Mat's Arc (Full Spoilers)

[Julian Cook]

OK so can someone clear something up for me about Matt.  Something BS said about not being able to get the three to meet up again cause it just didn’t fit, so how did Morrian get to meet Rand, I will get back to that, OK we last had Matt cooking a rabbit for the happy couple while his band were getting kicked at Caemlyn.  So in the mist of this battle they have spare channeller not doing anything else but hanging around to open a gateway, ok

lets go with that, all these people are dying and someone that can help is kicking their heals waiting to open a gateway. Right that’s OK I can live with that, so then Matt goes to Caemlyn and his band is having a bit of a problem, so Matt just grabs a horse and then makes his way to his wife. So I guess that Morrian and Thom go to meet Rand. Except that the battle takes place while Matt is away, so at the time the gateway turns up the battle is over or is midway, so We just accept that Matt just walks away or that there is someone there to make a gateway at a time where everyone has left, including the person who
makes the gateway, so at this point the person making the gateway would have to be with Rand, I guess then that’s how Morrian gets to meet Rand, so where is Matt?, and if Matt is on his horse on the way to meet his wife, what happened to all that tugging from the last book, and with Matt just leaving I guess that
Matt is not the one to save people, except that is the very reason that he was given the charge of the Army, so my question is how did Morrian get to meet
Rand ?

[hime]

OK so can someone clear something up for me about Matt.  Something BS said about not being able to get the three to meet up again cause it just didn’t fit, so how did Morrian get to meet Rand, I will get back to that, OK we last had Matt cooking a rabbit for the happy couple while his band were getting kicked at Caemlyn.  So in the mist of this battle they have spare channeller not doing anything else but hanging around to open a gateway, ok

lets go with that, all these people are dying and someone that can help is kicking their heals waiting to open a gateway. Right that’s OK I can live with that, so then Matt goes to Caemlyn and his band is having a bit of a problem, so Matt just grabs a horse and then makes his way to his wife. So I guess that Morrian and Thom go to meet Rand. Except that the battle takes place while Matt is away, so at the time the gateway turns up the battle is over or is midway, so We just accept that Matt just walks away or that there is someone there to make a gateway at a time where everyone has left, including the person who

makes the gateway, so at this point the person making the gateway would have to be with Rand, I guess then that’s how Morrian gets to meet Rand, so where is Matt?, and if Matt is on his horse on the way to meet his wife, what happened to all that tugging from the last book, and with Matt just leaving I guess that

Matt is not the one to save people, except that is the very reason that he was given the charge of the Army, so my question is how did Morrian get to meet

Rand ?

 

let's see...I think Grady was responsible for opening the gateway for them, he probably went to Merrilor with Perrin , so he wasn't there for the battle of Caemlyn, and it explains how Moiriane made it there, but it doesn't explain about Mat, perhaps when he got there Grady told him about the meeting between Rand and Egwene , Mat's first reaction was to flee so he asked Grady to open him a gateway near Ebuo dar...I know, there are major holes with this theory but it's the one I'm going with.

 

As for the discussion of Mat Vs Demandred, I'll refer you to a conversation Mat had with Elayne, he told her the battle was like a card game, and that he was losing, he only needed to draw one card right, and that card was Demandred's death, the Battle was won after Lan killed Demandred, because that was Mat's plan all along!

 

also, if the Seanchan had returned earlier, the sounding of the horn would have been unnecessary & anticlimactic, it was either the heroes or the seanchan, one of them had to be  anticlimactic for the other to come in the right time, and I believe Brandon made the right call by bringing the heroes first.

[Guest adrian]

The fox-head medalion should protect Matt only from female Saidar as I learnedfrom TFoh when Matt died the second time. Saidin should work, so Demandred could use any TP or saidin in order to turn Lan to nothing...I wished another way to fight Demandred but now I have only q about that.

[hime]

saidin doesn't work on Mat either, the only example we have of this is Halima(or Aran'gar) using it on him when he was in salidar.

[BFG]

The fox-head medalion should protect Matt only from female Saidar as I learnedfrom TFoh when Matt died the second time. Saidin should work, so Demandred could use any TP or saidin in order to turn Lan to nothing...I wished another way to fight Demandred but now I have only q about that.

 

The reason that the lightning worked on Mat is because it was something created with a weave, but then existed independently of the weave.  Similar to how the AS can pick something up and hurl it with the power and it will hit Mat.  Compare this to a fireball which is only maintained by the weave that creates it.  If they were to set fire to something and then hurl it, the medallion wouldn't protect him as both fire and the object exist independent of the weaves.  (It also explains why Galad was singed but not seriously burnt by fireballs.  He got singed by the heat from the fire as it came close, but the instant the fireball touched him it dissolved preventing serious damage.)

[mcbernier]

 

 

Never understood the hate for the Mat of the last 3 books. I absolutely love how he gets more humorous and light-hearted the more dire the situation gets. 

 

To the whole complaint that Mat should have "out-general-ed" Demandred, that is pure bullshit. The fact that "great captains" were influencing battles so much and that tactics and command mattered THIS much was stretching reality hard as it is. In video games, the commander of the army matters because his orders are carried out perfectly and as such they guide the battle. In real battle, orders matter very very little and command is awfully complicated, involving thousands of men. I can accept that stretched slightly to allow for fantasy, but the whole battle being a tactical fight between two people? That would have been awful.

 

I guess I see it differently. The way Mat was written was the biggest disappointment. But I'm glad you liked it.

 

You bring up an interesting point about tactics and "out-general-ing" Demandred. I don't have a lot of knowledge about military history, but I do know that battles have been won through tactics. Go back to Alexander the Great, and some of the stuff he pulled off, while leading the cavalry on the battlefield, at times against absolutely horrible odds. That's how I always pictured Mat. So I sort of expected Mat to do something similar, and "out-general" Demandred on the field of battle (or whoever the tactical commander was going to be). Tactics can win battles. And sometimes tactics need to be revised while in the heat of battle. But I think your point was that there was a lack of seeing a command structure that would have been capable of carrying out the precision necessary to carry out these battlefield movements. We weren't given much of a sense of this (I don't recall). But maybe the idea was that the one power would have made this easier.

 

I can't explain it to you but....read War and Peace. When Tolstoy stops the story and starts explaining things about the war and Napoleon, he perfectly explains the truth of it. 

 

I'm sure it's been explained in a simpler and far less tedious way somewhere else, but it's the only one I can think of.

 

See, in a battle, the chain of command and such given are very different from a single commander sending orders to people which are carried out. In order to handle a large army, as the one in the last battle is, a very complex and different chain of command with people with different expertise and freedom to act upon changes in the situation is created. A single person, even with a view of the battlefield as Mat had cannot correctly judge positions and the flow of the battle and act accordingly, acting as a single commander over the rest. Most commanders will disagree, many orders will be carried out differently, messengers will relay wrong messages....it's just so complicated that you can't explain a battle with the actions of commanders. In most cases, they are carried by the flow of events and their "tactics" matter in just the overall scheme of things - whether the plan is to retreat, flank, advance, etc.

 

The reason history focuses around commanders, generals and individuals is because it is not viable to explain battles in their entire truth. You can say that "Napoleon made his infantry move through the woods and ambush the enemy" or you can spend 7 pages explaining why it REALLY happened, why it was successful and so on. Academically, both are the same, so historians explain them in the simpler, clearer way. Fantasy and sci-fi take this route, because the other one is boring and has no appeal at all.

 

About your use of the tactics of Alexander the Great, for example - the reason his tactics seemed genius is a huge combination of endless factors, mistakes, differences in equipment, etc. etc. etc.

 

It's terribly complicated and boring as hell, hence why I agree that it was OK to portray the whole battle as it was portrayed - my point was that it would have been terrible if Mat had "out-general-ed" Demandred, as such a thing would have shattered any sense of reality.

 

This was well said. Thanks. I'll think about it. And War and Peace is in my list. When I get the time!

[Julian Cook]

Did Matt send Lan to kill Demandred

[Arran]

Did Matt send Lan to kill Demandred

I don't think so, I'm pretty sure that Galad just gave Lan the medallion and he went off on his own to do the deed.

[Julian Cook]

 

Did Matt send Lan to kill Demandred

I don't think so, I'm pretty sure that Galad just gave Lan the medallion and he went off on his own to do the deed.

 

That's how I read it, if so then Matt would never had won with out his death, not something he planned.  

[Arran]

 

 

Did Matt send Lan to kill Demandred

I don't think so, I'm pretty sure that Galad just gave Lan the medallion and he went off on his own to do the deed.

 

That's how I read it, if so then Matt would never had won with out his death, not something he planned.  

The Wheel weaves as the Wheel wills.

[Finnssss22]

 

 

Did Matt send Lan to kill Demandred

I don't think so, I'm pretty sure that Galad just gave Lan the medallion and he went off on his own to do the deed.

 

That's how I read it, if so then Matt would never had won with out his death, not something he planned.  

 

Mat knew from the very beginning he wasn't going to win without "something extra". All he could do and did do was set it up so that when or if that "extra something" happened, he would be in a position to capitalize on it.

 

This isn't counting the Horn, the return of the Seanchan, the return of the Dragons firing through gateways or the return of the river.

These were all things he knew about and had planned for. He still knew he needed something extra and said as much in one of his PoV's. He said he still wasn't sure if it would be enough.

[mcbernier]

 

 

Never understood the hate for the Mat of the last 3 books. I absolutely love how he gets more humorous and light-hearted the more dire the situation gets. 

 

To the whole complaint that Mat should have "out-general-ed" Demandred, that is pure bullshit. The fact that "great captains" were influencing battles so much and that tactics and command mattered THIS much was stretching reality hard as it is. In video games, the commander of the army matters because his orders are carried out perfectly and as such they guide the battle. In real battle, orders matter very very little and command is awfully complicated, involving thousands of men. I can accept that stretched slightly to allow for fantasy, but the whole battle being a tactical fight between two people? That would have been awful.

 

I guess I see it differently. The way Mat was written was the biggest disappointment. But I'm glad you liked it.

 

You bring up an interesting point about tactics and "out-general-ing" Demandred. I don't have a lot of knowledge about military history, but I do know that battles have been won through tactics. Go back to Alexander the Great, and some of the stuff he pulled off, while leading the cavalry on the battlefield, at times against absolutely horrible odds. That's how I always pictured Mat. So I sort of expected Mat to do something similar, and "out-general" Demandred on the field of battle (or whoever the tactical commander was going to be). Tactics can win battles. And sometimes tactics need to be revised while in the heat of battle. But I think your point was that there was a lack of seeing a command structure that would have been capable of carrying out the precision necessary to carry out these battlefield movements. We weren't given much of a sense of this (I don't recall). But maybe the idea was that the one power would have made this easier.

 

I can't explain it to you but....read War and Peace. When Tolstoy stops the story and starts explaining things about the war and Napoleon, he perfectly explains the truth of it. 

 

I'm sure it's been explained in a simpler and far less tedious way somewhere else, but it's the only one I can think of.

 

See, in a battle, the chain of command and such given are very different from a single commander sending orders to people which are carried out. In order to handle a large army, as the one in the last battle is, a very complex and different chain of command with people with different expertise and freedom to act upon changes in the situation is created. A single person, even with a view of the battlefield as Mat had cannot correctly judge positions and the flow of the battle and act accordingly, acting as a single commander over the rest. Most commanders will disagree, many orders will be carried out differently, messengers will relay wrong messages....it's just so complicated that you can't explain a battle with the actions of commanders. In most cases, they are carried by the flow of events and their "tactics" matter in just the overall scheme of things - whether the plan is to retreat, flank, advance, etc.

 

The reason history focuses around commanders, generals and individuals is because it is not viable to explain battles in their entire truth. You can say that "Napoleon made his infantry move through the woods and ambush the enemy" or you can spend 7 pages explaining why it REALLY happened, why it was successful and so on. Academically, both are the same, so historians explain them in the simpler, clearer way. Fantasy and sci-fi take this route, because the other one is boring and has no appeal at all.

 

About your use of the tactics of Alexander the Great, for example - the reason his tactics seemed genius is a huge combination of endless factors, mistakes, differences in equipment, etc. etc. etc.

 

It's terribly complicated and boring as hell, hence why I agree that it was OK to portray the whole battle as it was portrayed - my point was that it would have been terrible if Mat had "out-general-ed" Demandred, as such a thing would have shattered any sense of reality.

 

I thought about your point a little more, and you may be on to something. However, the discussion is a little cloudy. I believe the position you articulated is that (a) Mat did not "out-general" Demandred, and (b) if he did it would have been foolish. But I'm not sure this is exactly right. There are fans in this very forum, I believe, who really do think Mat did "out-general" Demandred. Why? because Mat was able to go "toe-to-toe" with him, and prevent a complete destruction of the good guys. So, "out-general-ing" is something of a judgment call. But you're issue has to do more with the fact that all the captains, including Mat, were portrayed as being able to plan--and execute--their battles with unbelievable precision. In short, it was quite literally unbelievable that a commander could have this level of real-time control over a battle. Right? Too many things can go wrong. Too many factors stand in the way. Commanders can only operate on the level of overall tactics, setting the shape of the battle, while the details must necessarily be left to others. I think this is right, and it seems a fair criticism. Perhaps Mat should not have been portrayed as having this sort of control. Maybe he should have outlined a devious plan, in the "war room" beforehand, and then fought on the battlefield--maybe adjusting something here or there, while leading the Band. That's actually the sort of thing I have originally expected. Thoughts?

 

Last, I disagree with your phrasing here: "the reason [Alexander's] tactics seemed genius is a huge combination of endless factors, mistakes, differences in equipment, etc." Alexander's tactics were genius, and their genius was objectively distinct from their execution. When he fought against, I think Darius, it was only because of his battle plan the night before--we are told it came to him on the very eve of battle--that they were able to win against astronomical odds. He formulated a plan that continues to be studied today. Of course, he had excellent troops, etc., but they were outnumbered something crazy, and not by farmers.

[hime]

Excuse me, but this is fantasy, we have people who can travel and horizontal gateways that look over the field!

 

I don't think it's fair to compare it to battles in our world.

[Aleator77]

Mat is instantly able to send orders to any commander he wants, watch from above to make sure they are carried out, and instantly send corrections if needed.  The real world analogues are silly.

[kadinsor]

The whole Tuon - Mat relationship was horrible, and this is clearly RJ's fault.

 

Tuon is a person deeply into psycopathy. An authoritarian dictator who cares only for her one glorification. Can go on a long tangent trying to justify this, but she is what she is, and Egwene was right to put her in her place. She actually reminds me a lot of Joffrey from Song Fire and Ice, the only differenct is perspective and George Martin's writing is more grim. But the same idea is there, someone raised to by a psycopathic dictator, and who acts with cruelty for no reason except own glorifiation.

 

That is actually not so. If you pay attention to how Tuon is depicted before Sanderson takes over, you'd notice that she's actually a pretty decent person.

 

In WH Jordan goes out of his way to point out that she's treats her damane well, she believes that no one should be allowed to own damane if they don't show active interest, she also puts on her veil specifically because she had one of her damane beaten unfairly.

 

In her POV chapter it's also pointed out that her "stern judge" mask is a mask, she's trained actively to maintain it because she worries she wouldn't  project authority otherwise.

 

Also in WH, when she Mat lies to her he wanted to give one of the damane sweets she abandons her "mask" and breaks out in smiles.

 

In KoD she mentions that she does not believe in unnecessary pain (that when she kills one of the Dark Friends to save her the agony).

 

But I also agree with you, in that after Sanderson takes over, she just changes. She no longer smiles, and she's not a very good person. There's no longer depth about her. But I don't believe it has anything to do with her becoming the Empress, it's just that Sanderson probably didn't "get" the subtle hints from Jordan's depictions that  she's a "closet" decent person among the Seanchan. Also you'll notice that the most ridiculous things about assassins were after Sanderson took over - Jordan probably never had intention to present assassinating as some kind of a national sport, where Seanchans joke about it and tell you to your face they'll send assassins after you - in the books written by Jordan, Seanchans take loyalty seriously, for example in Suroth's POV in KoD she initially cringes at the thought of killing the Empress - and she's a Dark Friend! 

 

But if you create your impressions solely from the later books, then you're right.

[Rhienne]

I think there is a distinction between being a good person, and being a good person relative to the rest of the Seanchan.  The fact that she treats her damane well doesn't make her a good person, since most good people would agree that treating another human being in that way is extremely cruel and shows a massive lack of compassion.  Yes, she's not as bad as some of the Seanchan, but she isn't exactly great either. 

 

Additionally, I found the fact that she thought about breaking her agreement with the Dragon's Peace almost immediately a pretty poor reflection on her character.  It shows a complete lack of honour and integrity, and that her word means nothing.

[flinn]

I think there is a distinction between being a good person, and being a good person relative to the rest of the Seanchan.  The fact that she treats her damane well doesn't make her a good person, since most good people would agree that treating another human being in that way is extremely cruel and shows a massive lack of compassion.  Yes, she's not as bad as some of the Seanchan, but she isn't exactly great either. 

 

Additionally, I found the fact that she thought about breaking her agreement with the Dragon's Peace almost immediately a pretty poor reflection on her character.  It shows a complete lack of honour and integrity, and that her word means nothing.

 Tuon was great before Sanderson. She was half-bad after Sanderson. 

[mcbernier]

Excuse me, but this is fantasy, we have people who can travel and horizontal gateways that look over the field!

 

I don't think it's fair to compare it to battles in our world.

 

 

Mat is instantly able to send orders to any commander he wants, watch from above to make sure they are carried out, and instantly send corrections if needed.  The real world analogues are silly.

 

I know, in the real world commanders don't have the ability to send instant orders to the field, or watch a battle from above, or send immediate orders to correct something, or...hey, wait a minute!   If you think about modern warfare, there is a lot of similar stuff, when you consider the level of fire power we can bring to a fight, or the way we can watch ("real time") what is happening on the battlefield. And yet, we still study the great battles of history. Why? Because the principles still apply. What Alexander the Great did is still relevant. 

[kadinsor]

Additionally, I found the fact that she thought about breaking her agreement with the Dragon's Peace almost immediately a pretty poor reflection on her character.  It shows a complete lack of honour and integrity, and that her word means nothing.

 

That happens in the books Sanderson wrote, however. I don't think that Jordan would have written anything like that.

 

Since Sanderson took over the books, her character has changed for the worse. There is Jordan's Tuon, and there is Sanderson's Tuon, and they are not the same person.

 

You shouldn't hold the deeds of Sanderson-Tuon against Jordan-Tuon.

[Dunedain Fal]

yeah after Sanderson took over, Tuon took a turn for the worse.  I cannot stand her and I wish that she get smacked down big.  I cannot believe that Brandon Sanderson would allow the Seanchan to get away after dissing Rand and the White Tower.  The Seachan did not suffer any repercussions.  I want Seanchan to pay dearly, and I mean, dearly for the actions they have taken.

[Aleator77]

 

 

Excuse me, but this is fantasy, we have people who can travel and horizontal gateways that look over the field!

 

I don't think it's fair to compare it to battles in our world.

 

 

Mat is instantly able to send orders to any commander he wants, watch from above to make sure they are carried out, and instantly send corrections if needed.  The real world analogues are silly.

 

I know, in the real world commanders don't have the ability to send instant orders to the field, or watch a battle from above, or send immediate orders to correct something, or...hey, wait a minute!    If you think about modern warfare, there is a lot of similar stuff, when you consider the level of fire power we can bring to a fight, or the way we can watch ("real time") what is happening on the battlefield. And yet, we still study the great battles of history. Why? Because the principles still apply. What Alexander the Great did is still relevant. 

 

 

Modern day commanders have this ability.  You weren't comparing modern day commanders though, you were making the statement that it's impossible for Mat to have a specific level of control over the battle and citing completely irrelevant ancient battles to support the argument.  

[hime]

Here,now! I don't think Brandon's Tuon is worse than Jordan's, if you read her POV in the gathering storm, it's actually quite close...It's Tuon the Empress that is worse than Tuon the DoNM, very understandable really, Negative character development is still development, I mean Rand almost turned to the dark side in the gathering storm, and Tuon became worse due to her heavy duty as empress, hopefully she will get better with time even if we don't get to see it.

 

But honestly, lets assume Brandon had made her all sweet and cuddly, would her last scene make sense? when she told Mat she can kill him now that she doesn't need him?

 

as we all know that scene was written by Jordan..so get off Brandon's back!

 

On a different note I did feel the whole assassinations issue was overdone, but it was rather hilarious so I didn't mind.

[clu7ch]

people hated queen egwene also, but it was her 'becoming' the white tower that saved the pattern. Tuon did alright by me at the end. At least she didn't turn out like 100% of the whitecloaks whom I loathed. 

[mcbernier]

 

 

Excuse me, but this is fantasy, we have people who can travel and horizontal gateways that look over the field!

 

I don't think it's fair to compare it to battles in our world.

 

 

"1359791426">

Mat is instantly able to send orders to any commander he wants, watch from above to make sure they are carried out, and instantly send corrections if needed.  The real world analogues are

silly.

 

I know, in the real world commanders don't have the ability to send instant orders to the field, or watch a battle from above, or send immediate orders to correct something, or...hey, wait a minute!    If you think about modern warfare, there is a lot of similar stuff, when you consider the level of fire power we can bring to a fight, or the way we can watch ("real time") what is happening on the battlefield. And yet, we still study the great battles of history. Why? Because the principles still apply. What Alexander the Great did is still relevant. 

 

Modern day commanders have this ability.  You weren't comparing modern day commanders though, you were making the statement that it's impossible for Mat to have a specific level of control over the battle and citing completely irrelevant ancient battles to support the argument.  

 

 

Maybe you didn't read the whole discussion I was having with the other feller, or maybe you didn't read it carefully (who can blame you?  ), but the original point was his (I'm assuming he's a he ). I think it's an interesting critique, and I think I agree with it. But I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it's impossible for Mat to have that level of control. It sure does seem unlikely though, when you think it through. If you are interested, read through all the relevant posts. (Also, I didn't cite Alexander the Great as support for this particular conclusion--I originally brought him in, actually, as a counterpoint against this view.)

[pointerksl]

    I couldn't find anywhere else to post this (I haven't seen an Olver thread, maybe I missed it) and I haven't seen this topic discussed so I am choosing to post it here because it is most relevant in this thread:

 

Ok so here it is; Does anyone have a problem with the whole Olver blowing the Horn because Mat dying severed his link to the Horn thing? Don't get me wrong, it was an excellent part of aMoL and I thought BS pulled the scene off beautifully, my heart was pounding for Olver. I just don't think the logic of balefire really helps this theory. 

 

Balefire, as I understand it, slices a thread from the Pattern making whatever that thread has done, undone. This is why Mat was able to be resurrected in the first place. But to me, if balefire was able to UNDO Mat's death, that same balefire should have UNDONE the severing to the Horn. It doesn't seem to add up for me when I think, OK Mat was killed, severed from the Horn makes sense. HOLP UP balefire! aka Mat's thread goes in rewind mode, NOT DEAD, not severed, right? It just seemed like a continuity mix up.

 

I'm certain RJ had something in the notes about Olver blowing the Horn (Little Boy Blue style); it's kind of a GIANT portion of the Last Battle to not leave some sort of instruction. I think RJ planned to have Olver blow the horn all along, but the whole Death/Balefire/Severed thing to me goes against the very nature of Balefire itself. It felt a little Deus Ex Machina to me... Maybe someone can explain it to me in simpler terms. And again, I loved that part in the book, but the more I think on it the more I'm like "hold a tick, this doesn't add up."

 

-Pointer