ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: Grifter on July 17, 2020, 02:03:44 PM
-
I know some folks think Harry is going to take up Amoracchius. Others think Thomas will. But what about in Battle Ground? Thomas isn't likely to bounce back in a couple of hours, and Harry has the athame to use, so doubling up with Amoracchius seems unlikely to me.
So who else might wield it, if only for a night? I know no-on has to, but let's speculate on the idea that it's in town and they're going to need all the help they can get.
Michael is heavily injured. Murphy is heavily injured and also she'd probably be terrified. Daniel is living elsewhere so no second generation from him, and the other Carpenter kids haven't been foreshadowed for any action.
Charity maybe? Probably not Forthill.
Mac?
Marcone?
Imagine a scene where Harry's brought Amoracchius to the battle prep and left it laying on a table, and Marcone touches the hilt absently while explaining to Harry that all he wants is to protect the people in Chicago, and a faint glow emanates from the sheeth?
:o
What other mortals are around that might take it up? Rawlins? Stallings? Rudolph? Mike the Mechanic? Agent Tilly?
-
IA investigator short and broad. Why does IA have the case? Divine intervention.
Only things missing for plausibility are:
1) Knowing how to use a sword- and all that takes is Murphy mentioning training with him
2) Mention of pronounced religiosity.
-
IA investigator short and broad. Why does IA have the case? Divine intervention.
Only things missing for plausibility are:
1) Knowing how to use a sword- and all that takes is Murphy mentioning training with him
2) Mention of pronounced religiosity.
I'm not sure pronounced religiosity is a requirement, seeing as the standards seem to be "decent person doing good".
-
Amorrachius seems more scarcely used.
One assumes love is a harder concept to find an embodiment for- Michael's embrace of traditional charity via religion- love for fellow man- is probably his foot in the door.
An uber-Catholic cop in Chicago, that loves the people of his city as a defining trait, is not an impossible trope to call on- and Butcher loves putting his own stamp on traditional tropes.
-
I could buy that. But is a short scene at the beginning of the book enough of an intro for someone that would be taking up the sword permanently based on their love for duty and city?
Still, the Love aspect needing to be relevant is important. And Murphy being in True Love is the only thing...
Wait a minute.
This book was the most we ever saw of Lara being human-adjacent and loving/caring. Is it possible that *she* could take up the sword, if only for one night? Love for a child made Susan worthy for a night. Lara feeling the love for Thomas and being in a self-sacrificing mood might do it.
And can you imagine the scene where Eb sees a wamp queen take up a Sword of the Cross? :o
-
I could buy that. But is a short scene at the beginning of the book enough of an intro for someone that would be taking up the sword permanently based on their love for duty and city?
Still, the Love aspect needing to be relevant is important. And Murphy being in True Love is the only thing...
Wait a minute.
This book was the most we ever saw of Lara being human-adjacent and loving/caring. Is it possible that *she* could take up the sword, if only for one night? Love for a child made Susan worthy for a night. Lara feeling the love for Thomas and being in a self-sacrificing mood might do it.
And can you imagine the scene where Eb sees a wamp queen take up a Sword of the Cross? :o
As good a guess as any.
-
Could Lara be trusted with a sword, though, even just for the night?
-
Could Lara be trusted with a sword, though, even just for the night?
Any more or less than Murphy?
Maybe to a point. Anyone who really understands love, right? Maybe not passionate love, but sibling love?
-
Definitely less than Murphy.
Murphy made a sword vulnerable by mistake.
Lara has extremely strong motives to want to see the Sword of Love destroyed on purpose. Love is the White Court's Bane -- their kryptonite. Putting the ruler of the White Court in a position to destroy one of the greatest weapons against her and her court is a big, big temptation.
-
I'm not sure pronounced religiosity is a requirement, seeing as the standards seem to be "decent person doing good".
Yeah, supposedly Sanya is an atheist.
-
Sanya believes in Hope as a former Denarian
Butters believes in Faith his succession of carreers to make the world better
Michael believes in Love, of god, his fellow man and his wife and family
Thomas has real painful experience of True Love
-
I do think Thomas will *eventually* take up the sword, but I'm not sure he's ready yet, although...
One of the theories of the English Prisoner is that he's Arthur, and it's believed that Amoracchius was Excalibur. And it seems like Harry set it up so Thomas and the English Prisoner could talk, in a place where not even Anduriel can listen in.
Perhaps one of them (Arthur or Thomas) will be taking up Excalibur soon.
-
Does it have to be a fully human mortal?
In Skin Game, we saw Nic giving a coin to Blood on His Soul (aka the Genoskwa) and offering one to Grey.
Could River Shoulders take up the sword for a bit?
-
Why not Goodman Grey? We don't know his full motives, but he has stated doing things for a 'good cause'.
Does it have to be a fully human mortal?
In Skin Game, we saw Nic giving a coin to Blood on His Soul (aka the Genoskwa) and offering one to Grey.
Could River Shoulders take up the sword for a bit?
Now I'm imagining bigfoot wielding a glowing toothpick. :o
-
It would look like one of those plastic cocktail swords in his hands. My guess is that River is going to play a role shielding Harry whilst he gets in close.
-
Imagine a scene where Harry's brought Amoracchius to the battle prep and left it laying on a table, and Marcone touches the hilt absently while explaining to Harry that all he wants is to protect the people in Chicago, and a faint glow emanates from the sheeth?
I seriously, strenuously doubt that Amorrachius is going to go to someone who just barely didn't shoot Justine and an innocent child in the head only because it would mean having to fight and kill Dresden immediately instead of down the road.
Seriously, I don't know how anyone can read Even Hand and entertain the possibility that Marcone is anywhere near material for a Knight of the Cross.
-
I seriously, strenuously doubt that Amorrachius is going to go to someone who just barely didn't shoot Justine and an innocent child in the head only because it would mean having to fight and kill Dresden immediately instead of down the road.
Seriously, I don't know how anyone can read Even Hand and entertain the possibility that Marcone is anywhere near material for a Knight of the Cross.
I think you're exaggerating the circumstances in Even Hand. He didn't just barely not kill them. He had no intention of killing the child at all. If you remember anything about him, you should remember that kids are safe. As for Justine, she was a spy that cost him valuable resources and who's actions injured his people, to use him as a cat's paw. Is it really so outlandish for someone to consider such things against a potential enemy that abused his own sensitivities?
But despite all that, he said he debated it, and then decided against it. There was never a rational reason for him to do it, so he wouldn't have. That's the one thing you can count on for Marcone. He won't do something without a profit.
As for the sword, it seems highly unlikely that he'd even be worthy. But it might be interesting to see him touch it while thinking about protecting his city, which he will likely defend as passionately and he does any of his people. Which is to say not passionately, but with cold determination.
-
I think you're exaggerating the circumstances in Even Hand. He didn't just barely not kill them. He had no intention of killing the child at all. If you remember anything about him, you should remember that kids are safe. As for Justine, she was a spy that cost him valuable resources and who's actions injured his people, to use him as a cat's paw. Is it really so outlandish for someone to consider such things against a potential enemy that abused his own sensitivities?
As I recall the story, in the end, after the Fomor are driven off and Justine and the kid are safe, Marcone's inner monologue very clearly and explicitly considers killing both of them, because they've seen too much of his defenses.
Marcone is a bad person, who does bad things, for selfish reasons.
He is not fit for a Sword.
Admittedly, my copy is with someone else right now so I can't check it, but I do not recall Marcone excepting the child from his consideration of murder.
But despite all that, he said he debated it, and then decided against it. There was never a rational reason for him to do it, so he wouldn't have. That's the one thing you can count on for Marcone. He won't do something without a profit.
That he considered it and only decided against it for the reason of, "It means killing Harry now instead of killing Harry later," is not a good mark. He had to talk himself out of murdering a woman and an innocent child.
His idea for killing Justine and the child was made for cold, rational reasons -- that they knew of his defenses and might, some time in the future, tell Harry about them. He didn't kill them because doing so would mean fighting Harry immediately instead of later on -- i.e., he made the decision based on when would be a good time to murder someone else.
As for the sword, it seems highly unlikely that he'd even be worthy. But it might be interesting to see him touch it while thinking about protecting his city, which he will likely defend as passionately and he does any of his people. Which is to say not passionately, but with cold determination.
Marcone doesn't want another predator taking away his prey. He doesn't have some altruistic, virtuous desire to protect the innocent. He's just defending his hunting territory.
-
Just checked my copy -- he doesn't mention killing the child, just Justine. And his reason is that she'll tell Dresden the details of his anti-Dresden defenses. (In Peace Talks, we learn that she did exactly that.)
In fact, he explicitly warns Justine about taking the child to the White Court, and suggests Father Forthill as an alternative.
The passage in question:I debated putting a bullet in her head but decided against it.
But, yes, Marcone is not a good man. His role in the story is to show that the "rational, honorable monster" that Dresden often finds himself dealing with (like Lara and Mab) isn't an exclusively supernatural phenomenon. Marcone is fully human, fully rational, and fully a monster. And still probably better than what would replace him if he's killed -- just like Lara or Mab.
I don't think he'll be taking up a Sword, any more than Lara or Lea or Mab, without a serious redemption arc.
-
But, yes, Marcone is not a good man. His role in the story is to show that the "rational, honorable monster" that Dresden often finds himself dealing with (like Lara and Mab) isn't an exclusively supernatural phenomenon. Marcone is fully human, fully rational, and fully a monster. And still probably better than what would replace him if he's killed -- just like Lara or Mab.
Which is why it was weird to have him step up and take the lead to defend Chicago, even getting a bit moralistic...
As far as the Sword goes, I had thought of him as a possible candidate for one and that was confirmed that Jim even considered it at one point but went with Butters instead. Yes, he is a monster, but Sanya back when he held a coin did things that would make him a monster as well.
So it is possible that Marcone could and can redeem himself, if he continues to lead in the fight against the Fomor and the Titian he may succeed and be worthy of a Sword, if that is his desire.
-
Which is why it was weird to have him step up and take the lead to defend Chicago, even getting a bit moralistic...
I didn't think it was that weird for Marcone to step up like that. He just met an immensely powerful being that wants to kill him in particular. It's pretty rational to strong arm the Accords into getting yourself allies against Ethniu. Just because he doesn't typically let emotions rule his judgment doesn't mean he can't use them to manipulate others.
-
Why was that weird?
The whole point of hosting the Peace Talks was to increase his stature among the Accords signatories. He's the host, and it's his "barony" that's under attack. If he *didn't* step up to take the lead, it would be the end of the experiment of letting a mortal join the club.
-
Right, he didn't do it because he was an upstanding citizen who really cares dearly for the common man of the city.
He did it because he's in a room full of predators who just got told that the only thing stopping them from eating him outright for his insolence -- the Accords -- no longer matter. He has to take charge or else he's dead.
-
But he has a code. He doesn't let anyone kill kids, or sell them drugs, or abuse them. The first section of the short story was all about him killing people that had been giving kids drugs and then prostituting them.
It's like the bad guys in Die Hard With A Vengeance. Their entire threat revolves around putting a massive explosive in a city school. But when one of the henchmen tries to leave a smaller explosive on the street, another says he can't leave it, because what if a kid finds it. It clues the viewer into the fact that the school threat is a ruse long before the reveal.
Marcone wouldn't have hurt the child. And he likely wouldn't have killed Justine either. But he considered it, and rightly so. Gender and beauty aside, someone had just used and manipulated him, resulting in his own arm being broken, his people being injured, his resources being spent, and his defenses being revealed. If Justine had been some guy, we wouldn't think twice about Marcone making them pay for what they did.
If anything, Marcone comes across as cold but fair, and Justine comes across as a cold manipulative liar.
-
Right, he didn't do it because he was an upstanding citizen who really cares dearly for the common man of the city.
He did it because he's in a room full of predators who just got told that the only thing stopping them from eating him outright for his insolence -- the Accords -- no longer matter. He has to take charge or else he's dead.
Yes, I didn't make myself clear, it was weird because he came off as an moral upstanding citizen caring about the city when all he really cares about is his own survival.
-
Yes, I didn't make myself clear, it was weird because he came off as an moral upstanding citizen caring about the city when all he really cares about is his own survival.
I think "all he really cares about" is a bit too strong, but yeah, it's likely higher on his priority list than Chicago as a whole.
-
Marcone is a bad person, who does bad things, for selfish reasons.
I'm not so sure it's for selfish reasons.
-
Marcone wouldn't have hurt the child. And he likely wouldn't have killed Justine either. But he considered it, and rightly so. Gender and beauty aside, someone had just used and manipulated him, resulting in his own arm being broken, his people being injured, his resources being spent, and his defenses being revealed. If Justine had been some guy, we wouldn't think twice about Marcone making them pay for what they did.
The confrontation starts with Marcone having to be talked into saving the kid, because by rights the kid belongs to the Fomor. He didn't seem too broken up about the prospect of giving Justine and the child back to the Fomor until Justine pours on the extra guilt.
And you're missing the point -- he didn't consider killing Justine as retaliation for her manipulation.
He considered killing Justine because she knew too much; not because she wronged him, but because murdering her might make murdering someone else easier.
-
My guess is purely from left field and as unexpected as choosing Susan was in Changes.
What about Justine?
-
The confrontation starts with Marcone having to be talked into saving the kid, because by rights the kid belongs to the Fomor. He didn't seem too broken up about the prospect of giving Justine and the child back to the Fomor until Justine pours on the extra guilt.
And you're missing the point -- he didn't consider killing Justine as retaliation for her manipulation.
He considered killing Justine because she knew too much; not because she wronged him, but because murdering her might make murdering someone else easier.
I think you're overestimating the line that he "debated" it. He was never really going to do it due to the circumstances of the situation, specifically due to the fact that she was there under the Accords. He had every reason to believe, by the end of their conversation, that Justine (and Lara) went to him intentionally. There was every reason to believe that Justine was setting him up and using him as a cat's paw for the Wamp mission. So he couldn't just kill her after claiming Accords protection if there was even a chance Lara knew she was going there.
Now, if this is all to argue the point that someone who is capable of weighing the pros and cons of murdering someone in cold blood isn't compatible with using a Sword of the Cross, then sure. We're both in agreement. But I think the Sword is capable of picking up on intentions in the moment, and the person's worthiness in the moment, and allowing them to wield it in the moment. I don't think Susan managed to work against the Ramps and their loyal followers without killing some humans via conventional means. I don't think she'd pass the litmus test of Worthy of the Sword on a regular day. But on one day she did, because of her goals and intentions. I think the same could possibly be true for Marcone.
-
We know that Susan was incapable of picking up a Sword in DM.
-
We know that Susan was incapable of picking up a Sword in DM.
Yes, and she was afraid when Harry handed her the Sword of Love, it worked because she was there for the love of her child.
-
I put this in another thread but I wondered if the lightsaber would be able to cut the demon inside Thomas (doubtful) or Justine's baby (more probable). If that would be the case perhaps Thomas will answer the call. But I don't think this is going to happen now so perhaps Marcone will take the sword for one night, to fight the Titan. And I believe Harry will tell the three Knights to hold their swords together. The light will probably weaken the Titan enough to allow Harry to place her in the Pokeball.
Another option is that Merlin himself takes the sword, out of love for Mab.
-
I don't think Amoracchius is going to come into play at all in BG because Harry has it at Demonreach, but he doesn't retrieve it when he retrieve's the placard and "athame."
-
Correct, besides we don’t see Amorrachus attached to the end of Harry’s staff on the cover of Battle Ground
-
I don't think Amoracchius is going to come into play at all in BG because Harry has it at Demonreach, but he doesn't retrieve it when he retrieve's the placard and "athame."
I don't think so either.. Now it may depend on how long Thomas stays out of the action.. It could be he stays where he is at until the BAT, then Harry frees him to take up the Sword.
-
While I don't think this will come into play in BG, Thomas can likely wield Amoracchius. He picked it up in GP. It didn't burn him.
-
While I don't think this will come into play in BG, Thomas can likely wield Amoracchius. He picked it up in GP. It didn't burn him.
True, though some would say the Sword allowed him to handle the it because he was rescuing it from custody by either Bianca or Mavra..
-
I'm pretty sure some have argued that he can't touch it at all because it's the Sword of Love.
-
I'm pretty sure some have argued that he can't touch it at all because it's the Sword of Love.
That too, however after the crap hit the fan, the only one in the hall that thought to save the Sword was Thomas. Not even Michael thought about that, he was too busy trying to save Harry. As we have learned recently, apparently there is an angel residing in the Nail in the hilt of the Sword, it would know what Thomas was trying to do.
-
I may be wrong but I believe Thomas had it by the scabber, not touching the actual sword.
-
I may be wrong but I believe Thomas had it by the scabber, not touching the actual sword.
He brought it back in a rifle case to be precise. Somebody had to put it in the case though..
-
Yes, but he could have grab it with something not with his bare hands.
-
We now know there is an angel powering the blade, which knows what it is doing, this why some Knights serve foe decades and some for days and how the faithsabre can cut an anvil, or a monster but not Sanya.
It would permit Thomas to touch the sword, but would have been inactive, it detects the intention of the wielder and of any person or monster against whom it is wielded.
Things like wedding rings are purely passive, they hurt Whamps nothing to be done and mortals can’t control the True Love effect on a Whamp, only withdraw their touch but an angel can, the sword is not a passive wedding ring, nor a control less mortal.
-
Wasn't the sword weakened to the point where Mavra could swing it around without harm when Thomas retrieved it?
-
The Angel became inactive, withdrawing is power from the physical sword.
-
Yes, but he could have grab it with something not with his bare hands.
While wearing a loin cloth, fighting for his survival against RCV, in a fire? I doubt it.
RE: The angel choosing not to harm Thomas, why did it choose to harm Susan in DM?
The difference between Thomas not getting zapped and Susan being zapped could easily be that WCV don't react to the power of faith and RCV do, but I don't recall Susan and Martin having any trouble hanging out in a Catholic church.
His ability to touch it all means that it being the Sword of Love won't prevent him from wielding it.
TheCuriousFan's question is interesting. When did the Sword stop being weakened? When Thomas recovered it or when Michael picked it up? Harry felt the Sword's power before Michael picked it up.
-
Well, a step further, the Sword merely fell out of Harry's hand when he went to kill Lea with it. Michael said it wouldn't allow itself to be misused in that manner. However it also allowed Lea to
pick it up and run off with it, then further allowed her to give it to Bianca, who in turn gave it to Mavra who was going to murder Lydia with it. Michael said the Sword was vulnerable, that the blood of innocents would shatter it. It did make an angry chime when Mavra lifted it out of the case.. It didn't seem to bother her though and she would have carried it all out except Harry put a stop to it.
So it all seems a bit inconsistant.
-
Ramps can be held off by objects of Faith, Harry does it with his Pentagram.
We could test it with the Faithsabre, just get a Ramp and...oh, never mind.
Blamps are also subject to Faith, so the Faithsabre would make a real mess of Blamps
-
While wearing a loin cloth, fighting for his survival against RCV, in a fire? I doubt it.
I did not mean something too fancy he could have simply use the low part of his shirt or something. I don't have the digital book, so I can't do a quick search, but I got the idea that the book were clear in saying that Thomas has not actually touched it.
-
I did not mean something too fancy he could have simply use the low part of his shirt or something. I don't have the digital book, so I can't do a quick search, but I got the idea that the book were clear in saying that Thomas has not actually touched it.
No, it isn't explicit, however it is clear that Mavra took it out of the case waved it in the air [she was about to kill Lydia with it, then unmake it] while the Sword sent out an angry chime. So the Sword let a member of the Black Court handle it, apparently unless Michael was wrong it was going to let
her use it to murder and shatter it. In contrast, it wouldn't let Harry kill Lea with it, it fell out of his hands.. ??? Anyway back to your point, the Sword was out of the case and had to be put back in the case.
-
@Dina: Thomas wasn't wearing a shirt. Just a loin cloth, which I guess he could have used. I doubt Thomas is too concerned about being nude in public.
@Mira: The rifle case it was in was something Thomas got to put it in. Neither Harry nor Michael recognized it. That doesn't really affect your point.
-
@Dina: Thomas wasn't wearing a shirt. Just a loin cloth, which I guess he could have used. I doubt Thomas is too concerned about being nude in public.
@Mira: The rifle case it was in was something Thomas got to put it in. Neither Harry nor Michael recognized it. That doesn't really affect your point.
Actually I think it was the same case that Lea brought the Sword in to the party in the first place. Whether Michael or Harry remembered it is beside the point, The Sword itself had been handled by unclean hands..
-
Maybe, but I don't think so because that case is never described as a rifle case, just a black case. When Thomas has Amoracchius, the case is repeatedly referred to as a rifle case.
-
My personal take is that Thomas will end up taking up the Sword. As an incubus much of his character is wrapped up in lust & love, of various kinds. His birthday is on valentine's day. With a child on the way that just adds another layer of love to the character. He's presumably going to be cured with the lightsaber version of Fidelacchius. Outside of Arthur showing up, I can't think of a better character to wield it.
-
I agree but that does not mean he could touch it before. Mira is probably right, but the books gave me the idea that he did not touch it with his hands. At least, not yet.
-
I think that he didn't touch it with his hands is probably an impression you read into it. I know I do that sort of thing all the time. The sword goes missing at the party. Thomas shows up with it in a case. That's pretty much all the book says about it.
-
I think that he didn't touch it with his hands is probably an impression you read into it. I know I do that sort of thing all the time. The sword goes missing at the party. Thomas shows up with it in a case. That's pretty much all the book says about it.
The books says that Lea brought the Sword to the party in a case. Lea also picked up the Sword after it fell out of Harry's hand. The book also says that Mavra held up the Sword to murder Lydia before all hell broke lose... So based on the fact it let a member of the Fae handle it and though it didn't like it, it allowed Mavra, a member of the Black Court to pick it up and would have unmade it.. Not too far a stretch that it allowed Thomas to pick it up and put it back in the case to return it.
-
I think that he didn't touch it with his hands is probably an impression you read into it. I know I do that sort of thing all the time. The sword goes missing at the party. Thomas shows up with it in a case. That's pretty much all the book says about it.
Yes, you are probably right.
The books says that Lea brought the Sword to the party in a case. Lea also picked up the Sword after it fell out of Harry's hand. The book also says that Mavra held up the Sword to murder Lydia before all hell broke lose... So based on the fact it let a member of the Fae handle it and though it didn't like it, it allowed Mavra, a member of the Black Court to pick it up and would have unmade it.. Not too far a stretch that it allowed Thomas to pick it up and put it back in the case to return it.
You are right. I think I thought the sword has been in the case Thomas brought it all the time. That is why I thought there was no need for Thomas to even risk touching it. I do remember than when Mavra hold it I thought she was powerful enough to go against the sword defenses. Now, thinking on it, it could still be the case, the angel being weakened and yes, he would have allowed Thomas to save it.
Another explanation was Mavra was wearing gloves :)
-
I think "all he really cares about" is a bit too strong, but yeah, it's likely higher on his priority list than Chicago as a whole.
I disagree. I think he sees Chicago as "his." Hurt Chicago, hurt him. Help Chicago, help him.