The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Murphy in Peace Talks (WoJ spoilers)

<< < (68/74) > >>

jonas:

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 on September 02, 2017, 07:34:03 AM ---I can't believe that we are arguing about Nicodemous's credibility. That is why I call this lunacy. It is clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that Nick can lie and he did lie, a freaking lot, not all the time but the next best thing to it.
--- End quote ---
Then why is proving it so hard?
--- Quote ---"I know the value of your words and you know the value of mine". This phrase first used by shiro is proof enough. Nick is a lying cheating bastard, because JB design him as a complete nemesis to Michael's character. Arguing about this is pointless.
--- End quote ---
Very character opinion driven though. I'd point out as Nic is also one of those few 2k year olds who know what's actually happening, knows about N and how the world actually works on metaphysical level, their's a whole heck of a lot of reasons for him not to bust outright lies, knowing full well why it became part of the balance for instance as a previously unbalanced force without a punisher or redeemer. Satan, the original accuser/nemesis role and how he used sin to claim the parts that had no balance in reality, no one to punish, based off of the cabbalistic seraphim and our level of reality and it's polar opposite spiritus mundus in previous satan, now his bride Lilith/Nemesis/Lachesis,ect, ect. Now Magic has no elemental punisher for crime (click to show/hide)Until Harry becomes that in the end, giving black magic balance in reality and taking away N's current foothold, ect, ect.

--- Quote ---All I want to say is this. Had Nicodemous say something and he is the only sorce of information and with the absence of any other contrary proof, taking his words as truth is reasonable. No matter how you put it, the guy is still a character in the story, and his words are still text evidence. When he say that Harry is afraid of power during book 5, I take that statement as truth just fine. Why? Because nothing is going against that statement and Harry even somewhat agrees which further support the statement.

But taking Nicodemous's words as credible evidence, when there is at least 3 other characters who's words and actions contradicts Nicodemous's statement and under the condition where these 3 character are all reputable characters, that is a choice only made by crazy lunatics.

--- End quote ---
As character witness's alone, sure.(haven't seen this happen fyi but thanks for calling me a lunatic and crazy and ect. WATCH the push, because shove is an easy extension) But just because they believe Nic to be a liar doesn't mean he did either. Take for face value that the knights have always had their own agenda(considering what else the nails are, I find this believable) and having that agenda has skewed the word of mouth knowledge of Nic and the fallen(as we know they lack much else written) then it becomes less of a concrete thing. You can take all the things said about Mab, and if you didn't know for a fact she couldn't lie, she'd be quite the liar to you. She's deceptive, two faced, manipulative, ect.

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: DonBugen on September 03, 2017, 03:36:35 PM ---Hm, that's right.  And they'd catch her, too, unless Mab were to literally appear at Harry's death.  Which may be possible...  While we don't know for certain where Mab is between the meeting with Kringle and Harry's confrontation with her at the BFS, I have a hunch that she stays in Chicago.  Mostly due to the fact that the weather remains icky.  If she's in Chicago, that would mean that Harry's mantle would return to Mab, not Molly, on Harry's death, which would tell her that her knight is no more.
--- End quote ---
Granted, yeah, Mab's probably in Chicago. How quickly she could arrive without being summoned, we don't know. At the end of the book, Molly apparently has to cover the physical distance to arrive.

Even so, the earring she gave Harry is suppressing Bonnie. Even if Mab could get to her, she might not have been "conscious" because of it.


--- Quote ---I hear what you say about Mab's recreation of the scene in Small Favor.  Correct me if I'm wrong - that was what Mab was able to do with no forewarning, without any initial invested means of knowing that the movement of these Denarians would be important to her.  To me, that doesn't say "wow, she's limited."  Imagine what she could do if she was prepared.

No, I mean really, imagine.  She DOES have this band of elite spies and assassins at her beck and call, who can witness events play out through reflective surfaces.  And in the icy, sleety environment, there's plenty of reflective surfaces.  Heck, Harry even has some on him, one of which sits on his earlobe.  Nick is holding another for most of the confrontation.

I mean, she's been putting together this plan for ages.  She's spending the weekend making sure everything goes to plan.  Is it really improbable that she wouldn't task a Fetch with watching Harry's back, and alerting her when things got dicey?  I mean, I know that Harry fought some Fetches a while back, but he's all winter and stuff now.

Besides, Harry's words to Nicodemus when he closes the gate talk about Mab watching directly.  They are fighting in Mab's element.
--- End quote ---
Here's the thing about Mab, though -- she doesn't want a Knight she has to keep tabs on and micromanage. Hell, that was Harry's threat -- that he'd become someone Mab had to micromanage. She seems to have picked Harry because of his ability to operate on his own and surprise her -- keeping a constant eye on him seems to go against that.

So yes, it's possible that Mab is watching everything. I don't think it likely, and I don't think it matters, because...


--- Quote ---I've given you evidence that Mab may be watching herself, and provided a good number of other witnesses who could have done the job.  (and yes, the Cobbs Harry met at Shoegasm wouldn't have been watching, but that was mostly just an example that not all little folk have heads as full of corn silk as the Major General and his colonels).  But at the end of the day, the question remains:  even if Nicodemus only has a reasonable chance that Mab might not be watching closely, would he really risk killing Dresden if it wasn't 100% obvious and clear that Harry had betrayed him?  Especially on a job that is so important, he is willing to sacrifice his daughter over?
--- End quote ---
It is obvious and clear Harry had betrayed him. He gave Harry an order (to kill Butters) and Harry slaps him on the wrist. Everybody present knows what it looks like when Harry tries to kill something. Especially Nicodemus -- Harry's tried to kill him a few times. and that Forzare spell was clearly not cast with lethal intent.

But let's say Mab was watching everything closely. Let's say she even knew what Harry was trying to do.

Do you really think Mab is going to argue that the Winter Knight that she picked personally, who she pursued for near a decade, and who she proclaimed as hers to all of Faerie... is an incompetent incapable of killing a defenseless, fragile mortal like Butters?

huangjimmy108:

--- Quote from: DonBugen on September 03, 2017, 03:36:35 PM ---Hm, that's right.  And they'd catch her, too, unless Mab were to literally appear at Harry's death.  Which may be possible...  While we don't know for certain where Mab is between the meeting with Kringle and Harry's confrontation with her at the BFS, I have a hunch that she stays in Chicago.  Mostly due to the fact that the weather remains icky.  If she's in Chicago, that would mean that Harry's mantle would return to Mab, not Molly, on Harry's death, which would tell her that her knight is no more.I hear what you say about Mab's recreation of the scene in Small Favor.  Correct me if I'm wrong - that was what Mab was able to do with no forewarning, without any initial invested means of knowing that the movement of these Denarians would be important to her.  To me, that doesn't say "wow, she's limited."  Imagine what she could do if she was prepared.

No, I mean really, imagine.  She DOES have this band of elite spies and assassins at her beck and call, who can witness events play out through reflective surfaces.  And in the icy, sleety environment, there's plenty of reflective surfaces.  Heck, Harry even has some on him, one of which sits on his earlobe.  Nick is holding another for most of the confrontation.

I mean, she's been putting together this plan for ages.  She's spending the weekend making sure everything goes to plan.  Is it really improbable that she wouldn't task a Fetch with watching Harry's back, and alerting her when things got dicey?  I mean, I know that Harry fought some Fetches a while back, but he's all winter and stuff now.

Besides, Harry's words to Nicodemus when he closes the gate talk about Mab watching directly.  They are fighting in Mab's element.

I've given you evidence that Mab may be watching herself, and provided a good number of other witnesses who could have done the job.  (and yes, the Cobbs Harry met at Shoegasm wouldn't have been watching, but that was mostly just an example that not all little folk have heads as full of corn silk as the Major General and his colonels).  But at the end of the day, the question remains:  even if Nicodemus only has a reasonable chance that Mab might not be watching closely, would he really risk killing Dresden if it wasn't 100% obvious and clear that Harry had betrayed him?  Especially on a job that is so important, he is willing to sacrifice his daughter over?
Again, please note my earlier arguments over intent vs. deed, or as you put it, intent vs. what is actually done.  We agreed that intent does not signify a betrayal, as you might remember.  What matters is if Harry actually betrays Nicodemus.  That means that what matters in the beginning is whether Dresden actually ushers Butters off to safety or not.  After Nicodemus gives the order to Harry to kill Butters, what matters is if Harry actually kills Butters or not.  And at this scene, everything is not played out, so Harry has not yet for certain saved Butters.  Harry has not succeeded where Nicodemus has failed.

It does not matter a bit what he intends to do, but what he actually does.  Otherwise, Nick could have just killed Harry as he ran toward the Carpenters' house in the beginning.  Instead, Nicodemus shows up, acts as if Harry was obviously pursuing Butters, and then makes him choose between allowing Butters' death or fighting them and betraying Mab.

Nicodemus wants to make sure Dresden is clearly breaking the truce.
...  you DO realize that you're completely arguing in favor of my point, yet again?

I mean, you just stated that when Nicodemus told the Genoskwa to kill Harry, that he wasn't actually trying to have Harry killed, because he would lose the piece of leverage he was using.  This literally means that you are saying that this was all a ploy in order to get Karrin to expose the sword.  It literally means that you are agreeing with Nicodemus.

You have just provided a logical, well-thought-out reason that Nicodemus was being accurate when he said that this was a ploy.

And furthermore, you provided extra evidence that I hadn't even thought of.  If Karrin is completely justified in killing Nicodemus if he has the Genoskwa killed, there's only one reason for that to be the case.  It would mean that Nicodemus had taken an action which contradicted his submission and relinquishment of the coin.  This would imply that Nicodemus did not truly "relinquish his claim on the blood of the innocent."  Because that would mean in this case that Harry was innocent and Nicodemus truly did not have a right to his blood under the agreement.

I mean, come on.  Don't you see this?  At all?  You just literally agreed to me.  I've shown several times in this thread that I'm not allergic to admitting when I'm wrong and adjusting my beliefs based off of it - after all, I'm not arguing to Mr. Death anymore that Murphy must be under some evil influence.  Come on.

Second...  Harry is safe from Genoskwa after the sword breaks, because... what, Nicodemus is gloating?  I don't understand your reasoning there.  I mean, sure, the Genoskwa probably doesn't have friends with Internet access, so he probably hasn't read that Evil Overlord list, either.  But come on.  The Genoskwa is a vicious, brutal, carnal predator.  When he decides to kill something, he kills it.  He doesn't just hang there and wait so that Harry can feel emotional pain.

If Nicodemus' life being in danger was holding him back before, it sure isn't now.  Pretty sure that Gen would then drink his blood like a bottle of pop.
That wasn't quite my argument.  Harry is totally replaceable if Mab offers another Winter Sidhe.  Harry's agility compared to the grace of a sidhe is like comparing a toddler to a housecat.  The big question is, will Mab replace Harry if Nicodemus is betraying their agreement?

Again, intentions don't matter.  What matters is what actually happens.
And again, this is another strawman, and you know why.  It is Mab's opinion, not Nicodemus', that matters.  You cannot make the same argument if it is said "So the idea that Nick won't risk killing Harry unless Nick is certain that Mab would see Harry's act as betrayal is again another false assertion."  Mab doesn't just dole out replacements if Nicodemus felt justified in killing Dresden; she would only do so if Harry actually had broken Mab's word.

--- End quote ---

Let me ask you this: Did Butters die?

This the matter. The crux of the matter is not whether or not Harry usher Butters to safety. The order is not "Secure the mortal doctor". THe order is "End him". THe question is did Butters die or not. And don't mention it is not yet certain, because it is certain. Once Butters pass the fence into Michael's home, it is over and finalize If at that point Butters did not die, it means Harry has fail. It is the same as Harry coming back to Chicago from demonreach island after he make a deal with eldest gruf in book 10. Once Harry step into Chicago, the game is ended and Eldest gruf fail the job. There is no uncertainty about it. Harry is task to end Butters and he fail, breaking Mab's given word in the process.

If intent does not matter, Butters will have to die before the equation is balance. The final result matters, no excuses. Nick can't kill Harry, but Harry has to end Butters by all cost.

Balance is what drives the fae, and no, just because Mab's perception that matters, she can't just twist things and argue her way out of everything. There is a law governing this. If she is not bound, nobody in their right mind would want to make deals with her. She can twist everything and thereby no credibility. Do you think Mab is a freaking dishonorable Denarians?

Again I mention this. If Butters truly die, this "Intent" argument of yours will be more plausible. But since Butters did not die, this excuse is not applicable.


As for Nick gloating. Well, he is human in the end. He has just succeeded in destroying one of the holy sword. It is only reasonable that he'll take some time to celebrate. Capable as Nick is, there is still some limit. He is not perfect. Like I said, even Mab, the absolute Queen, has her emotional moments, like not killing Maeve with her own hands for example. If even Mab can show some emotional response, so does Nick. It is an understandable lapse of judgement on Nick's part. a small lapse at that, and would not have mattered at all if not for Michael and Uriel's intervention.

He could have killed Harry at any time, delaying it for a few minutes to gloat does not effect anything. He could also refuse Michael's offer, it is his own fault being greedy and lose everything. Michael's home is neutral territory, once Harry cross the threshold, like Butters he escape the crisis. The matter is settled and Nick can't cry fowl about this matter anymore.

huangjimmy108:

--- Quote from: jonas on September 03, 2017, 04:44:34 PM ---Then why is proving it so hard? Very character opinion driven though. I'd point out as Nic is also one of those few 2k year olds who know what's actually happening, knows about N and how the world actually works on metaphysical level, their's a whole heck of a lot of reasons for him not to bust outright lies, knowing full well why it became part of the balance for instance as a previously unbalanced force without a punisher or redeemer. Satan, the original accuser/nemesis role and how he used sin to claim the parts that had no balance in reality, no one to punish, based off of the cabbalistic seraphim and our level of reality and it's polar opposite spiritus mundus in previous satan, now his bride Lilith/Nemesis/Lachesis,ect, ect. Now Magic has no elemental punisher for crime (click to show/hide)Until Harry becomes that in the end, giving black magic balance in reality and taking away N's current foothold, ect, ect.As character witness's alone, sure.(haven't seen this happen fyi but thanks for calling me a lunatic and crazy and ect. WATCH the push, because shove is an easy extension) But just because they believe Nic to be a liar doesn't mean he did either. Take for face value that the knights have always had their own agenda(considering what else the nails are, I find this believable) and having that agenda has skewed the word of mouth knowledge of Nic and the fallen(as we know they lack much else written) then it becomes less of a concrete thing. You can take all the things said about Mab, and if you didn't know for a fact she couldn't lie, she'd be quite the liar to you. She's deceptive, two faced, manipulative, ect.

--- End quote ---

If it is so easy to catch a devil in a lie, the devil won't be the devil, unless you are TWG.

The fact that it is so hard to prove the lie is testament to Nick's skill, not his credibility.

How do I know? Because WoJ say that Nick is Michael nemesis in character.

We has to start with assuming that Nick is lying and go from there, not the other way around.

jonas:

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 on September 04, 2017, 12:31:36 AM ---If it is so easy to catch a devil in a lie, the devil won't be the devil, unless you are TWG.

The fact that it is so hard to prove the lie is testament to Nick's skill, not his credibility.

How do I know? Because WoJ say that Nick is Michael nemesis in character.

We has to start with assuming that Nick is lying and go from there, not the other way around.

--- End quote ---
We also has to be nice to our fellows here and none of this is conclusive Yellow Jim of the 108 blessings. Your taking an opinion and because the idea opposed to it is so repugnant, slathering it in ego. Please don't.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page