: IIRC, the "Tales From Myth TFL" story
: "Fang-Grinder" mentions the fir'Bolg's
: *recent* truce with the Light, which would put the
: current age as the Sword Age.
You do remember correctly. And I just found the journal entry which comes right out and says that the Wolf Age came just before the present age, so I can't argue with that anymore either. The Deceiver *is* younger than I thought. I don't like it, though. It means we have to admit Bungie made a mistake (with not replacing "Caliban's" name.)
: The new age begins as soon as the tides begin to turn,
: when the new Hero or Leveller arises. It took quite a
: while after Balor's death to completely clean up all
: the damage done, to finally have completely won the
: war.
: So it's not a straight up-and-down kind of thing, not a
: sawtooth curve, but instead a gradual acceleration and
: decceleration, like a sine curve, where the new ages
: begin where x=0. So, as soon as Alric showed up and
: started to slow the tide of darkness, the Sword Age
: began. When the next Leveller shows up and begins to
: build his army and commits some minor acts of chaos,
: then the next age will begin.
So the "Age of Light" begins not when the Light is first triumphant, or even when the Light first begins to do better than the Dark, but instead when the Light first starts to get whupped by the Dark not quite so badly? When the 2nd derivative of (Light Power/Dark Power) becomes positive? That's optimism for you. :) Only problem I have with this is that the fir'Bolg joined the Light before Rabican's battle with Shiver, which was the first real turning point in the war ("we have never before challenged a Fallen Lord and won"). So the Sword Age must not be dated by a turning point, but instead by Alric's birth or coronation. Similarly, I guess, the Dark Age begins before anyone knows about it, when the Great Hero is possessed but some time before he starts openly ravaging the lands of Light.
--SiliconDream
