u/Eldest67

Do you think Bayaz had anything to do with Dow's attempted assassination of Logen?

I was thinking back to the final part of Last Argument of Kings and a doubt came to mind: do you think Bayaz could be, at least indirectly, behind Black Dow's attempted assassination of Logen?

The thing that raised my doubt was the last meeting between Bayaz and Logen. Bayaz already knows about Calder and Scale's situation (and therefore what's happening around Logen) and, in fact, promises Logen his help. Shortly thereafter, however, Dow makes his move against him.

The timing seems rather suspicious to me.

Three possibilities come to mind:

Bayaz has absolutely nothing to do with it, and Dow simply wants Logen dead for his own reasons.

Bayaz knew Dow would try to kill him and simply decided not to intervene.

Bayaz manipulated the situation indirectly, perhaps by providing information to Dow or somehow pushing him to act against Logen.

The third is obviously much more speculative, but it would be perfectly in line with Bayaz's approach: manipulating people and events without necessarily exposing himself.

What puzzles me most is precisely why Bayaz promised to help Logen if he was willing to let him die shortly thereafter. It could have been a sincere promise at the time, or Bayaz simply decided that if Logen survived, he would still be useful, while if he died, it wouldn't be a problem.

Am I reading too much into the timing of events, or do you really think there's evidence to suggest that Bayaz played a role in Logen's attempted assassination?

What is your interpretation of what becomes of Ferro Maljinn at the end of the saga?

I think she's become exactly like Tolomei, but with great willpower that translates into resistance to demons. Potentially one of the most dangerous creatures in the entire universe; Bayaz's ultimate weapon against Kahlul.

And you know what the catch is? It's as if Bayaz has given her strength, and therefore revenge, but Ferro remains his pawn.

Sure, a pawn who may be harboring revenge against her master, but a pawn nonetheless.

Who is your favorite character from The First Law Trilogy and why? (I'm only talking about the first three books, of course)

I'll start. Sand Dan Glokta and Bayaz.

Bayaz isn't a character in this story; Bayaz IS THE STORY!

If you think about it, the very title of the saga (The First Law) takes on a whole new meaning at the end of the trilogy:

It's not Euz's magical law on demons. The true "First Law" of the world is the one Bayaz himself pronounces to Ferro in Chapter 53:

"Power justifies any means. This is my first law, and also my last. The only one I recognize."

He's a shocking and terrifying villain precisely because he's already won before the story even begins:

He Controls the Economy: He owns Valint & Balk, the bank that keeps kings, nobles, merchants, and even the Inquisition on a leash.

He Controls Politics: He founded the Union, has always chosen its kings, decides its "ministers" and generals, and uses its laws at will.

He controls War and Magic: He possesses the Seed, manipulates Iron, turning it into a weapon to hurl against Khalul! He has transformed all the protagonists into his personal pawns.

In almost all traditional fantasy stories, the Wise Wizard helps the heroes defeat the Dark Lord to restore peace and freedom. Here, we discover that the Dark Lord already sits atop the tower, wearing the Wise Wizard's robe, and has transformed the entire world into his personal chessboard. No one can beat him because everyone plays by his rules and with his money.

Wow. Possibly the best villain I've ever seen/read. The fact that Abercrombie doesn't delve into Khalul, Mamun, etc. now makes sense. We've always had the real Villain beside us, drinking tea!

Hi everyone! I'd like to explore Sanderson for the first time. I was particularly drawn to The Stormlight Archive. Could you give me an overview so I could get a better understanding of the vibe? Keep in mind that I'm not a huge fan of The Lord of the Rings (the characters are too archetypal), but I do love series like Sapkowski's The Witcher and Abercrombie's The First Law, so characters are very well fleshed out from an introspective perspective (Martin included). Let me know, thanks. I'm interested in a very important plot, full of incredible events and characters! Translation: iconic moments that I'll never stop remembering.

PLEASE NO SPOILERS. I'M JUST SHARING A SINGLE THEME FROM THE BOOK.

The best part of BTAH? Valint & Balk. Dark, financial (Valint & Balk) who decide wars, orchestrate royal assassinations, and enforce silence. I can't wait to find out who these madmen are in LAOK (I start tomorrow).

I just finished Before They Are Hanged, and I'm left with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I was deeply impressed by what Abercrombie does best: the characters. Glokta is probably the novel's high point, with incredible characterization and insight. Logen's company also works great, because each member brings with them a story, contradictions, and a very strong sense of humanity.

On the other hand, however, I still have the feeling that the events themselves struggle to have a real personality. I miss those moments capable of becoming iconic, those scenes that remain etched in your memory and seem to belong to the legend of the narrative world. A clarification: I don't think there's a lack of great moments:

The "problem" is that they are mostly character-driven moments, rather than major events capable of DEFINING the saga.

Perhaps this is Abercrombie's trademark: it doesn't seek to create an epic fantasy in the traditional sense, but to tell the story of imperfect people navigating events larger than themselves. It's a deliberate choice, and it often works, but for those who also love those Witcher-esque moments where a chapter seems to transform into a legend, I won't spoil it; it can leave a certain sense of loss.

So my judgment remains uncertain: I'm extremely satisfied with the characters, the dialogue, and the psychological depth, but I still long for more memorable events that make me think, "This scene will go down in fantasy history."

Tomorrow, I'll start Last Argument of Kings

I don't know if any of you have ever read "Baptism of Fire" from The Witcher saga, but I think "Before They Are Hanged" could be described as something similar, but probably even more cynical and realistic. I haven't finished reading the book yet, I have about 120 pages left (I just left Aulcus), but I can say I love human relationships! I love the characters' introspection and their constant contradictions. The same dynamic occurs in Geralt's Hansa, although perhaps rougher here.

Please NO SPOILERS.

A question: I'm reading Not Before They Are Hanged. I just discovered that the Seed can only be wielded by Ferro because he has demon blood.

What I don't understand is this: Glustrod, being the son of Euz, didn't also have demon blood? If so, why did he destroy Aulcus when he used the Seed, while Ferro, on the other hand, should be able to use it without causing the same catastrophe? Is it because Ferro has less demon blood? Or have I missed some explanation? Thanks for your time, please. NO SPOILERS.

I've read 27 chapters of Before They Are Hanged (I'm only two chapters into the second half) and I get the feeling that Abercrombie is still building his world. Is that the case? Or am I just misunderstanding the work? In The Blade Itself he introduces you to the characters, in BTAH he develops them further and makes them grow and evolve, in the third? I expect fireworks in the third. Let me know your thoughts, obviously strictly spoiler-free, thanks. I just need to understand.

started the First Law trilogy a few days ago. I just saw Fenris's appearance in The Blade Itself. What can you say to a newcomer like me?

Does anyone know where Aloy's mural is in Zero Dawn? I know it's in the opening section of the game. I'm talking about the one seen in the famous 2017 trailer.

Has anyone played the narrative portion of the Hunter Gathering Play Test? I don't want to know the details, I think there's some sort of embargo, but just whether they liked it or not. Since it is considered canonical I would like to understand if it can be somehow connected to the post Forbidden West

What theories have you formed about Horizon III?

Despite Hunters Gathering, do you think it's possible that Guerrilla will announce Horizon 3 a full three years early, much like Naughty Dog did with Intergalactic (expected somewhere between 2027 and 2028)? I'm obviously referring to the big State of Play event scheduled for June 2nd.

From what we've read recently, the event will actually be shown in some American theaters of the Alamo Drafthouse chain, recently acquired by Sony Pictures, and, according to the website of one of the theaters involved, it will even run about 90 minutes. Among the cities involved are New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, and Dallas. All these details make me think this isn't a "minor" State of Play, especially since Sony announced it almost two weeks in advance, while usually they only give a day or two.

In short, do you think a Horizon 3 reveal could actually happen, or is it still too early? Sony hasn't hosted an event of this magnitude since E3 2018, when it showcased titles such as Death Stranding, The Last of Us Part 2, Ghost of Tsushima, and, finally, Marvel's Spider-Man.