Jump to content




  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Just one annotation to the numbers of ancient armies that have been referenced (Persians, Romans, these kinds of folks). It's one thing I learned at university that I can't believe I get to apply! :) And it's this: The numbers that the ancient historians like Thucydides and Xenophon and Plini and all those guys give are not really to be taken literally. When the invading force is described as "a million strong", that's not actually supposed to be read as "1,000,000 guys showed up on the shore" but as "a friggin' huge-ass army showed up on the shore". That goes for a lot of these ancient armies. The numbers are not reliable, they are just giving you an flavor of what it must have been like to face a big army. That's apparently just how the ancient historians worked. I think our modern kind of accuracy in reporting is a relatively recent thing, I'd be suspicious of ANY numbers written down before maybe the Renaissance.
  2. In diablo 2 I personally slaughtered maybe 20,000 enemies, and they had some pretty well defended positions. 8:1 doesn't seem too bad in a fantasy context... :) Anyway, is there a way to estimate the size of the Shadow's forces? If the DO sends 8,000 trollocs and 40 fades to crush a few hundred villagers, is that about the ratio we can expect?
  3. That would be a pretty cool resolution. I like that idea. I can't even imagine what her arguments would be in the first place, though. Did she give or imply any rationale beyond "it's insane"? I've got the last two books as audiobooks (don't judge me) where it's rather inconvenient to look up specific passages*. I think that's the biggest problem I have with the whole thing. She doesn't seem to have even an ill-conceived argument as to what makes this a bad plan, let alone a strategy for what comes after her intervention. (I imagine something like the one in Arrested Development, which did later turn into a party, as I recall...) I'd have thought that she'd at least have some rationalization of her course of action. The word "unconstructive" comes to mind... *(Wait, did I just stumble upon a huge gap in the audiobook format market? Dibs! :) )
  4. Err, alright, I'm confused. I thought you were being sarcastic and what you were actually saying was "Olver's a tinker (the way of the leaf thing), so obviously his picking up a knife is significant." But what you're saying then is that you ARE surprised that it's caused such consternation? I'm still none the wiser then. :)
  5. See, I totally forgot that he was a Tinker. Alright, so there was something noteworthy. Still no alarm bells ringing for me, though.
  6. I don't think this is gonna turn out to be the reason, but it makes a lot of sense to me. (Like with the cracked Enigma codes in WW2, which I assume is what you had in mind as well.) I also have a question: Everybody seems to have picked up on something strange going on with Olver. I totally missed that, cause he was always such a minor character to me. What has made everyone so suspicious of him? What am I not seeing?
  7. Don't have anything of substance to add, but I'm delighted to find a place to vent my frustrations about all the times in ToM where someone, mostly Egwene and Elayne I think, fumes about Rand intending to break the Dark One's prison's seals, completely leaving out the little detail that this might be the only way to get the job done. (According to the guy who actually has to do the re-sealing, at that.) I never really liked those two girls, but that was aggravating. I was very happy to discover that my main man Perrin figured that out immediately.
  • Create New...