Trick or Treeing.

Aug 24, 2010 22:01

The Tree of LifeSo, they figure that brightsteel is what Serious Ass was talking about when it came to the weapon under the tree, they just have to find it ( Read more... )

brisingr

Leave a comment

Comments 14

brightlotusmoon August 25 2010, 05:45:09 UTC
And Paolini is a successful author... why, again?

Reply

ravenswept August 25 2010, 06:52:14 UTC
Marketing. Good timing, and better marketing (not on his part, on the publishers).

Reply

kippurbird August 25 2010, 16:26:04 UTC
Dumb luck. He readily admitted it.

Reply

jacedraccus August 26 2010, 13:19:06 UTC
I'm gonna add "there's more stupid kids than discerning ones" to the list of reasons.

Reply


ravenswept August 25 2010, 07:00:38 UTC
Technically, barring actual thinking going on, attacking the tree was a good idea. Nothing about trying to speak to it was helping, Eragon obviously wasn't going to come up with any good suggestions, so Saphira going right to the source actually accomplished the overall goal. Had she not, they never would have gotten any answer nor would they have gotten the steel. Not by any reason involving logic.

And Eragon's plea was pretty weak. "There is a war" wow, that's so new, there's never a war... "the elves are leaving" god forbid they do something, he makes it sound like their leaving is a bad thing, that if he doesn't save the world the elves will actually have to mingle with other lifeforms and that's simply can't be let to pass... "I need a sword"... I hate this kid. I hate Paolini for this. His romantic idea of a single weapon being the end all of a personality is not a good idea. This is like saying, "from now on, if we want to win, we need to steal Eragon's pointy stick. Because the kid's a wuss, he turns into a total four ( ... )

Reply

kippurbird August 25 2010, 16:28:28 UTC
Attacking the tree is good. But it goes against reason as to why they would attack it after they said it would likely kill them and anyone who did attack deserved to be killed.

Of course, this is me trying to use reason.

his is like saying, "from now on, if we want to win, we need to steal Eragon's pointy stick. Because the kid's a wuss, he turns into a total four-year old without it, he'll do anything to get it back."

Ahahha. Yes.

A true warrior will use what is around him to finish the battle,

Sadly, Eragon is not a true warrior.

Reply

ravenswept August 25 2010, 18:08:27 UTC
Ah, reason, truly a lost concept on Paolini.

No, no he is not. This is a boy who enters into a battlefield with a non-bladed staff, because he'd rather use that instead of not using a spwecial sword of his own.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

kippurbird August 25 2010, 16:28:49 UTC
I know, right?

Reply

ravenswept August 25 2010, 18:08:59 UTC
Great, now I'm hearing Radioactive Man say that line.

Reply


foxypope August 26 2010, 02:16:33 UTC
Our heroes, ladies and gentleman.

Maybe this is Paolini's idea of giving his characters faults. "Oh that Saphira, she's got a temper!" Too bad all it does is make them look even more incompetent and stupid in the grand scheme of things.

Reply

autarkhos August 26 2010, 07:22:52 UTC
Hell, I wouldn't mind if that was the case.

The trouble is that her temper GETS her things so, instead of being a flaw, it becomes a positive character trait. WHICH IS TRULY.

Reply


smurasaki August 26 2010, 23:35:06 UTC
"Most forms of magic," said Oromis, "Require ever more energy to sustain as the distance between you and your target increases. However, that is not the case in this particular instance. It would require the same amount of energy to send the rock in my hand to the other side of that stream as it would to send it all the way to the Southern Isles..."

If you cause your entire plot to vanish in a puff of logic, you probably need to rethink something. Not that Paolini is the only fantasy author to accidentally do this, mind, but it's still a whopping big oopsie.

Though, in the case of Paolini's books, I think logic may be their antimatter.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up