That's still not what deployed means.
In this context, deployed would mean they told Ebenezer, "Go to this specific place and do this specific thing." They apparently do not and cannot enforce it when they do give him an instruction.
Again: That is not what war zone means. You keep using the term in a way that does not match what it means.I guess I'm more loose with the definition. I see a war zone as any place that there is conflict, but not necessarily a declared war. Examples include the United States bombing Syria even though war has not actually been declared. Or a better example would be the Cold War in which the CIA was conducting secret missions that included assassinating people. Or a proxy war in which the United States assisted Afghanistan in killing Russians, or when the Russians were helping kill Americans in Vietnam. War had not been declared in these situations between the U.S. and Russia but deaths resulted in these proxy wars, and undeclared wars.
Please tell me where we have confirmation that the White Council was in an active state of war against the Fallen, when the Dark Wizards organized into a force that could war with the White Council, when they were at war with the Old Gods in the course of Ebenezer's time with the Blackstaff.War need not be declared for action to be taken. Also we have very little info on when the Blackstaff has taken action. It's just speculation.
I.e., the acts Ebenezer committed as the Blackstaff happened in a time when the White Council explicitly was not at war.Countries take military action all the time without actually declaring war. The United States strikes in Syria have been done without war being declared by either side.
The only ones we have hints about are the people who messed with his wife (not a world-ending threat, a personal vendetta)Will have to wait to read before making a judgement
and Ortega (again, a personal vendetta -- and do you think all his human servants deserved it?).You have used Eb's own words to describe the Blackstaff. So will I. He stated the attack was in response to the attack on Archangel, and the death of Simon, a senior Council member. His response was exactly what the Blackstaff was created for. He struck a target that the White Council could not attack without massive casualties. The Council would have had to resort to guns, and swords to avoid killing innocents with magic. Ortega was using the Council's laws against them by surrounding himself with mortals that the White Council could not attack with magic.
We know he tried to hit Lord Raith (again, a personal vendetta -- over someone the Senior Council wanted dead anyway, so they wouldn't have ordered it).He doesn't need to be the Blackstaff to have done the three attacks. Killing non humans is perfectly fine with the White Council. His failed attempts on Raith actually are evidence he didn't use the Blackstaff. He attempted magic that slipped off of Raith. Raith is however vulnerable to bodily attacks like bullets. Eb could have used something similar to what he used on Ortega but did not, that's evidence that he wasn't using his position as the Blackstaff and was working within the laws of magic as a normal wizard.
The point is, nobody on the White Council knows who Ebenezer as the Blackstaff is killing or why. The nature of his job means that nobody is supposed to know.I actually think this is wrong. I thought it was right earlier but upon reflection of his conversation with Harry I think he's much more like a CIA agent and that his being above the laws of magic is actually his get out of jail free card. It's similar to someone taking orders to conduct a mission, but then later on when there is new leadership they want to prosecute the person for that mission. The Blackstaff protects the person who's conducting those missions. I think the 2 confirmed attacks that were performed in the books both could have actually been ordered by the White Council. I have to reread the quote but cannot find the book right now.
The point is it could happen. That the existence of a secret assassin who's allowed to break all the rules that everyone else is under the threat of death to obey, and who the potential targets have no say about is terrifying. It doesn't matter what Ebenezer has actually done with the position; the point is he could extremely easily either kill whoever he wants, or kill whoever the Senior Council deems a problem, and both situations are and should be terrifying to the lower ranking members.I think my posts on the strike against Ortega, and Raith point to the holes in this argument. As for the attacks on his wife, that book isn't out
Seriously, based on his known hits and attempted hits, pissing off Ebenezer personally is the only real requirement for the Blackstaff to wipe you and everyone within about a mile of your current position off the face of the planet.
Decided to move off of this because there hasn't really been any evidence in the books if the Council has or hasn't directed Eb to do attacks or if he acts completely on his own. I personally believe he is directed to attack some things, but to the Council they want deniability, so the Council will deny any knowledge if he's found out to be the attacker.I doubt the Council directed him to attack the guys who went after his wife, or after Lord Raith.
I guess I'm more loose with the definition. I see a war zone as any place that there is conflict, but not necessarily a declared war. Examples include the United States bombing Syria even though war has not actually been declared. Or a better example would be the Cold War in which the CIA was conducting secret missions that included assassinating people. Or a proxy war in which the United States assisted Afghanistan in killing Russians, or when the Russians were helping kill Americans in Vietnam. War had not been declared in these situations between the U.S. and Russia but deaths resulted in these proxy wars, and undeclared wars.The cold war wasn't a "war zone," and yes, you're being so loose with the definition that it's just not the right term anymore. Point is, a sniper is sent somewhere. The Blackstaff has total autonomy.
War need not be declared for action to be taken. Also we have very little info on when the Blackstaff has taken action. It's just speculation. Countries take military action all the time without actually declaring war. The United States strikes in Syria have been done without war being declared by either side.The Blackstaff isn't a military force. It's an assassin, one that has total discretion to pick and choose its targets and methods without any apparent input or restraint from its supposed governing body.
You have used Eb's own words to describe the Blackstaff. So will I. He stated the attack was in response to the attack on Archangel, and the death of Simon, a senior Council member. His response was exactly what the Blackstaff was created for. He struck a target that the White Council could not attack without massive casualties. The Council would have had to resort to guns, and swords to avoid killing innocents with magic. Ortega was using the Council's laws against them by surrounding himself with mortals that the White Council could not attack with magic.If it was really in response to Simon, I think it would've happened a lot sooner. Instead it happens literally the week after Ortega tries to kill Harry. I kiiiiiiinda doubt that was a coincidence.
Eb's attack was exactly what his position was designed for. To attack an enemy of the White Council using it's laws against it. My opinion is it was an attack by the White Council in response to the attack on Archangel.Ebenezer himself says it was because Ortega planned to attack Harry.
He doesn't need to be the Blackstaff to have done the three attacks. Killing non humans is perfectly fine with the White Council. His failed attempts on Raith actually are evidence he didn't use the Blackstaff. He attempted magic that slipped off of Raith. Raith is however vulnerable to bodily attacks like bullets. Eb could have used something similar to what he used on Ortega but did not, that's evidence that he wasn't using his position as the Blackstaff and was working within the laws of magic as a normal wizard.That's not evidence at all. We don't know the mechanism of the satellite spell; it could have been like the Moloccio, which was linked to a specific person, and thus the link would slip off of Raith. Or he didn't have a handy satellite and tried something more direct.
I actually think this is wrong. I thought it was right earlier but upon reflection of his conversation with Harry I think he's much more like a CIA agent and that his being above the laws of magic is actually his get out of jail free card. It's similar to someone taking orders to conduct a mission, but then later on when there is new leadership they want to prosecute the person for that mission. The Blackstaff protects the person who's conducting those missions. I think the 2 confirmed attacks that were performed in the books both could have actually been ordered by the White Council. I have to reread the quote but cannot find the book right now."could have actually been" is not evidence. We know three times that Ebenezer used the Blackstaff and for what.
If it was really in response to Simon, I think it would've happened a lot sooner. Instead it happens literally the week after Ortega tries to kill Harry. I kiiiiiiinda doubt that was a coincidence.
We don't know what the other hits were, but of the ones we have, none seem to have been ordered by the White Council.
3. He killed 200 mercenaries working for the people who were trying to kill Maggie.
...The third is something that the Merlin had specifically told Harry he didn't want done.
2) the Blackstaff is not some super duper secret black operative that allows the White Council to act without consequences. Anything the Black Staff does will be assumed to be Council policy by any of the supernatural powers -- even if they do not know of the position. A wizard did it -- and the wizard is not a hunted warlock - so White Council is responsible.
Like he did with Simon (Paranet papers). He issued a couple of friendly warnings and veiled threats and Simon understood them perfectly well and behaved after that. ;)
I don't have the RPG to have read the Paranet material. What was Simon dabbling into that got him a warning?He was friends with Tsar Nicolas and the WC suspected that he assisted him with magic. The final straw apparently was that he accompanied the Tsar to the front lines during WWI. There were no open accusations and no proof, but there were suspicions that Simon broke the Laws to help his friend. Eb handled the situation by writing him a couple of letters with 'friendly' advice. Veiled threats really, that while there wasn't officially a case against him, the Blackstaff could always handle matters. The threats were enough to convince Simon to retreat to Archangel and be a good boy afterwards. Whether he really behaved or just became more proficient in keeping a low profile is anyone's guess. The fact that the Tsar and all his family were murdered and the political situation in Russia became very 'interesting' could indicate either, imo. There's a lot of room for speculation and conspiracy theories left in the material. Probably intentionally. ;)
Because maaaybe he didn't so much behave himself after that as get sneakier about about dissociating his research interests from his public pesona ... (cough - Cowl - cough)
1. He killed the people who went after his wife (and thousands of others who happened to be nearby; I think it was the volcano he made erupt).
2. He killed the people who went after Harry
3. He killed 200 mercenaries working for the people who were trying to kill Maggie.
The first is obviously personal. The second he admits was completely personal. The third is something that the Merlin had specifically told Harry he didn't want done.
We don't know what the other hits were, but of the ones we have, none seem to have been ordered by the White Council.
And even if they did give orders, Ebenezer self-admittedly has full autonomy to ignore them.
Ok you're quoting a book that hasn't even been written. You can't use that as evidence. Unless you want to link WOJ that flat out says the only reason he targeted a group was because they were targeting his wife, and no other reason.It's not going to be in a book as far as I know. It was WOJ. I don't have the link, but I'm looking for it. I know it's out there. Maybe I need to summon Serack...
He targeted the Red Court, and Ortega who was behind the attack. He didn't hit Ortega until after the attack on Archangel that killed a huge number of council members including a Senior Council member. If that isn't an act of war I don't know what is. You have used Eb's words as evidence. Here are some more. He said the attack was for Simon.I just quoted and bolded the bit where he says he did it directly because Ortega was coming after Harry again.
He killed 200 mercenaries working for the Red Court who the White Council was at war with. They were trying to unleash a bloodline curse that would assassinate a Senior Council member. He was also helping leading an attack against the senior leadership of the Red Court. Would he have done all this if it was purely to save his granddaughter? Probably, but that's not evidence because the attack in question was hugely important. So important that Odin showed up. Did Odin get involved just for Maggie too? What about TWG? A KoTC was there, was TWG only there for Maggie as well?Everyone else's motives aren't really germane.
What we have is the Blackstaff participating in an operation that's Grey Council -- an organization that Ebenezar formed explicitly to go around the White Council. And an operation that the Merlin himself said shouldn't be happening.
You can't point at Ebenezer's secret attack with his secret organization that he's kept secret from the White Council and is going against the stated will of the White Council as an example of Ebenezer following the orders of the White Council.
Well, now that's not entirely the case.OK, Ive seen this theory come up from lots of different folks, and I have to say I hate the argument to the very core. A Boast about a vague future
If you'll recall, when Harry was talking to the Merlin in the Worry Room, along with Luccio and Molly, Langtry said that they were going to hit the Rampires so hard, that they were going to take them out, "root and branch".
That sound pretty much like they were planning on doing something really big and taking out all of the Rampires. That sounds an aweful lot like an all out offensive or a black ops mission. Given the talks going on with Arianna in Edinburgh, I'd say it was a Black Ops mission. And I'd bet that Ebenezar is the head of the Black Ops for the Council.
I wonder if McCoy went after lord Raith using the Blackstaff. It is believed that relic is an epic one, yet the protections that Wcv stood against it. A staff that allows the seven laws being broken, yet it was held back. The thing is that it is believed the protections are outsiders based, so a staff that could freely break the seventh law, should be able to counter it.
He didn't hit it after Archangel. He hit it a solid year or more after Archangel, and his stated immediate reason was that Ortega was coming to kill Harry. It's right there, still on the page.
Everyone else's motives aren't really germane.
The White Council is capable of fielding hundreds of Wardens.
If you're going to wipe out an enemy "root and branch," you send those hundreds. Not 12 guys.
It's not going to be in a book as far as I know. It was WOJ. I don't have the link, but I'm looking for it. I know it's out there. Maybe I need to summon Serack...
2010 Mysterious Galaxy Q&A
Do you have it planned out who Harry's grandmother is? @6:05
Yes... Well she's not alive any more.
Was she significant?
Well, she was a mortal. That was about it.
ARE WE EVER GOING TO MEET LEFAY'S MOTHER?
As in Ebenezar's wife? Well, not unless we go back and do the French and Indian War thing probably.
ARE WE GOING TO FIND OUT WHO SHE IS?
She was a mortal. She died somewhere around 1810 I think. I've got it all written down somewhere.
OK, Ive seen this theory come up from lots of different folks, and I have to say I hate the argument to the very core. A Boast about a vague futuregoalAbstract Declaration Victory does NOT allow you to claim credit!
It's like if the US President were to say "Im Going to Defeat North Korea" and then a few days later china Bombed it off the map, and then suddenly the White Houses Supporters start trying to claim the credit. Except in this example China would exist and have originally been formed specifically to avoid US involvement.
Damn. I could have sworn there was something more recent -- either a public appearance or an AMA -- where he said someone tried going after her to get to him, and one of the events he mentions in Blood Rites was him getting revenge.
Going by the timeline, it'd have to be New Madrid, since it's in 1812.
Sadly, the search function on the forums sucks and I haven't been able to find the reference :(
My personal opinion is that the WC restrictions on the Blackstaff are more strategic than tactical. The WC may point the BS at specific problems. The WC may censure the BS if the BS goes to far or abuses the position. I imagine the BS position could be revoked if abused, but I doubt that has ever happened. I imagine that only the most trusted of wizards would be allowed to take that position.
That said, I do think Eb might be the most powerful Blackstaff since the original Merlin (who is suspect was the first). Blackstaff and Senior Council member -- that is a very powerful combination.
I think the debate between Mr. Death and myself is a good realistic way the Council would react. There would probably be a pretty even split on the idea of the Blackstaff. If there was a large amount of upset people, the things the Blackstaff did to protect the White Council would probably be used as examples to it's importance. This would result in a minority of people on both sides of the issue digging in their heels while the majority would except it with reservations, and probably demand some type of oversight.
That is if they don't already know about it which I suspect at least members who are 100+ years old probably know or suspect of the Blackstaff's existence.
Damn. I could have sworn there was something more recent -- either a public appearance or an AMA -- where he said someone tried going after her to get to him, and one of the events he mentions in Blood Rites was him getting revenge.
I'm pretty sure I recall something like that from one of the AMA's, including that he tried to stay away from Maggie Sr. so his enemies wouldn't learn she mattered to him up until her powers manifested.
Edit: Oh, yes. That stuck in my memory because it was part of the same answer as something ... uhh ... just a teensy bit important.
https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/3lye65/i_am_jim_butcher_author_of_the_dresden_files_and/cvadt1h/
Okay, here's a slightly different tangent ....Let me make sure Im hearing you: your suggesting that Eb had accumulated Black Magic Taint over the years, and that the instance in Changes was the first time he'd used the Blackstaff in that time and consequently was "catching up" on purging the Black Magic Taint?
In Changes, we saw the Blackstaff apparently siphoning off the taint of Ebenezar performing a black magic spell (ripping out the lifeforce of the Ramp's Mercs.)
What if all that was being siphoned off wasn't just from that act? What if he didn't need a staff to perform the spell that pulled the satellite out of orbit, so the Blackstaff wasn't able to pull it out then, but this was the next time the staff was used, and it was taking all of the taint, even from other uses of black magic, out of Eb?
It really, really is not. A sniper is sent to places where there are known or suspected enemies, his orders coming from a chain of command and only allowed to shoot in that specific instance, in that specific space, at that specific time and often, specific people that are pre-approved.
The Blackstaff has no orders. He has no real oversight. He has full discretion to do whatever he wants (remember, "What's the point of having a license to ignore the Senior Council if I don't use it?"). He is not sent after a target -- he decides who to kill, when to kill, how to kill, and can do so whenever he wants to.
I still find it hard to believe the majority of the White Council is unaware of the Blackstaff. It's been around for a very long time, and wizards instinctively are curious, and gather knowledge. It's their nature. They also seem to associate with the supernatural community, again sources of information on the Blackstaff.
I think it's more likely that Harry personally didn't know for a number of reasons.
1. He's young for a wizard
2. He has been shunned by the Council, and seen a a security risk
3. Harry avoids the White Council
I think the 3rd reason is the biggest. Harry has gone out of his way to avoid everything to do with the White Council and only exposes himself to them when he has no choice. I think most wizard folk who are involved with the Council probably know of, or at least heard whispers of the Blackstaff. I doubt that they are 100% unaware. It's more likely that they suspect, but can't confirm.
Both Maggie Sr. and Harry were and are members of the White Council. I.e., the White Council has outright told him to take out its own members.
That depends. Sometimes there's a specific 'kill list' (which may be just one name), sometimes there's a 'kill category', depending on the situation, and it can be very broad. For ex, a sniper behind enemy lines doing commando work might be told 'Use your own discretion' and anybody counts as long as its an enemy.Even so, that's in a specific context, and the sniper is given specific instruction that he has discretion. The Blackstaff has that kind of discretion all the time, without having to be told.
Or a witness. What do you think a sniper in wartime, behind enemy lines, or in some similar situation, does when he gets spotted by a kid or an innocent bystander or whatever? Somebody who might tell the enemy about him? Might give away the entire operation?
And of course, when a sniper is operating unsupervised, even if he has specific orders, it's more or less a matter of faith whether he follows them.
In theory, maybe. In practice, the Blackstaff has to consider the consequences of his decisions like everybody else. He's still just one man, honk off enough powerful people and sooner or later it's going to catch up with him. The Council outnumbers him thousands to one, and could wipe him if they wanted to. Or if gets too carried away, they could refuse to back him up. Or they could physical take the blackstaff itself away from him.He should, yes. But until they catch up to him, he can get away with a lot, and we haven't seen anything in the way of oversight. Given it's a secret position that's not really supposed to exist, it's not like he's filling out after-action reports.
Or they could pick him off with a sniper rifle. Or poison him. Or whatever. He's still just one man.
He should, yes. But until they catch up to him, he can get away with a lot, and we haven't seen anything in the way of oversight. Given it's a secret position that's not really supposed to exist, it's not like he's filling out after-action reports.You know, would he? Not challenging your statement, I really dont know, but Im trying to compare it with my Hollywood knowledge of clandestine acts. Assume he has nominal transparency with the Senior Council, because if they dont know about him they cant keep the secret or know not to execute him after. So for the sake of argument assume that he at least Informs the SC of his activities, if not actually asks permission. Would an organization such as the Council do so in Writing? Would it be Word of Mouth Only? They are pretty big in to modern bureaucracy, especially on the military/warden side of the organization, so some sort of Top Secret division of their record keeping wouldnt be out of the question. On the other hand, records of Clandestine activities often do more Harm than Good in both short and long terms, so maybe not.
Except it's not about the power he has, it's about the hypocrisy inherent in him existing.
The Merlin is incredibly powerful, people don't mind that so much. But having the Council say "the rules apply to everyone... Except him, he's cool," that people would mind.
Other things the Merlin has not openly opposed: The Black Council.
The Merlin is one of the absolutely biggest opponents of dark magic, and absolute in carrying out punishment against those who wield it. The fact that he hasn't openly apposed the position shows that he recognizes it's importance.The fact he's unopposed to it is the problem, from the point of view of the average White Council member.
The fact he's unopposed to it is the problem, from the point of view of the average White Council member.
You aren't a White Council member so you don't know from their point of view.And you do?
If they are aware of the Blackstaff they might take great comfort in the fact that there are dark wizards, and creatures out there that are terrified of the Blackstaff knocking on their door. By the claims being made you would think the Blackstaff is a homicidal maniac that murders people for the fun of it.That's really not how people work when they find out about something like that.
And you do?Of course not. I attempt (and fail I'm sure) to talk as someone from the outside looking in. But your comment "The fact he's unopposed to it is the problem, from the point of view of the average White Council member." sounds like you're speaking as an authority on what a council member believes.
That's really not how people work when they find out about something like that.
Consider when we all that information about the CIA and NSA surveillance was leaked. Was the general reaction, "Well, I'm glad that the NSA is keeping an eye out for security risks!" or was it, "Holy shit, the government is watching us all! This is terrible!"
You're making an assumption about the White Council that just plain runs counter to human nature. Wizards are used to being the most powerful person in the room. Do you really think they're totally OK with someone who has license to wipe them off the map using powers they're not allowed to use?Yes because it happens everyday in real life. The Russian people love Putin. Polls have his support as incredibly high in Russia. He worked for the KGB, and is connected to reporters, and political opponents being murdered. If he wants someone dead in that country, they will be. The people still love him though because they think he's got their best interest at heart, and that he wants Russia to be strong again. Doesn't matter if they are right, or wrong, it's what they believe. Do some people fear him? You can be sure, but Russia as a whole loves him.
The point is the White Council does not know who the Blackstaff is, how he operates, on what basis he picks his targets, or what ethics he has.See that's what I'm talking about with you speaking from the perspective of a member of the White Council. We as readers don't know this. If you have WOJ, or in book information that i don't recall I'd like to read it. But I don't recall there ever really being much information about what anyone on the Council knows.
You're speaking from the perspective of knowing the Blackstaff is an extremely honorable, judicious man. The White Council doesn't know that. All they know is that there's someone out there who's allowed to break all the rules they'd be put to death for even skirting.His position grants him immunity to the rules only for as long as the Council allows it. That's what I think you're missing. If the majority of Council members felt he was abusing his position, he'd be gone. He's not some god that can just do whatever he wants forever. You can be sure if Langtry thought Eb was abusing his position, he'd need only a few more people to support his position and McCoy would be gone.
Except it's not about the power he has, it's about the hypocrisy inherent in him existing.
The Merlin is incredibly powerful, people don't mind that so much. But having the Council say "the rules apply to everyone... Except him, he's cool," that people would mind.
The fact he's unopposed to it is the problem, from the point of view of the average White Council member.
"So we're all under threat of instant death if we ever commit one offense against the laws ... except the Merlin's croney, apparently. If he can use it, why can't we?"
Because he has a blackstaff and you don't, and there's only one and we don't know how to make another.Aaand being wizards, they won't just accept that answer and rather try to make one for themselves.
Aaand being wizards, they won't just accept that answer and rather try to make one for themselves.
Well, maybe the young ones.
Of course not. I attempt (and fail I'm sure) to talk as someone from the outside looking in. But your comment "The fact he's unopposed to it is the problem, from the point of view of the average White Council member." sounds like you're speaking as an authority on what a council member believes.The point was, you're countering my point by trying to say since I'm not a White Council member, I can't say their point of view ... and then you expound on what their point of view would be.
Depends who you ask. Some people were paranoid, some people like it because they don't mind giving up privacy (that nobody will pay attention to) with the hope that it can stop major terrorist attacks.I remember it being far more of the former, and a hell of a lot of outrage about it.
Yes because it happens everyday in real life. The Russian people love Putin. Polls have his support as incredibly high in Russia. He worked for the KGB, and is connected to reporters, and political opponents being murdered. If he wants someone dead in that country, they will be. The people still love him though because they think he's got their best interest at heart, and that he wants Russia to be strong again. Doesn't matter if they are right, or wrong, it's what they believe. Do some people fear him? You can be sure, but Russia as a whole loves him.I'm wondering how close real-world politics are to touchy topics, but I kinda want a citation needed here.
See that's what I'm talking about with you speaking from the perspective of a member of the White Council. We as readers don't know this. If you have WOJ, or in book information that i don't recall I'd like to read it. But I don't recall there ever really being much information about what anyone on the Council knows.The whole point of the position is to be a secret. The White Council isn't supposed to have someone who can break the laws, since the organization as a whole exists primarily to enforce the laws. I'm just using plain logic here. You don't need WOJ or in-book confirmation to extrapolate that the White Council's majority doesn't know all the intimate details of a position that's not supposed to officially exist.
All I know is that Langtry, LtW, Gatekeeper, and Martha Liberty are people with different personalities, and beliefs, highly intelligent, and people of character from what I can tell, and none of them have come out openly about their opposition to the Blackstaff. LtW, Gatekeeper, and Liberty to me are the best examples to me.Because it's a secret position that's not supposed to exist. They don't acknowledge it exists in any official capacity. That they don't "oppose" something they're not supposed to let on that they know about doesn't mean anything.
His position grants him immunity to the rules only for as long as the Council allows it. That's what I think you're missing. If the majority of Council members felt he was abusing his position, he'd be gone. He's not some god that can just do whatever he wants forever. You can be sure if Langtry thought Eb was abusing his position, he'd need only a few more people to support his position and McCoy would be gone.And what constitutes "abusing his position"? The position that's not supposed to exist, again.
I'm wondering how close real-world politics are to touchy topics, but I kinda want a citation needed here.
I'm wondering how close real-world politics are to touchy topics
It is theorized black magic corruption is some how linked to the outside, and the winter court mans the outer gates. It is believed the black staff is mother winter walking stick so that might not be coincidence.
So I am wondering if winter knight has some protection from the corruption of black magic. The walking stick would a physical relic of mother winter power, while the knight mantle is a portion of her power.
But the staff and mantle would have their costs and concequences for any protection they provide.
Logically, if even Mab is worried about Nemfection, then I'd bet that the WK has no immunization to black magic, assuming that Black Magic corruption and the outside are linked.I've occasionally wondered if the sponsored magics are affected by the black magic taint -- I mean, faeries and vampires and the like can apparently kill with magic without the taint. I wonder if using Winter or Summer magic offers any kind of "buffer" to it.
Now, if Harry gets his hands on the Blackstaff, that would mean he has an (almost) direct link to Mother Winter and her power. I wonder if that would make using the Blackstaff even more potent.It could. It might also tell Mother Winter where her missing walking stick is -- with someone she can apparently summon back to her home.
I've occasionally wondered if the sponsored magics are affected by the black magic taint -- I mean, faeries and vampires and the like can apparently kill with magic without the taint. I wonder if using Winter or Summer magic offers any kind of "buffer" to it.
It could. It might also tell Mother Winter where her missing walking stick is -- with someone she can apparently summon back to her home.
We don't know if they gain a taint when they kill with magic. The only one I remember doing anything like that was Aurora, and she didn't live very long after attempting it.They can kill with magic because they act in compliance with the balance, they don't break free will. Mortal magic taints when it breaks cosmic laws tied to freedom of will. Pretty sure the whole point of the WK is to act as a buffer for Mab, to keep HER from getting the taint. By giving the job of violating free will to her disposable subordinate. Also, when she keeps him in the bullpen too long highjinx start up pretty steadily in the winter court.
We don't know if they gain a taint when they kill with magic. The only one I remember doing anything like that was Aurora, and she didn't live very long after attempting it.Lea did some (presumably illusion-based) killing in GS while taking turns as the Rag Lady. Also likely had some collateral damage during Changes, but that's just conjecture.
They can kill with magic because they act in compliance with the balance, they don't break free will. Mortal magic taints when it breaks cosmic laws tied to freedom of will. Pretty sure the whole point of the WK is to act as a buffer for Mab, to keep HER from getting the taint. By giving the job of violating free will to her disposable subordinate. Also, when she keeps him in the bullpen too long highjinx start up pretty steadily in the winter court.
Lea did some (presumably illusion-based) killing in GS while taking turns as the Rag Lady. Also likely had some collateral damage during Changes, but that's just conjecture.
Huh?Gotta reread SK man. They can't force you but they can glamour you, they can make deals, they can kill mortals whom have chosen to get involved in the courts affairs or otherwise provoke them. Lea basically went about teaching Molly how to inspire fear without actually violating the laws themselves, by doing precisely what the Sidhe have done all along.
I thought that the killings were speculated to have been committed by Leah, but we really don't know.
Gotta reread SK man. They can't force you but they can glamour you, they can make deals, they can kill mortals whom have chosen to get involved in the courts affairs or otherwise provoke them. Lea basically went about teaching Molly how to inspire fear without actually violating the laws themselves, by doing precisely what the Sidhe have done all along.I think it's only the queens that can't kill unaffiliated mortals -- nothing has been stopping trolls from eating children or the Redcap from murdering travelers.
Gotta reread SK man. They can't force you but they can glamour you, they can make deals, they can kill mortals whom have chosen to get involved in the courts affairs or otherwise provoke them. Lea basically went about teaching Molly how to inspire fear without actually violating the laws themselves, by doing precisely what the Sidhe have done all along.
Sorry Jonas, but you are applying a "rule" to all of the Sidhe that doesn't apply.The way I've always seen it, the Laws of Magic apply to mortals only, going both ways. I mean, Leah turns everyone into dogs without a problem and she's throwing around deadly magic without a care in the world in Changes.
Only the Queens cannot kill without a connection to the courts. That's why they have a WK.
The rest of the Sidhe can kill as they like. Look at the Fetches or the Redcap. But the real question is if they use magic (not just glamour on themselves) to kill with, are they tainted. We don't have any examples of it yet, so we really don't know.
I think it's only the queens that can't kill unaffiliated mortals -- nothing has been stopping trolls from eating children or the Redcap from murdering travelers.Sidhe, say it with me Sidhe. Not fae or Faerie. If you notice Lea can't just do whatever she wants either. Harry goes out of his way to explain why she can get to him multiple times. Leah 'lawyered' the CH hounds as helping to complete the quest. Don't pretend to know about the redcaps situation.
So long as you're not actually a queen, you're free to kill whoever you want.
The way I've always seen it, the Laws of Magic apply to mortals only, going both ways. I mean, Leah turns everyone into dogs without a problem and she's throwing around deadly magic without a care in the world in Changes.
It's got to do with free will and one's nature. A human's nature is changeable -- a fae's isn't. They're beholden entirely to their nature, so if they use magic to kill, then it's already in their nature to do so.
The way I've always seen it, the Laws of Magic apply to mortals only, going both ways. I mean, Leah turns everyone into dogs without a problem and she's throwing around deadly magic without a care in the world in Changes.
It's got to do with free will and one's nature. A human's nature is changeable -- a fae's isn't. They're beholden entirely to their nature, so if they use magic to kill, then it's already in their nature to do so.
Sidhe, say it with me Sidhe. Not fae or Faerie. If you notice Lea can't just do whatever she wants either. Harry goes out of his way to explain why she can get to him multiple times. Leah 'lawyered' the CH hounds as helping to complete the quest. Don't pretend to know about the redcaps situation.Harry is talking about things like how she can control or heal him because they're connected. If she just wanted him dead, there's nothing stopping her from just stabbing him.
*yea again, see Leahnansidhe
Harry is talking about things like how she can control or heal him because they're connected. If she just wanted him dead, there's nothing stopping her from just stabbing him.Now... are we talking killing with magic or not? Either way once you've made connections with the Sidhe your no longer 'off the board' of their games.
Check the sequence in Changes: Lea never "lawyers" anything. She just does it. Then when she changes them back, she freely offers to turn any of them back if they want.check it again
Godmother. I hope you have some way to get us to the temple a little more swiftly?He gave her an excuse to do something she always wanted to and then she laughs about it. If they give her permission before she changes them back how does that break, well, anything at all?
And what do you mean "don't pretend to know"? Harry says outright what the Redcap does and the Redcap confirms it. That's the myth of the Redcap in the first place -- that it murders people.again... thought we were mainly talking about magic, as Redcap kills up close and personal. Now prove that he's ever killed at least one completely random person without them being connected to the courts or duped into giving him an opening in some way? Since it's not in the books, I won't pretend to know how he does what he does ;)
The Laws of Magic have nothing to do with permission. Harry gave Molly permission to muck with his mind, and it was still a violation of the law.Hold on, quantus just quoted the pertinent woj in another thread, let me go try to jack it.
Things are getting muddled here -- point is, nobody in the whole series ever brings up anything Faeries do -- killing, transforming, mind-screwing -- as being related to or falling under the Laws of Magic. I honestly thought it was simply a given that they weren't affected by the taint because nobody in the world seems to care.
The consequences for breaking the Laws of Magic don't all come from people wearing grey cloaks.the laws of magic have nothing to do with permission, the actuality behind them does. every law can be broken down into why it violates free will except for possibly contacting outsiders, but that's still bad juju.
And none of it necessarily has anything to do with what is Right or Wrong.
Which exist. It's finding where they start or stop existing that's the hard part.
Jim
As for violating the laws of magic themselves turning you good or evil, well. :) There's something to be said on either side of the argument, in the strictest sense, though one side of the argument is definitely less incorrect than the other. But it's going to take me several more books to lay it out, so there's no sense in ruining the fun. :)
It might also tell Mother Winter where her missing walking stick is -- with someone she can apparently summon back to her home.
The Laws of Magic have nothing to do with permission. Harry gave Molly permission to muck with his mind, and it was still a violation of the law.
We don't know if they gain a taint when they kill with magic. The only one I remember doing anything like that was Aurora, and she didn't live very long after attempting it.
The Laws of Magic have nothing to do with permission. Harry gave Molly permission to muck with his mind, and it was still a violation of the law.
I'm not at all sure I agree with that. The law is against "invading" someone's mind - that doesn't sound like a prohibition on mind magic done with consent. LtW's efforts to help heal the damage Peabody did to the younger personnel would fall under a similar situation. Also, for that matter, Molly and Harry's sparring sessions about trying to plant an idea in each other's head, which they apparently did a considerable amount of, would also be prohibited under the interpretation that consent doesn't negate the violation of the 'invade' law.
Something I just recalled that might shed light on the exact relationship of Blackstaff and Council: in Turn Coat, after Harry learns what's going down, he travels to Edinburgh and finds Ebenezer waiting, along with a strike force of Wardens, waiting for news to come in so they can capture Donald.Not necessarily -- Ebenezer doesn't have to be the Blackstaff to be one of the best combat mages around. He's a well-known heavy hitter, Blackstaff or no.
Eb is no longer a Warden, but he's right there with the strike team and everybody takes that for granted as natural. That suggests to me to that the Wardens, at least, know what the Blackstaff is and who it is and what he is allowed to do.
Not necessarily -- Ebenezer doesn't have to be the Blackstaff to be one of the best combat mages around. He's a well-known heavy hitter, Blackstaff or no.
No, it's not proof, but it's a strong indication. There are probably quite a few Wizards who are known to be very good in combat, but going after a rogue Warden is the sort of thing you do 'officially'.Ebenezer isn't just "very good." He's considered one of, if not the best on the planet, and one of the few men around who could take Morgan in a fight. Plus, apparently he is (spoilers from Fistful of Warlocks)
There might be lots of good shots and skilled combatants in a city, but they don't usually join the SWAT team for an operation.
Going after a rogue Warden who happens to be Donald Morgan is especially touchy, both politically and practically.
You cant forget that Morgan was also the Hero of the Council and a battle leader. He did almost take out the Red King after all. takeing out Morgan was a Huge victory for the WC. Taking down Captian Lucio as well would have started a Civil war which may have been the BC's pourpose
Yeah, Morgan was not about to win any popularity contests, inside the Council or out of it--but *everyone* knew that he was bad news. He wasn't *liked* by hardly anyone, but he was *respected* by most of the Council and their allies, and *feared* by most of their enemies.
Harry just happened to be in that latter category for the longest time, as far as Morgan was concerned. Morgan scared the bejeezus out of Harry, on several levels. Which was why Harry's POV toward Morgan was so freaking skewed. Harry /always/ saw him as the Javertesque-persecutor of warlocks and wayward wizards. For everyone else, that was only a part of Morgan's identity. Mainly, to them, he was the guy from the White Council who was most likely to kick down your door, burn your wicked minions to ash in fire and brimstone, and then divide you into several distinct nonentities with his sword. :) The killing-baby-warlocks thing was just his sideline.
Harry does not have Morgan's experience or expertise in a fight. It doesn't mean that Harry isn't also an effective and dangerous opponent, but he has a completely different approach--and he generally has a lot more to learn, still, before he is as formidable as someone like Morgan.
Granted, Ebenezar makes /Morgan/ look like Harry. But hey. :) There's always someone bigger or better than you, right?
Ebenezer isn't just "very good." He's considered one of, if not the best on the planet, and one of the few men around who could take Morgan in a fight. Plus, apparently he is (spoilers from Fistful of Warlocks)(click to show/hide)
And remember, they don't really want to kill Morgan in a fight. They want to capture him alive.
So it's not like "good shots" being called for a SWAT team operation; it's more like Korben Dallas/John Matrix/John Rambo being pulled out of retirement because he's the only man alive who can do the job.
No, I'm afraid it doesn't. He's no longer a Warden, and while he's possibly the most dangerous fighting Wizard, there are others in his league. It just doesn't add up that the Council would have him there 'unofficially'. Too risky on several levels. You could assume it was true, but it's a stretch in credibility terms.Im not seeing your issue with this, what risk? Why would it be "Unofficial"? He was