Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Sign in to follow this  
tkroll

Hope Not to See

Recommended Posts

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

 

*WHISTLES* at all the Key Reveals concerning so many series above.

 

 

Fish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree, i hope the last book is full of action and we have a lot of showdowns.

should be great... might have to break into TOR publishing and steal and early copy of the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

 

OK. Let's make up our mind's here, people. Almost everybody here will gush about how much they love the series because "it's so realistic! < gush/swoon >"

 

Reality is that people have accidents. Reality is that people do dumb things. Every single freaking day.

 

There is very solid evidence that Napolean lost at Waterloo because his hemorrhoids were so inflamed he couldn't sit a horse long enough to keep a coherent picture of the battle in his mind, and so things went all pear shaped for him and his Grande Armee'.

 

There is very good evidence that Lee lost at Gettysburg because:

1. He had dysentery on the fateful day ( or he simply ate too much of one of the local ladies' Peach Cobbler ), rendering himself incapable of exercising command;

2. Buford, who commanded his Northern Flank suffered from " liver disease: ( most likely Cirrhosis ) and was " too ill " ( read dead drunk ) to command that day, and his subordinates simply weren't up to the task of properly bringing off Lee's complicated plan with the correct timing;

3. Longstreet hated Lee's plan from the beginning, and without Stonewall Jackson to keep him in-line, simply mutinied and never ordered his troops to carry-out any of their part of Lee's plan.

 

All of which left Pickett alone, and abandoned to certain destruction.

 

So, is the Love of WoT because it's "so realistic" or just because it fits a lot of people's fantasies about what's realistic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

 

OK. Let's make up our mind's here, people. Almost everybody here will gush about how much they love the series because "it's so realistic! < gush/swoon >"

 

Reality is that people have accidents. Reality is that people do dumb things. Every single freaking day.

 

There is very solid evidence that Napolean lost at Waterloo because his hemorrhoids were so inflamed he couldn't sit a horse long enough to keep a coherent picture of the battle in his mind, and so things went all pear shaped for him and his Grande Armee'.

 

There is very good evidence that Lee lost at Gettysburg because:

1. He had dysentery on the fateful day ( or he simply ate too much of one of the local ladies' Peach Cobbler ), rendering himself incapable of exercising command;

2. Buford, who commanded his Northern Flank suffered from " liver disease: ( most likely Cirrhosis ) and was " too ill " ( read dead drunk ) to command that day, and his subordinates simply weren't up to the task of properly bringing off Lee's complicated plan with the correct timing;

3. Longstreet hated Lee's plan from the beginning, and without Stonewall Jackson to keep him in-line, simply mutinied and never ordered his troops to carry-out any of their part of Lee's plan.

 

All of which left Pickett alone, and abandoned to certain destruction.

 

So, is the Love of WoT because it's "so realistic" or just because it fits a lot of people's fantasies about what's realistic?

bob old boy I hope you know what you are talking about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there's still a lot of bad guys to take out and not a lot of time to do it, so some of their deaths are going to need to be somewhat truncated. The ones I can think of that I think will be killed off by a main character are:

 

Moridin - Killed by Rand in the Last Battle

Moghidien - Killed by Nynaeve. The woman needs a Forsaken kill and can finish what she started a few books back

Graendal - Currently tying some strings to Tuon, so she'll be killed by Mat after her compulsion on him fails

Taim - Killed by Logain because I want me a False Dragon battle and will compose a very snitty post if I don't get it

Fain - Killed by Perrin. I think this will be the second time that he saves Rand's life and it gives him some vengence for his family

Slayer - After Lan dies at Tarwin's Gap, he turns out to be a Hero of the Horn who ignores the precepts and kills him in dream land and then rips himself out of it to be with Nynaeve because he's so cool that he doesn't need to be tied to some stupid Horn

 

That leaves us with Demandred, who will continue his run of almosts with him almost getting the one-on-one scrap he's been looking for with Rand, only to be killed by a nameless underling just before he gets his chance. Also Shadar Haran - that character's a flop for me, so just have him whacked over the head with a frying pan by Lini and he falls down some stairs or something and nobody feels the need to mention him anymore. I can't think of any other bad guys at the moment aside from random underlings who can be killed off by other random underlings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graendal - Currently tying some strings to Tuon, so she'll be killed by Mat after her compulsion on him fails

 

I don't recall this? We know she failed with Perrin and is being punished by SH. What are the strings to Tuon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graendal - Currently tying some strings to Tuon, so she'll be killed by Mat after her compulsion on him fails

 

I don't recall this? We know she failed with Perrin and is being punished by SH. What are the strings to Tuon?

 

It was in her POV at the end of the last book before SH started getting all freaky with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graendal - Currently tying some strings to Tuon, so she'll be killed by Mat after her compulsion on him fails

 

I don't recall this? We know she failed with Perrin and is being punished by SH. What are the strings to Tuon?

 

It was in her POV at the end of the last book before SH started getting all freaky with her.

 

ToM

Now that Semirhage was gone, Graendal had begun placing some strings around their new, childlike Empress. She'd have to abandon those schemes now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

 

OK. Let's make up our mind's here, people. Almost everybody here will gush about how much they love the series because "it's so realistic! < gush/swoon >"

 

Reality is that people have accidents. Reality is that people do dumb things. Every single freaking day.

 

There is very solid evidence that Napolean lost at Waterloo because his hemorrhoids were so inflamed he couldn't sit a horse long enough to keep a coherent picture of the battle in his mind, and so things went all pear shaped for him and his Grande Armee'.

 

There is very good evidence that Lee lost at Gettysburg because:

1. He had dysentery on the fateful day ( or he simply ate too much of one of the local ladies' Peach Cobbler ), rendering himself incapable of exercising command;

2. Buford, who commanded his Northern Flank suffered from " liver disease: ( most likely Cirrhosis ) and was " too ill " ( read dead drunk ) to command that day, and his subordinates simply weren't up to the task of properly bringing off Lee's complicated plan with the correct timing;

3. Longstreet hated Lee's plan from the beginning, and without Stonewall Jackson to keep him in-line, simply mutinied and never ordered his troops to carry-out any of their part of Lee's plan.

 

All of which left Pickett alone, and abandoned to certain destruction.

 

So, is the Love of WoT because it's "so realistic" or just because it fits a lot of people's fantasies about what's realistic?

 

Buford was the Union Calvary Commander. Far as I know he wasn't drunk but he did die of Pneumonia that autumn. You may have him confused with Ambrose Powell Hill who was too sick to command that day. I haven't read any indications that he was drunk but he did have a constant stomach problem and was often too sick to command.

 

You are correct about Longstreet's opinion of Lee's plan. You are incorrect thinking that Jackson could keep Longstreet "in line" only Lee could do that. Longstreet never worked well with or trusted Jackson after the fighting during the seven days battle. Jackson's men were split between Hill and Richard Ewell who was never the same after he lost his arm. He seemed as bold as Jackson at first but proved to be very indecisive.

 

I think the story of Lee's Special Orders 191 (not sure about the number) and how they fell into union hands is a better illustration of your point.

 

Back to the Wheel of Time- I just don't want to see some of the epic build up get resolved off camera. If Lan for example, perishes off camera I would be disappointed but not too upset. If Matt were to get taken out off camera I would be livid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*WHISTLES* at all the Key Reveals concerning so many series above.

 

 

Fish

Sorry about the key reveals. The stories have been out for a while but I should have mentioned the spoilers at the top of the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope not to see:

 

A totally happy ending where everyone is happy and married happily ever after.

Sealing the Bore causes channeling to go away (assuming an imperfect sealing in the future seen by Aviendha).

Rand ends the series in Moridin's body. (Pretty sure it ain't happening, but it's definitely on the list.)

Mat and Tuon part ways after the Last Battle. (This one actually seems plausible, but I don't have to like it.)

Rand gets killed by Moridin or Demandred or any of the Forsaken. Lame!

Elayne is still on the Sun Throne at the end. Moiraine and Thom FTW!

Alivia kills Rand or helps him fake his death. (ugh)

 

I could go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see a key villain taken out by a minor new character in some cheeseball way after a lot of build up or intrigue. Or see Rand so built up through the series and then die because some one throws a rock at him...

 

Examples- ROTJ "Boba Fett? Boba Fett? Where???!" then fett's jet pack is triggered and he winds up in the belly of a sarlac.

Dark Tower- Randall Flag, Marten, The Man in Black - killed by the friggin spider...cmon I wanted to see him and Roland show down.

BSG- Starbuck as some unexplained mystery angel? Huh?

A ton of characters taken out off camera - like Lupin and Tonks in the last Harry Potter book.

 

So far most of the baddies seem to have been dealt with effectively. Elaida now a Damane. /cheer. Masema killed by Faile- hey that works. Galina off to serve the Shaido forever great! Matt chucking the Gholam into eteranal darkness- oh that was great...

 

OK. Let's make up our mind's here, people. Almost everybody here will gush about how much they love the series because "it's so realistic! < gush/swoon >"

 

Reality is that people have accidents. Reality is that people do dumb things. Every single freaking day.

 

There is very solid evidence that Napolean lost at Waterloo because his hemorrhoids were so inflamed he couldn't sit a horse long enough to keep a coherent picture of the battle in his mind, and so things went all pear shaped for him and his Grande Armee'.

 

There is very good evidence that Lee lost at Gettysburg because:

1. He had dysentery on the fateful day ( or he simply ate too much of one of the local ladies' Peach Cobbler ), rendering himself incapable of exercising command;

2. Buford, who commanded his Northern Flank suffered from " liver disease: ( most likely Cirrhosis ) and was " too ill " ( read dead drunk ) to command that day, and his subordinates simply weren't up to the task of properly bringing off Lee's complicated plan with the correct timing;

3. Longstreet hated Lee's plan from the beginning, and without Stonewall Jackson to keep him in-line, simply mutinied and never ordered his troops to carry-out any of their part of Lee's plan.

 

All of which left Pickett alone, and abandoned to certain destruction.

 

So, is the Love of WoT because it's "so realistic" or just because it fits a lot of people's fantasies about what's realistic?

 

Buford was the Union Calvary Commander. Far as I know he wasn't drunk but he did die of Pneumonia that autumn. You may have him confused with Ambrose Powell Hill who was too sick to command that day. I haven't read any indications that he was drunk but he did have a constant stomach problem and was often too sick to command.

 

You are correct about Longstreet's opinion of Lee's plan. You are incorrect thinking that Jackson could keep Longstreet "in line" only Lee could do that. Longstreet never worked well with or trusted Jackson after the fighting during the seven days battle. Jackson's men were split between Hill and Richard Ewell who was never the same after he lost his arm. He seemed as bold as Jackson at first but proved to be very indecisive.

 

I think the story of Lee's Special Orders 191 (not sure about the number) and how they fell into union hands is a better illustration of your point.

 

Back to the Wheel of Time- I just don't want to see some of the epic build up get resolved off camera. If Lan for example, perishes off camera I would be disappointed but not too upset. If Matt were to get taken out off camera I would be livid.

 

You're probably right. I was working from memory about Buford. Apparently I got my generals confused. Whoever it was was the commander of Lee's Northern Flank.

 

Stonewall Jackson is another example in himself. Shot by mistake by one of his own sentries. A perfect example of what happens when you put too young, and too inexperienced people in exposed positions. They panic at the slightest thing and shoot first and ask questions later.

 

To be slightly fair to Longstreet, his objections were not without merit. Lee's plan was overly complex and relied entirely on too many moving parts all moving in synchronicity. Plus Longstreet had already lost a lot of men in the Peach Orchard and assault on Little Round Top, etc. Nonetheless, he did essentially mutiny, and so far as I know never paid any price for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stealing heavily from Wikipedia here because it's easy to cut-and-paste:

 

The most controversial assessments of the battle involve the performance of Lee's subordinates. The dominant theme of the Lost Cause writers and many other historians is that Lee's senior generals failed him in crucial ways, directly causing the loss of the battle; the alternative viewpoint is that Lee did not manage his subordinates adequately, and did not thereby compensate for their shortcomings.[81] Two of his corps commanders—Richard S. Ewell and A.P. Hill—had only recently been promoted and were not fully accustomed to Lee's style of command, in which he provided only general objectives and guidance to their former commander, Stonewall Jackson; Jackson translated these into detailed, specific orders to his division commanders.[82] All four of Lee's principal commanders received criticism during the campaign and battle:[83]

 

James Longstreet suffered most severely from the wrath of the Lost Cause authors, not the least because he directly criticized Lee in postbellum writings and became a Republican after the war. His critics accuse him of attacking much later than Lee intended on July 2, squandering a chance to hit the Union Army before its defensive positions had firmed up. They also question his lack of motivation to attack strongly on July 2 and July 3 because he had argued that the army should have maneuvered to a place where it would force Meade to attack them. The alternative view is that Lee was in close contact with Longstreet during the battle, agreed to delays on the morning of July 2, and never criticized Longstreet's performance. (There is also considerable speculation about what an attack might have looked like before Dan Sickles moved the III Corps toward the Peach Orchard.)[84]

 

J.E.B. Stuart deprived Lee of cavalry intelligence during a good part of the campaign by taking his three best brigades on a path away from the army's. This arguably led to Lee's surprise at Hooker's vigorous pursuit; the meeting engagement on July 1 that escalated into the full battle prematurely; and it also prevented Lee from understanding the full disposition of the enemy on July 2. The disagreements regarding Stuart's culpability for the situation center around the relatively vague orders issued by Lee, but most modern historians agree that both generals were responsible to some extent for the failure of the cavalry's mission early in the campaign.[85]

 

Richard S. Ewell has been universally criticized for failing to seize the high ground on the afternoon of July 1. Once again the disagreement centers on Lee's orders, which provided general guidance for Ewell to act "if practicable." Many historians speculate that Stonewall Jackson, if he had survived Chancellorsville, would have aggressively seized Culp's Hill, rendering Cemetery Hill indefensible, and changing the entire complexion of the battle. A differently worded order from Lee might have made the difference with this subordinate.[86]

 

A.P. Hill has received some criticism for his ineffective performance. His actions caused the battle to begin and then escalate on July 1, despite Lee's orders not to bring on a general engagement (although historians point out that Hill kept Lee well informed of his actions during the day). However, illness minimized his personal involvement in the remainder of the battle, and Lee took the explicit step of removing troops from Hill's corps and giving them to Longstreet for Pickett's Charge.

 

So, it seems to be A.P. Hill who was "too ill" to command. And Lee who was both too wishy-washy in his orders, and lacked sufficient discipline to keep himself in command condition.

 

At any rate, along with the Stonewall Jackson episode, concrete examples of how real battles get resolved by very flawed men and non-entities alike. All of whom make constant mistakes. Some too filled with hubris and others too scared to think clearly or act with proper caution and restraint.

 

The Pennsylvania Campaign was an "All Costs" venture to Lee, but he failed to communicate that to his subordinates and get them on-board with the program. The War turned on that Battle, and everything after was simply mop-up by the North.

 

As to Jackson "handling" Longstreet, Lee sketched outlines, Jackson filled in the details and painted the picture that Lee had only sketched. Without Jackson, Lee was merely mediocre. With him he was brilliant.

Edited by Bob T Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stealing heavily from Wikipedia here because it's easy to cut-and-paste:

 

The most controversial assessments of the battle involve the performance of Lee's subordinates. The dominant theme of the Lost Cause writers and many other historians is that Lee's senior generals failed him in crucial ways, directly causing the loss of the battle; the alternative viewpoint is that Lee did not manage his subordinates adequately, and did not thereby compensate for their shortcomings.[81] Two of his corps commanders—Richard S. Ewell and A.P. Hill—had only recently been promoted and were not fully accustomed to Lee's style of command, in which he provided only general objectives and guidance to their former commander, Stonewall Jackson; Jackson translated these into detailed, specific orders to his division commanders.[82] All four of Lee's principal commanders received criticism during the campaign and battle:[83]

 

James Longstreet suffered most severely from the wrath of the Lost Cause authors, not the least because he directly criticized Lee in postbellum writings and became a Republican after the war. His critics accuse him of attacking much later than Lee intended on July 2, squandering a chance to hit the Union Army before its defensive positions had firmed up. They also question his lack of motivation to attack strongly on July 2 and July 3 because he had argued that the army should have maneuvered to a place where it would force Meade to attack them. The alternative view is that Lee was in close contact with Longstreet during the battle, agreed to delays on the morning of July 2, and never criticized Longstreet's performance. (There is also considerable speculation about what an attack might have looked like before Dan Sickles moved the III Corps toward the Peach Orchard.)[84]

 

J.E.B. Stuart deprived Lee of cavalry intelligence during a good part of the campaign by taking his three best brigades on a path away from the army's. This arguably led to Lee's surprise at Hooker's vigorous pursuit; the meeting engagement on July 1 that escalated into the full battle prematurely; and it also prevented Lee from understanding the full disposition of the enemy on July 2. The disagreements regarding Stuart's culpability for the situation center around the relatively vague orders issued by Lee, but most modern historians agree that both generals were responsible to some extent for the failure of the cavalry's mission early in the campaign.[85]

 

Richard S. Ewell has been universally criticized for failing to seize the high ground on the afternoon of July 1. Once again the disagreement centers on Lee's orders, which provided general guidance for Ewell to act "if practicable." Many historians speculate that Stonewall Jackson, if he had survived Chancellorsville, would have aggressively seized Culp's Hill, rendering Cemetery Hill indefensible, and changing the entire complexion of the battle. A differently worded order from Lee might have made the difference with this subordinate.[86]

 

A.P. Hill has received some criticism for his ineffective performance. His actions caused the battle to begin and then escalate on July 1, despite Lee's orders not to bring on a general engagement (although historians point out that Hill kept Lee well informed of his actions during the day). However, illness minimized his personal involvement in the remainder of the battle, and Lee took the explicit step of removing troops from Hill's corps and giving them to Longstreet for Pickett's Charge.

 

So, it seems to be A.P. Hill who was "too ill" to command. And Lee who was both too wishy-washy in his orders, and lacked sufficient discipline to keep himself in command trim.

 

Most of that sounds about right. Longstreet was also heavily criticized for being critical of Lee after Lee had died. Lee was too used to both Jackson and Longstreet- he knew their shortcomings but was able to trust both of them. He applied that same level of trust to Hill and Ewell and that was unfortunate for the confederates. Ewell would continue to disappoint.

 

The guy who deserved a lot of recognition was John Buford. He held off Hills corps most of that first day and kept the rebels away from the high ground outside of town. His cavalry was completely shattered though. Not sure but I think his men, or at least some of them, were armed with early repeating rifles.

 

Cool to find some Civil War interest on a WOT forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope not to see:

 

A totally happy ending where everyone is happy and married happily ever after.

Sealing the Bore causes channeling to go away (assuming an imperfect sealing in the future seen by Aviendha).

Rand ends the series in Moridin's body. (Pretty sure it ain't happening, but it's definitely on the list.)

Mat and Tuon part ways after the Last Battle. (This one actually seems plausible, but I don't have to like it.)

Rand gets killed by Moridin or Demandred or any of the Forsaken. Lame!

Elayne is still on the Sun Throne at the end. Moiraine and Thom FTW!

Alivia kills Rand or helps him fake his death. (ugh)

 

I could go on.

 

I think none of us want to see an ending that makes us go <yawn>.

 

We want something clever, somewhat surprising, fantastic in almost every sense of the word, but not "Over the Top".

 

I think we all want at least one "slap-yoursself-upside-the-head" moment where we say, "Now WHY didn't I see that coming?"

 

Inevitably, those of us who have been with the series from the beginning are going to be disappointed. Nothing. And I mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, can live-up to a 22 year build-up.

 

Those who are relatively new to the series will probably not have that reaction because they haven't had to wait over 20 years for the other shoe to drop. They'll be relatively satisfied with however the series ends.

Edited by Bob T Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ToM

Now that Semirhage was gone, Graendal had begun placing some strings around their new, childlike Empress. She'd have to abandon those schemes now.

 

I think the point Tom Sawyer may be trying to make is that now that Graendal has had her little "come to Shaidar Haran" meeting, those plans may be back on again. Her opportunity to lay lows and take no further part in things has gone poof, and she now needs to prove very useful in order to continue living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see Demandred killing Rand. He'd get that smile on his face that it's always described he'll never have unless he killed Rand

No, Demandred will "almost" kill Rand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Man in Black

 

Are you talking about Lost there?

 

NO. He obviously means "A Boy Named Sue"

 

"The man in black fled across the desert..." thats what i was talking about. Gunslinger ref for the lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the "no happily ever after" idea myself...sure maybe a few do but if every single hero character lives well...it would be nice but I am the kinda guy that still hopes Ron Weasely will die eventually in the Harry Potter stories...

Heck Harrison Ford wanted Han Solo to die at the end of ROTJ....

 

It would be kinda funny if Rand just told Elayne, Min, and Aviendha I am through with you and I am off to save Lanfear. Have a nice day.... Don't really wanna see that either but it would make me laugh. Might feel bad for Min though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be kinda funny if Rand just told Elayne, Min, and Aviendha I am through with you and I am off to save Lanfear. Have a nice day.... Don't really wanna see that either but it would make me laugh. Might feel bad for Min though...

 

Funny. I'd love to see that--followed by the three tearing him to pieces, or better yet, shipping him off to the DO with a little note attached: "hope he's as useless for you as he was for us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...