Origins within Midkemia

I can't recall Nakor killing either. That's the thing, he's only killed one person and that was Jorna. I still think he's got a shard of the good goddess so does that mean he can't kill anyone???

And what about the image of Arch-Indar in Exiles Return. She looked like Jorna a bit, said Nakor was an old friend and that Varen was someone she could take care of easily. Strange to me
 
I think he'd still be able to kill people, otherwise all the work that the Conclave is doing to thwart evil would basically be for nothing if the Good Goddess didn't "approve" ,for lack of a better word, of killing, it would be like them taking two steps forward and one step back...

So I think Nakor is able to kill, but because Nakor is like Ralan Bek and finds it hard to control his impulses, he tries to avoid killing in case it sends him on a spree like Ralan goes on.

Even though he has a shard of the good goddess he does say he used to take pleasure in doing bad things like Bek did, cheating, violence etc.
 
Surely killing some thing evil would be a good act. thats why Nakor tried to bring beck Arch-Indar so that Nalr might be destroyed forever I believe.
Have'nt actually read exiles return yet:eek: so.....
But then nakor surely would be a friend of Arch-Indar anyway, I mean he started the attempt to bring her back!
 
No probs I should read it but they didn't have it at the Lib an I don't want to buy it.

I guess Nakor still does like gambling but then is that wrong? According to our morals it is but surely if you can lay the cards on the table by whatever means then you deserve to win? It depends what moral standpoint you take and I'm not certain about the standpoint of good in Midkemia. More of a philosophical debate if you will. I mean some people hold that the end wuld justify the means, but you could argue that no wrong action should be pursued even if the overall result would be a good outcome.

so......

Does anyone think the Saaur will play another key role?
 
Sorry Woodsman, I'll refrain from discussing exiles return then, let us know when you've finished, and if you liked it...

I don't think a god would be able to pick and choose, I mean Arch-Indar couldn't just go, "oh Nakor's trying to bring me back so he can kill people, but that man there can't kill the man who just killed his son" I imagine it's all about the "energies" released through death rather than the concious action of killing someone.

Hence why Varen is evil because he harnesses those "energies" and uses them in a negative/unnatural way.

I don't know I mean didn't Pug relocate them to somewhere on another continent? or even another planet?

Can't really remember that well...
 
Last edited:
And the reason why, e.g. murder killing in a theft or after rape etc. culd never be justified. However killing a murderer to prevent furthur perpetration could possibly be classed as a 'good' act. Killing Varen certainly would be. It's a kind of greater good principle. I don't know. If the Gods developed their characteristics from thoe who worshiped them, Arch-indar could go either way slightly I would have thought, after all you have the two opinions of good deeds/acts as outlined abovemost.

I will do, it's supposed to be pretty good, so...
 
I loved Exile's Return, a lot of people have slated it for going off in a complete different direction that TotSH or KoF but I think that's what the story needed, I was getting a bit bored of Tal, he seemed to be just too good, and the amount of times he was on the brink of death and yet brought back completely healed and retained all of his sword skill, it was just a little too unplausible for me...


I suppose Arch-Indar could see the murder of Varen as a good act, but thinking of all the soldiers and other people, like the people Tal kills whilst under K's orders would still be detrimental to bringing the Good Goddess back IF she objected to killing.
 
Yeah It sort of put me off conclave. I was really enjoying it - it was different and refreshing with a fair pace- until his hand was healed. that was just too much of magic use for me, it would have been much better had he had to carry on without IMHO.

A paradox perchance. She can't object IMO although Tals killing of, um, the Leutenant would be a evil act surely. No forgive & forget. but then Magnus is not trying to bring back A-I nor Tal just Nakor the others were somewhat scornful of his efforts if I remember rightly.
 
Yeah I don't mind that his hand returned but more that he regained full use of it, it's just too magical, a convenient way for Feist to put Tal through yet more suffering and show his strength and character, but still let him defeat the "bad guy"


I suppose so, that would make sense, returning A-I is kind of Nakor's side quest and he just sees getting rid of evil a part of his job, hence him siding with the Conclave and helping them.

That would make sense, especially since Jorna/Clovis/Demon King was trying to bring about the return of Alma-Lodka (I think) which A-I would have definitely objected to, in that case killing Jorna would probably have been an acceptable act in the eyes of A-I
 
Last edited:
I think they were, perhaps unintentionally, trying to bring back the entire dragon host. They would fight the gods and bring about the destruction of Midkemia in the process, although that is theory.
Presumably the whole Valheru race is against what A-I stood for. Not because they did evil intentionally but because they were amoral and thus evil was not wrong in their eyes?
 
The Valheru didn't perceive the concepts of right and wrong which upset the balance between good and evil, and they wanted to be all powerful which meant that the Valheru and the Gods could never co-exist.
 
Yeah, although i don't think Jorna understood this she just wanted eternal life and power. The pantathians did.

I think the Valheru were ""all right"" untill Draken-Koren became a tool of Nalars causing them to rise up and attack the Gods they didn't do it of their own accord it seems, it was a plot by Nalar to try an depose the other gods, and in a measure suceeded, after all A-I and Ishap were both lost and all those others.
 
Yeah I think you're right, they mainly just raided other realms, although I think at some point they would have run out of things to raid and kill and ended up challenging the gods anyway, based on their personality, although Nalar's plot sped up the process.
 
Most certainly. I spose though the Gods would have been furthur forward in the forming process and possibly more powerful/organised which wuold have limited the damage.

It was probably a good thing over all, as they were shut out of the Universe or whatever and thus those other races/worlds survived.
 
Yeah, something had to happen, either the Gods rose up and defeated the Valheru first before they were organised, or the Valheru won and became the new gods, or what actually happened.
 
Thats about it. I'm wondering how many other worlds are likely to have survived the Valheru Crusades?
 
To put it simply, no idea, I wonder have the Valheru been discussed in the Hall of the Worlds? Surely there are some people there who have either encountered or had some dealings with the Valheru...
 
Probably there are but I don't remember any discussion. Perhaps some of the people there are refugees. I like the Valheru concept though, of a powerful race with no concept of good and evil, just order and disorder. It kind of fits the my veiw of the world, that it's developed and moving forward towards a more balnced being/place
 
Sounds like quite a hairy place to live though, no concept of right and wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
P Interesting origins of White Walkers and their undead Book Discussion 13
HareBrain Origins of hobbits -- bug or feature? JRR Tolkien 9
M New Technology Allows Investigation into Origins Of Milky Way Science & Nature 5
AlexH The surprising cinematic origins of superheroes (and villains) General Film Discussion 2
Glitch House of Witches : Origins Kraxon 0

Similar threads


Back
Top