have that connection. Would it be helpful to remember that during the AoL, channelers were given the choice to be Stilled or be Bound? Binders were a luxury afforded channelers to keep them from being separated from the True Source by preventing them from misusing it. Non-channelers don't have access to the Powers That Drive The Wheel Of Time, and don't need such safeguarding (well, they might with ter'angreal, but in that case you just guard the ter'angreal).

 

There is nothing concretely ruling it out

 

Except for Sammael stating in ACOS that they only work on channelers, of course.

[Barid Bel Medar]

 

There is nothing concretely ruling it out

 

Except for Sammael stating in ACOS that they only work on channelers, of course.

 

I adressed this in my post.

 

If you did not know, the characters in the Wheel of Time constantly get things wrong and lie.

 

Sammael's word is not proof.

 

Just because a character says something is so, it doesnt mean it is.

[mbuehner]

How useful are they if they only bind channelers? What did they make up in the AoL, 3% of the population? Sooo...what about all those non-channeler criminals?

 

How useful is an angreal if only 3% of the population can use them? Pretty useful.

 

The problem is pretty obvious- you can lock up a non-channeler in a cell like we do all the time. But you can't lock somebody in a cell that can make holes in the air, and given that channelers are indeed at a premium, assigning a half dozen to perpetually guard a criminal is a nonstarter. The alternative is severing, which is a (much faster) death sentence in all likelihood. Moreover, channelers don't like to think about severing in much the same way most of us don't like to think about castration, even if it would be a fitting punishment for certain crimes.

 

So a binder is a very useful tool to punish non-capital offenders who can channel and at the same time prevent them from further crimes.

[sdelu]

@Grig I didn't mean it was hard to believe because I couldn't understand it, nor because I didn't take it as true. What I find hard to believe is that these super genius aol channelers wouldn't make it so that they bound other criminals as well. It seems like an oversight that 97% of the population would be left essentially without option for their punishment. Not only that but it is an effective way to prevent criminal behavior, so why not use it? I don't really believe that it's because it simply wouldn't work. I understand that it was tied to their ability to channel but it does that mean there was no way to do something similar to the common folk? Compulsion looks to br a pretty close cousin. Just not really well thought out by them, or just something to serve a purpose in the story. Who knows.

 

That's beside the point anyway. BBM gave me what I was looking for. Not everyone is a walking wot encyclopedia :p

 

I guess I'll be annoying then and point out that we don't know if the DO can bind people by other means. Or ishamael could have for that matter. Either way I don't think the DO would allow even the smallest darkfriend to betray him easily, so perhaps it's not so simple with tomas as it seems.

 

Also I'm glad dragonmount has a mobile page now. Woohoo.

[sdelu]

@mbuehner I hadn't looked at it from that perspective, so that's a fair point. I was looking at it more from the perspective of why lock people up at all? If anyone at all could be prevented from performing criminal acts, why not make use of that? Especially in an age of peace like the aol(I'm assuming the binders existed pre war of shadow).

 

Anyway enough derailing. I need no convincing, now its just something interesting to talk about.

 

Sorry about double post. Can't edit on the mobile site it seems.

[mbuehner]

Why would you assume there is no other option for punishment if you can't compel behavior with the power? You can just lock non-channelers, isn't prison punishment? Compulsion seems like overkill- its not making people obey oaths, its twisting their brains into obedience. Compulsion is forbidden for a reason- you go down that logical slope and you might as well compel all your civilians to never commit a crime and establish a utopia. But at what cost? Its starting to sound like Graendal's perfect world.

 

Channelers are a special case and hence they are given the option for a special punishment, the alternative being much worse. It would be cruel and Orwellian to seek to extend that to the rest of the population. Very likely ter angreals could be made to perform compulsion (and perhaps the Dark made them), but they would be nasty things indeed.

[Sharaman]

Non-channelers can be controlled in different, much simpler ways.

In this instance, I think we should believe Sammael. He was discussing the irony of channelers using it to bind themselves voluntarily, while speaking to somebody equally knowledgeable about it.

Also since stilling removes the effects of oaths on the binder, it's fairly clear that it doesn't work with non-channelers.

Fits with other weaknesses - mindtrapping, 13x13 - that are unique to channelers.

The binder is like the a'dam - somebody worked damn hard to find a way to hold specifically channelers in check, since they can't be held easily in other ways.

[Grig]

@Grig I didn't mean it was hard to believe because I couldn't understand it, nor because I didn't take it as true. What I find hard to believe is that these super genius aol channelers wouldn't make it so that they bound other criminals as well. It seems like an oversight that 97% of the population would be left essentially without option for their punishment. Not only that but it is an effective way to prevent criminal behavior, so why not use it? I don't really believe that it's because it simply wouldn't work. I understand that it was tied to their ability to channel but it does that mean there was no way to do something similar to the common folk? Compulsion looks to br a pretty close cousin. Just not really well thought out by them, or just something to serve a purpose in the story. Who knows.

 

Compulsion is seen as universally bad. It basically robs a person of their free will. This is completely different than the purpose of Binders, which was to basically allow someone to Bind themselves of their own free will for the safety of others as an alternative to being Severed. It is a gift, for all intents and purposes, not a punishment. There is no known way to do this to non-channelers, aside from torture (the Binding Chair? Am I recalling incorrectly that it's basically a torture device that scares people away from crime Clockwork Orange style?) or robbing them of their free will, so they have to put up with good ol' prison. It's not a matter of "why don't they do it to non-channelers", it's a matter of not being able to do so. Just like they cannot be 13x13d, they do not have the weakness of being able to be forcibly compelled by magical means short of rewiring their brains with the OP (which is wholly different than a channeler choosing Binding, and as such a wholly different moral threshold that would need crossing).

[chuckievi]

@Grig I didn't mean it was hard to believe because I couldn't understand it, nor because I didn't take it as true. What I find hard to believe is that these super genius aol channelers wouldn't make it so that they bound other criminals as well. It seems like an oversight that 97% of the population would be left essentially without option for their punishment. Not only that but it is an effective way to prevent criminal behavior, so why not use it? I don't really believe that it's because it simply wouldn't work. I understand that it was tied to their ability to channel but it does that mean there was no way to do something similar to the common folk? Compulsion looks to br a pretty close cousin. Just not really well thought out by them, or just something to serve a purpose in the story. Who knows.

 

That's beside the point anyway. BBM gave me what I was looking for. Not everyone is a walking wot encyclopedia :p

 

I guess I'll be annoying then and point out that we don't know if the DO can bind people by other means. Or ishamael could have for that matter. Either way I don't think the DO would allow even the smallest darkfriend to betray him easily, so perhaps it's not so simple with tomas as it seems.

 

Also I'm glad dragonmount has a mobile page now. Woohoo.

 

For non-channelers they had the chair of remorse, so a binder didn't need to work on everyone.

 

The Chair of Remorse is a ter'angreal kept in the second basement of the White Tower. It is a rectangular block of marbled gray, hard as steel except on the top, which molds itself to one who sits on it. There is a palm sized rectangular hole on one side with tiny, unevenly spaced notches. Channeling into the hole causes one sitting on the Chair to relive the consequences of ones crimes. It is an outstanding cure for recidivism.

 

taken from http://encyclopaedia-wot.org/items/chair_remorse.html

[nophone]

I think that he probably took poison as well, voluntarily, because as Verin's Warder, he likely reported to her as a Darkfriend. She was his immediate superior, and how he was connected to other darkfriend cells. If she released him from her bond, someone else who knew she was black, perhaps someone on the Supreme Council or a member of her heart, would wonder why he had survived Verin. Tomas would have been snapped up, and he has no defense against a channeler taking him.

 

If he was taken, he would have been able to reveal a lot about Verin's movements, plans, and her ways of thinking. He would be an invaluable resource to the Shadow, if they knew how to use him.

 

Or there could be a secret motive that Verin had, and a mission she sent Tomas on while lying to Egwene. :D

 

Well a few things come to mind when I read this:

 

1: Verin started drinking the tea when egween arived in her room, or perhaps called her and and started drinking right before (sorry i don't have the book on me, i only know that she woulnd't have wanted to f*ck this meeting with egween up).

 

2: she could have passed the bond or set something up, but maybe that would have arrounsed suspicion; she's a very discrete lady and she keeps her wisdom to her self for the most part. also, if his new Aes Sedia decided to question him using compulsion, there's a good chance he'd spill the beans about his whole life, which would not be in his best interest at all.

 

3: She can lie which means that she can also vear from the truth. Maybe he INTENDS or perhaps DID spend his final hour apart and with his family. It is unrealistic to assume that they both started their tea together though (if he's with his family), because the timing would be nigh impossible to get right.

 

4: it's entirely possible (likely) that the bonds to the dark lord (oaths and what not) are fashioned using the TruePower, of which it seems the oathrods oaths are broken and any other oath may possibly be impressed (speculation there).

[Bob T Dwarf]

We see with Bors/Carridin that everybody, Channelers and non-channelers alike recite the same Creed. Why would we believe that they do not also take the same oaths?

 

How would an oath sworn to a very living, present, and powerful deity like The Great Lord of the Dark be any less binding than one sworn on an *angreal?

 

If you could get in your car and drive to where you could personally visit your deity, a very jealous, even paranoid deity, known for killing his followers on a whim, how willing would you be to test the limits of any oaths you had sworn to him?

 

Voodoo works because the followers believe utterly in it. If the witch doctor says you will die, you die because you believe the witch doctor. Tomas believes that if he "betrays" the DO he will die, horribly, painfully, and suffer for eternity, unless he hews to the letter of the oath, " I swear not to betray the Great Lord, to keep my secrets until the hour of my death."

 

The only way out for Tomas, the only way he can quit doing the Dark's bidding is to die. And, the only way he can return to the Light before he dies is to wait until the last hour of his life to repent.

[Luckers]

How would an oath sworn to a very living, present, and powerful deity like The Great Lord of the Dark be any less binding than one sworn on an *angreal?

 

Coz its not. If it were then simply unbinding the likes of Talene and co. would have done nothing, yet we see they are quite capable of breaking their Oaths once the Bindings are gone.

 

If you could get in your car and drive to where you could personally visit your deity, a very jealous, even paranoid deity, known for killing his followers on a whim, how willing would you be to test the limits of any oaths you had sworn to him?

 

Voodoo works because the followers believe utterly in it. If the witch doctor says you will die, you die because you believe the witch doctor. Tomas believes that if he "betrays" the DO he will die, horribly, painfully, and suffer for eternity, unless he hews to the letter of the oath, " I swear not to betray the Great Lord, to keep my secrets until the hour of my death."

 

Quite. If he planned to destroy the world. You're not talking about some ignorent stone age person with the Old Testement god, you're talking about a educated, strong willed man who had for most his life secretly been seeking to oppose the Dark One. He'd been breaking the spirit of his oaths for a long time. Clearly it did not scare him, and I do not think he would have been so cowardly as to commit suicide when he could still do more. Verin certainly didn't intend to, but she had no other choice.

 

Tomas was a Warder, not a gullible villager starting at the Dragonsfang. The moment he started working with Verin, he brought upon himself the probability of retribution from the Dark One, and 'dying within an hour' wouldn't change that probability in the slightest.

[Arc]

well maybee he can channel with the wanting a way out was wanting a way out to not go insane from the taint when verin first bonded him im probally wrong but yah never know

 

1+ on that, my thought exactly. The only problem with it, I guess is that if channeling was the case, Tomas might indeed die and be of no more consequence for the rest of the story. And if BS said we should pay more attention to Verinisms, well .. that wouldn't be logical if he said to pay attention to something without consequence.