The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Murphy in Peace Talks (WoJ spoilers)

<< < (70/74) > >>

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: Mira on September 04, 2017, 05:11:41 PM ---No, the point is, who was Butters going to tell?  Marcone?   Well, Murphy is a lot closer and on speaking terms with Marcone where as Butters really isn't.. Actually the fact that she has worked with and for Marcone in the past, Murphy would have been more likely than Butters to reveal Nic's plans, yet she was allowed to be part of team Harry. So no, there was no real reason for Butters to die...  By ordering it he was pushing to see if Harry would blindly follow Mab's orders to him to cooperate with him...  Knowing before hand that killing Butters was a non-issue for Harry, he pressed it with the added theatrics of Geno about to crush his skull to insight Murphy to attack using the Sword which he knew she'd misuse and get it broke, then he'd take her out, and leave Harry isolated with no balancing power to his own crew... Like I said he didn't anticipate Michael/Uriel..

--- End quote ---
Butters knows too much, therefore he's a risk to the operation. None of that armchair analysis would factor in Nicodemus's thinking.

Nobody planning that kind of crime is going to look at someone who was actively and deliberately spying on their planning session and say, "Nah, they're not gonna tell anyone what we're up to, we can just leave him be." The very idea makes no sense whatsoever.

DonBugen:
Hoo boy.  A Mod was just provoked to use the red text.  I feel… slightly queasy.

Gotcha, Blaze.  If I’m crossing a line here, please let me know.


--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 --- 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 ---
Being Michael’s nemesis does not imply that every word he says is a lie, unless proven otherwise.  Which, logically, I and others have given ample evidence for.  I don’t think that a single person is arguing in favor of Nicodemus’ credibility.
--- Quote from: Dictionary.com --- cred·i·bil·i·ty
ˌkredəˈbilədē/
noun
The quality of being trusted and believed in.
--- End quote ---
No one is believing Nicodemus on his own merits, but from the evidence of the scene.  I would like to request that statements like “I cannot believe that we are arguing about Nicodemus’ credibility” would stop being made, as it is a back-door ad hominem argument.  Stating “Nicodemus is not a credible person” is a good method of debate.  Stating “It is inconceivable to me that someone would put efford to argue in favor of Nicodemous's credibility” attacks the people you debate with.

--


--- Quote from: Mr. Death ---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...
--- End quote ---
What Dresden threatens Mab with is not that she would have to keep an eye on him.  What he threatens is that he'll have no initiative, no drive, come up with no creative solutions and basically just follow her commands literally.  In this case, Mab would have to give Harry continual commands and basically direct Harry in his actions.

--- Quote ---"I'll do it.  I'll follow your command.  And I will do nothing else.  I'll make every task you command one you personally oversee.  I'll have the initiative of a garden statue."
...
"I think you don't have the time or energy to spare to fight your own knight anymore.  I think you need me, or you wouldn't have gone to all the trouble of keeping me alive for this long, of taxing your strength this much to get it done."
--- End quote ---
Dresden's threats are related to his lack of initiation.  And he doesn't say "I don't think you have the time to watch your knight," it's "I don't think you have the time to fight your knight."

Mab keeping an eye on the situation, or tasking one of her spies to do it, is far less taxing than if she's trying to be the brains behind the operation.  And she doesn't trust Nicodemus at all - so why wouldn't she make sure that she was ensuring that her honor was never put in jeopardy?  Especially when both Harry and Nicodemus acknowledge that the vault does blind Mab, changing the game?

--

I'm going to jump over to huangjimmy's argument, because both of yours are so close together it makes sense to put them together.

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 ---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.
--- End quote ---
I will mention that it is not certain at this point, because Michael's house does not protect a person from mortal attack.  If evidence is given that Harry could not have pulled out a gun and shot Butters in the head, then we'll talk.  But the only argument against this is the argument of intent.

And yes, the Genoskwa did incapacitate Harry a half second later.  However, I don't think that Harry can be found at fault because one of Nicodemus' henchmen stopped him from fulfilling the task.

Butters was out of play for Gen and Nick, but Nick's command meant that Gen and Nick wouldn't be the one to end him, anyways.

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 ---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.
--- End quote ---
If there is no uncertainty for it, please provide what evidence this arbitrary line provides other than the more literal line of Butters literally escaping death.  When Butters crosses the fence, it does not protect him in any way from the one person who is commanded to kill him.  It just protects him from the monsters making the commandment.

Please note, I am not arguing that there is not a line; just that you are drawing it prematurely.

--


--- Quote from: Mr. Death ---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?
--- End quote ---
It's no secret that Mab believes that Harry's actions are strange, inept, and downright odd.  She chastised Harry for squeamishness for not outright killing one of Nicodemus' goons when they all first met.  Harry's made it perfectly clear that he doesn't want to kill mortals.  And besides, Mab knows how to play the game.

If Nicodemus was so unwise as to have Harry killed at this point, I think that Mab could easily have sidestepped this issue, by referencing the above points and also mentioning that Nicodemus' gorilla attacked Harry almost immediately, completely stopping him from continuing his assault.  All she really has to do, in fact, is just point to the literal facts of the situation.  But I honestly don't think it would come to this.  Again, seems to be putting far too much chance on such an important operation, and Nicodemus has never shown himself to take stupid risks.

--


--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 ---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?
--- End quote ---
First, I never said a thing about Mab twisting things around.  But the books make it clear that Faeries twist around the truth all the time to make things seem one way when telling the truth.  Note, Lea making a deal with Teen Harry that she will give him power, when all she does is torture him a bit.  Or her aid of Harry in the graveyard in Grave Peril, only for the answer to have just been running water.

What I am talking about is not a crazy distortion of the truth.  In fact, it is nothing but saying the clear truth.  It literally boils down to this:

"So you ordered my knight to kill the mortal, and then you killed him after his first blow."
"He moved the doctor across the fence!  It's right there!  There's guardian angels and stuff."
"And this fence would protect the mortal from my Knight?"
"Well, no.  Not in the slightest.  But it means that Dresden didn't intend to kill him after all."
"So you say.  And so you killed my Knight after he let the mortal go free?"
"Well, not quite after.  More like before.  My mutant Bigfoot started smacking him around at that point, so he really couldn't do anything one way or another."

--


--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---
I do not understand this argument.  So, if Harry doesn't intend to kill Butters, but somehow kills Butters, then the argument that he didn't intend to kill Butters has more weight to defend why he didn't kill Butters even though he did kill Butters?  I have a feeling that this is not what you are trying to state, but I just can't figure out what you are arguing.

My argument was "Nick killing Harry at this point is premature, because Harry would still have the opportunity to kill Butters had the Genoskwa not attacked."  Butters' death would make my statement nonsensical.



--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---
I have no problem with Nicodemus going into gloat-mode, like every evil overlord shouldn't.  My stated argument was that if the Genoskwa was refraining from killing Harry because he somehow saw that Nicodemus' command would put his leader's life in jeopardy, as was argued, then he has nothing holding him back after the sword is broken.  "He was waiting because Nicodemus was gloating" doesn't make sense.  Has the Genoskwa ever shown that he cares about gloating, or one-upmanship?  Or has he just been about brutal violence and killing?

Again, my question remains:  Why would the Genoskwa refrain from killing Harry, when ordered to?  If he wasn't given previous orders to not kill Harry, then why just stand around holding his head.



Again, I state:  This is the evidence that Nicodemus' actions at this point were to draw Harry and Murphy into breaking Mab's agreement, rather than just trying to kill them outright.  Every item here I've provided evidence for, so I'm just going to list them one by one.

1.  When Harry asserts that ordering his goon to kill him would be breaking his contract with Mab, Nicodemus agrees.
2.  When ordered to kill Harry, the Genoskwa just holds his head and squeezes for about five minutes, though his expressed inclination would be to kill him.
3.  Harry does not fail to kill Butters; he strikes his first blow and is viciously attacked and restrained.  This is the objective truth.
4.  Butters is still on the field of battle and is vulnerable to attacks from half of the members of Nicodemus' team.
5.  This heist is of grave importance to Nicodemus' long-term goals, and it is not in Nicodemus' best interest to kill Harry if there is any ambiguity as to whether or not he has broken the truce.
6.  The exchange in front of Michael's house has been, from the start, Nicodemus trying to trap Harry into breaking the deal.  It is not unreasonable to consider whether this is a continuation of that trap.

Because of these reasons, I believe that when Nicodemus claimed that it was a ruse, he was not lying; he was revealing a played hand to Harry to refute his claim.

Mira:



   First of all the chase of Butters, beforethe fight begins at Michael's house, Butters already realized he was wrong and tells Harry that he was sorry..  Bottom line?  He isn't a threat to anything..  What's more, Nic knew it...

page 245 Skin Game

"Why, it was no more an attempt to kill you than  was your participation in the chase of the little doctor a betrayal of Mab's word that you'd aid me."
Nic did order Harry to end Butters, he didn't exactly say to kill him.. Harry drop kicked him over the fence with some controlled wizard action...  And if Nic really wanted Butters dead, there was plenty opportunity insist on it, when Butters left the yard to tend to the wounded Murphy.. He didn't...

--- Quote ---Because of these reasons, I believe that when Nicodemus claimed that it was a ruse, he was not lying; he was revealing a played hand to Harry to refute his claim.
--- End quote ---
No one is arguing that Nic is a liar, but let agree that he is also very clever...  What is a ruse?  But a trick or a type of lie... Nic is good at it, he is very clever and succeeded before he was seen through.. It was a temporary victory for him...

Mr. Death:
Don: The point is, Mab wanted Harry for a reason. She hounded him for near a decade, and took considerable pride in getting him as her Knight. And she does seem to understand that Harry works best when you set him loose.

Plus, it benefits Mab to not know what's going on; plausible deniability for her if the heist goes badly and reflects badly on her.

And she has pride. She didn't get Harry and show him off to all of Faerie just to turn around and say, "Oh, him? He was just terrible at his job."

Nicodemus doesn't have to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. He just has to tell a plausible story that Mab can't contradict. And without Harry to speak up for himself, she really can't. Especially if she's watching really close and realizes what Harry was up to, because she can't lie. She'd have to honestly believe that Harry fully intended to kill Butters and just sucked at killing things to tell Nicodemus that's what happened, and she knows at least two things about Harry: 1. That he will not harm his friends and allies, and 2. He knows how to kill the things he wants to kill.

So Mab making this argument depends on Mab arguing a point that, logically, to her, is contradictory to what she knows factually about Harry.

Bottom line, though, what you're expecting here is for Mab to pull out all the stops and go to the wall defending an asset that has just failed her, made her look bad, and died in the process. If Harry's dead? Then she knows it doesn't matter anymore; he's just an asset she lost at that point, no more important in the grand scheme of things than a check that bounced. She's not getting her deposit back, so she's going to just write it off.

Hell, if Harry's dead and Nicodemus genuinely is against the Outsiders, then she'll probably just bite the bullet and straight up ally with him.

To Mab, Harry's image, or even getting revenge on Nicodemus, matters a hell of a lot less than getting those weapons out of Hades' vault.

I will concede that Murphy showing up with the blade changes things; it gives Nicodemus a more tempting target, and the way it resolves ends up saving Harry and making them "even," with Nicodemus's so-called ploy balancing out Harry's betrayal. But before she does? Nicodemus can easily have had Harry killed and rightly pointed out that Harry deliberately and obviously acted against Nicodemus's interests in the mission by not only not killing Butters, but in hampering everyone else from catching him.

And Don, remember that Nicodemus's order is "make it hurt." That basically means, "Take your time with it, don't do it quickly." He's telling the Genoskwa to make Harry suffer, and that's why it takes so long.

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: DonBugen on September 04, 2017, 05:37:30 PM ---"So you ordered my knight to kill the mortal, and then you killed him after his first blow."
"He moved the doctor across the fence!  It's right there!  There's guardian angels and stuff."
"And this fence would protect the mortal from my Knight?"
"Well, no.  Not in the slightest.  But it means that Dresden didn't intend to kill him after all."
"So you say.  And so you killed my Knight after he let the mortal go free?"
"Well, not quite after.  More like before.  My mutant Bigfoot started smacking him around at that point, so he really couldn't do anything one way or another."
--- End quote ---
More like
"So you ordered my knight to kill the mortal, and then you killed him after his first blow."
"I killed him after he deliberately avoided killing the mortal. Mab, you have seen Harry kill. I've seen Dresden kill. He's tried to kill me, personally, several times. He put a hole in my wife a few years ago and she is far tougher than that doctor. You and I both know that Harry possesses both the physical and magical strength to have killed that mortal in an instant without even breaking a sweat. Can you honestly tell me that a force spell that didn't even injure a mortal was an honest attempt at killing him?"
"..."
"I thought not. Now, where's the replacement?"

Seriously, you cannot discount the fact that Mab has to be truthful. She has seen Harry explode a Sidhe that simply talked back to him. She knows for a fact that he has deadly magic and supernatural strength -- she's given him an upgrade to both. She knows for a fact that he has been willing to kill mortals in the past. She also knows that when Harry feels he has to kill, he doesn't beat around the bush -- he makes them explode, or he shoots them in the head. He doesn't lead up to it with a bunch of light shots.

Mab cannot stand there and truthfully say that she believes that kind of force spell is Harry attempting to kill someone. She knows better.


--- Quote ---Again, I state:  This is the evidence that Nicodemus' actions at this point were to draw Harry and Murphy into breaking Mab's agreement, rather than just trying to kill them outright.  Every item here I've provided evidence for, so I'm just going to list them one by one.

1.  When Harry asserts that ordering his goon to kill him would be breaking his contract with Mab, Nicodemus agrees.
--- End quote ---
He doesn't exactly. He denies the attempt by likening it to what they both know is a ruse. Nicodemus's near exact words are, "He didn't try to kill you, just like you didn't try to help the doctor escape us, wink wink."

--- Quote ---2.  When ordered to kill Harry, the Genoskwa just holds his head and squeezes for about five minutes, though his expressed inclination would be to kill him.
--- End quote ---
Nicodemus says to make it hurt. That means take your time, not do it instantly.

--- Quote ---3.  Harry does not fail to kill Butters; he strikes his first blow and is viciously attacked and restrained.  This is the objective truth.
--- End quote ---
Does the attack kill Butters? No. Everybody present except the Genoskwa has seen Harry use instant, lethal magic, so they know that Harry could have incinerated Butters in an instant if he wanted. Nicodemus has been strangled by Harry, twice. He knows that Harry could have easily killed Butters with his bare hands when he was already holding Butters.

--- Quote ---4.  Butters is still on the field of battle and is vulnerable to attacks from half of the members of Nicodemus' team.
--- End quote ---
The squires aren't there.

--- Quote ---5.  This heist is of grave importance to Nicodemus' long-term goals, and it is not in Nicodemus' best interest to kill Harry if there is any ambiguity as to whether or not he has broken the truce.
--- End quote ---
There isn't. Not enough of it that Nicodemus can't argue his case, because, unfortunately, his case is the actual truth -- Harry deliberately and willfully hampered the capture of a spy.

--- Quote ---6.  The exchange in front of Michael's house has been, from the start, Nicodemus trying to trap Harry into breaking the deal.  It is not unreasonable to consider whether this is a continuation of that trap.
--- End quote ---
Harry had already broken the deal. If anything, Nicodemus was just trying to make his case rock solid, but as it is? He'd win in any reasonable court.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page