Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Questions posted 14 May 2006 in Author Q & AQuestions by Cause, Candidate

Hi just recently managed to get ahold of the TFT and thought it was fantastic. But always it brings more questions to the surface and knowing you are here scott to maybe answer a few of them is irresistable.

1)Will wearing armour save a sorceror from a chorae, must it touch skin directly for the salt to be all encompasing and deadly. I know just being near one for two long starts damaging, but its not as lethal. So will a chorae bouncing off a helmet save a sorcerors life?

2)The salt? why? To expand why do sorcerors turn to salt of all things, and what explanation do you have for this.

3)The apparos that makes the chorae can it do anything else beside destroy magic? are any aparos sorcerors remaining to the consult? You seem to refer only to the menganca(sp) a gnostic school

4)how do apparos users not get salted from the construction of their chorae or is this part of the paradox that makes them.

5)Is the gnosis without a doubt more powerfull than anagogic sorcery? is their nothing in which the one beats the other? would their be no advantage to learning both? Also why is the abstarction of fire more damaging than the anology of fire from a dragons head. whi is the gnosis more powerfull?

6)the few who can work sorcery but dont are able to touch chorae without salting as they have not performed magic , been marked? Yet the cishuarim are not marked iether and yet they salt just as easilly?

7)After a battle how do you find chorae launched from bows? just scour the land, sorcerors sense them? whats stops a soldier stealing these priceless tears of god

<!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) -->I think I have asked or seen this aksed before but could you add chorae to the masonry of a building for instance to make it imune to sorcery.

9)Why did anarcane ground save atriphua. I would have thought sorcery was the one thing the north could hope to out do the horde of consult troops at.

10)will firing a chorae at a sorcerors ward destroy it or will it just pass stright through. I noticed the javreh seemed to leave the scarlet spires circular ward to start shooting but I also got the sense they as often shot from behind them. Thought only occured to me after chorae hitting kellhus debri field released them from the spell that held them.

11)The glossary says the mandate has the numbers of a minor school. 50-60 or rank and maybe double the number initiates. Yet the scarlet spires seemed to have only maybe 80 of rank. Is this small diffrence all that stands between major or minor schools or did I get the numbers wrong?

12)Ioykus refers to the dragon head as the hammer of his school. Have we not seen the imperial saik use it aswell.

well thats all I can remeber for now scott. Though Im sure you can expect more as I remeber them. Will greatly appreciate if you can answer any of these. Look forward to future books from you.

Cause. view post


Questions posted 14 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Wow way way way to many questions and most have an answer in the books. 7.) Nothing stops soldiers from stealing them and yes sorcerors sense them. The Gnosis is more powerful than the Anagogic sorceries i really dont feel like discussing the why becuase its been said many times all you have to do is look around on forum. 6.) The reason they dont salt is beacuse of the socery they use they use sorcery remembering of the God's heart and not the mind. 11.) This has benn said many times also i think theres even a page that says 10 schoolmen are worth more than like an army or something similar, theres so few of the Few that a few sorcerors makes all the difference. view post


Questions posted 15 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Cause, Candidate

7) yes I know sorcerors can sense them, that does not mean after a battle they walk the field pointing out the chora Im just asking if this is indeed what happens. I would think knowing their value and their ease to be stolen some sort of control would be put in place to stop it. Hence the question

6)the reason the dont have the mark is because they remeber gods heart, they are as vunerable to chorae as any other sorceror, as seen by the javrah killing dozens. My question is if a man who has never done sorcery but can may hold a chorae without salting, see mathainet, it appears the mark is what allows it to work. Yet the cishuarim as mentioned dont have the mark and yet still salt. so what is the diffrence that occurs

11) A diffrence of 10 sorcerors may make all the diffrence on a battlfield against normal troops. But I would think an group of 60 sorcerors facing a group 70 sorcerors is still open ended enough that any side could win. Its anologous to saying 70 swordsmen against 60. view post


Questions posted 15 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Im not understanding what your asking for six, the mark does not cause a sorceror to salt when they touch a chorae, the use of sorcery causes the salting. People of the Few that don't practice sorcery do not salt because they have never used sorcery. The only difference between Cishuarim and other Schoolmen is that the mark is not seen on the Fanim socerors he reason for this is explained in my previos post, chorae affects all sorcerors. view post


Questions posted 15 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Cause, Candidate

for 6 Im asking what change occurs in a cishuarim from when hes unmarked without ever using sorcery to when hes unmarked aftre having worked sorcery that allows a trinket to work. Further since chorae work on paradoxes whixh turn language back on itself destroying the language based magic of the gnosis, anagogic magic why does it destroy the emotion based magic of the pushke. view post


Questions posted 18 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Mahajanga Mordecai, Auditor

I hope I can help.

1.) Yes, the chorae has to touch either the sorcery and/or the sorcerer to be effective, as such, armor and a helmet would do sorcerers a great service in battle. In fact I've been wondering why they don't wear amor under their robes.

2.) Biblical reference obviously. Remember there are a lot of parallels to history and other fiction in these books.

4.) Scott said he hasn't thought that far out yet.

5.) Okay here's my understanding on why the gnosis is inherently more powerful than the anagoges. The anagogic craft requires detours to come into fruition; burning by way of dragon fire. Whereas the gnosis has the understanding of fire in and of itself. To say, as Akka has, that sorcery is based on meanings is to say that it is based on understanding/awareness. You understand the law of gravity in a layman's manner but a physicist has a far more profound understanding/awareness of it than you... same difference with sorcery. The gnosis is the accumulation of a deeper understanding and/or awareness of the properties of the world.

6.) My theory on the salting of &quot;unmarked&quot; sorcerers is that it's not the &quot;mark&quot; that attracts the unraveling properties of chorae but something deeper. The question is what? Because, like you said, Pshukari salt just as readily as cognitive sorcerers and they (Pshukari) don’t' bare the mark.

AFTERTHOUGT:
Who said Pshukari don't bare the mark? Is it not possible that they do bare the mark but that it is not visible to cognitive sorcerers due to the different way they access the &quot;god&quot;? view post


Questions posted 19 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I'll try to answer as many of these as I can but some are more speculation/ educated guess than direct evidence.


1)Will wearing armour save a sorceror from a chorae, must it touch skin directly for the salt to be all encompasing and deadly. I know just being near one for two long starts damaging, but its not as lethal. So will a chorae bouncing off a helmet save a sorcerors life?


It depends on the depth of the Mark. Achamian talks about some of the Non-men Sorcerors turning to salt from merely being within several meters of a Chorae. Armour might protect a human sorceror who isn't very old and very Marked, Achamian has had them within inches or less of his person and it was merely uncomfortable


2)The salt? why? To expand why do sorcerors turn to salt of all things, and what explanation do you have for this.


Salt = returning to the earth. I think this was more just to tie in some symbolism and such. It fits in very nicely with some of the other biblical style references Scott has used. There is no real explanation given as why it is salt. I think Scott just wanted to do it that way.


3)The apparos that makes the chorae can it do anything else beside destroy magic? are any aparos sorcerors remaining to the consult? You seem to refer only to the menganca(sp) a gnostic school


All we know is the Aporos hinges on paradox as opposed to the Gnosis which hinges on the whole abstract deal and the Anagosis which hinges on Analogy. The Aporetic sorcerors were banned by the rest of the Non-men because their work was considered dangerous and the Inchoroi took them in. We know it created the Chorae and likely they did other things with it but how broad of a use was applied we have no idea. It tends to undo things and negate other sorcery. Thats about all the details we know.


4)how do apparos users not get salted from the construction of their chorae or is this part of the paradox that makes them.


We don't know enough about how the Chorae were constructed to even guess. Given they were working with the Inchoroi probably already at the time the Tekne may have been involved as well.


5)Is the gnosis without a doubt more powerfull than anagogic sorcery? is their nothing in which the one beats the other? would their be no advantage to learning both? Also why is the abstarction of fire more damaging than the anology of fire from a dragons head. whi is the gnosis more powerfull?
[quote:glap8ub5]

The Gnosis is definitely more powerful. Think about it this way which is worth more a dollar bill or a rough drawing of a dollar bill. Not the best example but the Abstractions hinge on knowledge (Gnosis) whereas the Anagosis utilizes Analogy, an Analogy can only come close, it can only imitate. Hard to explain but if you just think about the concept of Analogy I think it is rather obvious.

[quote:glap8ub5]
6)the few who can work sorcery but dont are able to touch chorae without salting as they have not performed magic , been marked? Yet the cishuarim are not marked iether and yet they salt just as easilly?
[quote:glap8ub5]

Right, those who are of the Few yet have never uttered a Cant are not Marked and therefore not susceptible to Chorae. The Cishaurim use the Psukhe which leaves no visible Mark to the Few (yet I think the Cishaurim are of the Few themselves) but they are still hmmm I don't want to say tainted. I think they are still Marked metaphysically so to speak because they do use Sorcery but they just aren't Marked in the same manner, or at least it isn't visible to the Few. Sort of like think about an invention that shocked criminals. All Sorcerors are criminals but not all have criminal records, but the machine uses some other method to tell. The Cishaurim don;t have a record but are still criminals and so still get nailed <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

[quote:glap8ub5]
7)After a battle how do you find chorae launched from bows? just scour the land, sorcerors sense them? whats stops a soldier stealing these priceless tears of god
[quote:glap8ub5]

They look for them I guess, and allied Sorcerors (or at least those able to sense Chorae such as someone like Inrau who is marked and can sense them but isn't really a Sorceror anymore) help out. I'm sure Soldiers do steal them but I imagine it is an offence punishable by death.

[quote:glap8ub5]
<!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) -->I think I have asked or seen this aksed before but could you add chorae to the masonry of a building for instance to make it imune to sorcery.


No idea, maybe but I imagine Chorae only have a small area of effect so it would be too cost prohibitive. There are probably better methods to achieve almost the same thing.


9)Why did anarcane ground save atriphua. I would have thought sorcery was the one thing the north could hope to out do the horde of consult troops at.


The enemy couldn't use Sorcery there either, the hordes aren't nearly as bad when you don't have to worry about the Consult anymore and can just fight a good old fashioned melee battle with them. Remember that the Inchoroi didn't have full use of the Tekne by the time of the Apocalypse so relied just as much on Sorcery as anyone else.


10)will firing a chorae at a sorcerors ward destroy it or will it just pass stright through. I noticed the javreh seemed to leave the scarlet spires circular ward to start shooting but I also got the sense they as often shot from behind them. Thought only occured to me after chorae hitting kellhus debri field released them from the spell that held them.


Not sure


11)The glossary says the mandate has the numbers of a minor school. 50-60 or rank and maybe double the number initiates. Yet the scarlet spires seemed to have only maybe 80 of rank. Is this small diffrence all that stands between major or minor schools or did I get the numbers wrong?


I don't remember seeing how many Sorcerers of Rank the Spires have total but I thought it was more than 80. I'd have to check the books again.

[/quote:glap8ub5]
12)Ioykus refers to the dragon head as the hammer of his school. Have we not seen the imperial saik use it aswell.
[/quote:glap8ub5][/quote:glap8ub5][/quote:glap8ub5][/quote:glap8ub5][/quote:glap8ub5]

Not sure if they did or not, might have been something similar but not identical view post


Questions posted 19 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Cause, Candidate

5) But an abstarction actaully dilutes knowledge. To continue your example of the dollar bill. The base a dollar bill. The abstarction would be currency. the anology barter. Niether one effectivly describes that were talking about a dollar bill. Just some kind of money or some kind of exchange. And I know the gnosis is more powerfull were shown it enough the question is why.

<!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> I wonder about sorcery being enchanted into objects in the three seas. The chorae, ishual, daimotic cants, anborian circle, gnostic collar and chorae are magic constructs. I wonder if the knowledge of enhancing stoine with magic has been lost like at ishual, or perhaps as far as we know the mandates citadel is crawling with abstarctions of stremght.

9)i disagree. The consuly have dragons, a sranc horde and bashrag behemoths. The north have humans and the occasional super human in nonmen. I would wager the consult in non sorcerous battles have the advantage by a alrge degree. After all how do you kill a dragon without magic.

13) From a nonmen perspective chorae are a recent invention. So before chorae when mansions went to war how did the exalted ones manage to deal with quya sorcerors. Unless you simply prayed your quya were their quyas match. view post


Questions posted 20 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by H, Auditor

From what i understood of how the Gnosis is more powerful than the Anagosis is that the Gnosis doesn't need to waste effort on representation. The Anagosis needs a means to an end, the Gnosis just calls the end.

Like burning for example. The Anagosis needs to call fire, the fire then burns something. The Gnosis simply burns things: it excites atoms to the combustion state itself, no need for the middle man (fire). Thus, it's more efficient, and therefore more powerful. view post


Questions posted 21 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Mandati Shinigami13, Commoner

Another thing about the Gnosis that I remember is that it is spoken through the original nonman language, where the anagogic sorcery is forced to used more watered down tounges to speak it. view post


Questions posted 21 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Entropic_existence, Moderator

&quot;Cause&quot;:20z938q9
5) But an abstarction actaully dilutes knowledge. To continue your example of the dollar bill. The base a dollar bill. The abstarction would be currency. the anology barter. Niether one effectivly describes that were talking about a dollar bill. Just some kind of money or some kind of exchange. And I know the gnosis is more powerfull were shown it enough the question is why.
[/quote:20z938q9]

Actually the Abstraction of Currency is still inherently more powerful because it is closer to the very idea of the thing rather than merely being a representation. As others have said Gnostic Sorcery manipulates at a far more fundamental level, and seems to operate with things directly whereas the Anagogic sorceries have to call something that represents what they want to do


<!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> I wonder about sorcery being enchanted into objects in the three seas. The chorae, ishual, daimotic cants, anborian circle, gnostic collar and chorae are magic constructs. I wonder if the knowledge of enhancing stoine with magic has been lost like at ishual, or perhaps as far as we know the mandates citadel is crawling with abstarctions of stremght.


All of the examples you mentioned are a little different, daimotic cants take scribing circles and all that, as do Arborian Circules but I wouldn;t consider them constructs in the sense of items like chorae, etc. I would imagine ancient strongholds bear potent magical wards but whether it is a lost art we just don't know.


9)i disagree. The consuly have dragons, a sranc horde and bashrag behemoths. The north have humans and the occasional super human in nonmen. I would wager the consult in non sorcerous battles have the advantage by a alrge degree. After all how do you kill a dragon without magic.


Well it seemed to have worked with Attriteau so who knows.


13) From a nonmen perspective chorae are a recent invention. So before chorae when mansions went to war how did the exalted ones manage to deal with quya sorcerors. Unless you simply prayed your quya were their quyas match.



I would imagine Quya tended to go after one another and the Siqu battled one another. Other forces may have come into play as well but until we see something it's all merely speculation. view post


Questions posted 21 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

You could have used the example of Monoply money rather than a drawing of money. view post


Questions posted 22 May 2006 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Quote: &quot;Warrior-Poet&quot;:1c86a5n4
You could have used the example of Monoply money rather than a drawing of money.[/quote:1c86a5n4]

Yea, it would probably have worked better if I had of thought of it at the time <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> The fundamental analogy though still stands <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> view post


Questions posted 04 January 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by GreyMantle, Commoner

Quote: &quot;Cause&quot;:vkyvcvmp

9)i disagree. The consuly have dragons, a sranc horde and bashrag behemoths. The north have humans and the occasional super human in nonmen. I would wager the consult in non sorcerous battles have the advantage by a alrge degree. After all how do you kill a dragon without magic.
[/quote:vkyvcvmp]
I really don't think the Sranc would by themselves be much of a threat. Kellhus by himself is able to take out a large number by himself, and while the soldiers are not obviously not Kellhus's equal, I think a few humans would be able to hold against a much larger group of Sranc, since I think they are described as being shorter than men and weaker? I also doubt it would take much effort for a single Gnostic sorceror to destroy a huge number of Sranc.
Concerning Dragons. I don't think we've learned enough about Earwa's dragons to make a coherant decision on this matter. For all we know, dragons could be individually weak, instead relying entirely on their fiery breath. Yes, sorcerors would probably be able to deal with dragons most easily, but again we don't know enough to be able to decide how effective footmen or cavalry are against them. view post


Questions posted 04 January 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

I think it was stated several times that dragons were very difficult to kill but had been killed by non-sorcerous means several times, Im not sure where in the series I read it but I recall someone killing a dragon with a hammer. view post


Questions posted 04 January 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Harrol, Moderator

In the appendances there was a non-man that broke the neck of the most powerful dragon. view post


Questions posted 04 January 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Thank you Harrol i believe that might be what I was referring to. view post


Questions posted 05 January 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Harrol, Moderator

That is what I am here for... kind of I think. view post


Questions posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q &amp; AQuestions by Jamara, Auditor

The Dollar Bill Theorem:

Gnostic Sorcery represents the idea of currency.
Agnosis represents the idea of barter.
The Dollar Bill itself being the epitomy, &quot;Word of God&quot;.

The Gnostic would be more true to the Word of God than the Agnosis. I think this is agreed. But it is also obvious that there are a few steps between currency and the actual dollar. And we witness Kellhus reach one of those closer steps when he combines three strings rather than just two. He becomes something greater than Gnostic sorcery. Something closer to the &quot;Word of God&quot;. Working on quantum mechanics from a different thread, one would probably have to work 12 strings in order to be a god. view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown