Let me start out by saying that there might be some confusion...I never meant to imply that the info that Alric reports (that the Fallen Lords would become powerless if Balor died) is, for sure, correct. I've simply been keeping the possibility alive. The only things that I've been trying to prove are the following:that Balor was present when Alric was held captive, that Alric learned the info "by chance," and that Alric wasn't allowed to escape. Actually, at this point the discussion about power loss is rather irrelevant to those three points, but what the heck, I'll keep pushing it. At the same time, though, I believe it's just as likely that Alric somehow got the info wrong (just as the Nine, upon the first appearance of the Fallen Lords, mistook the Lords' relationship with each other), that it was his fault, that he wasn't actually fed misinformation. I believe either of those two theories is more likely than the idea that the Deceiver intentionally told Alric anything and/or allowed Alric to escape.
: Rabican defeated Shiver and killed her. Shiver's death
: had nothing to do with Balor's falling. The two events
: took place almost a year apart.
Yeah, somehow we got on different pages here. You're right, I never meant to disagree on this issue.
: You have the narrator on your side? Hmm... I don't think
: so.
Here, we're talking about whether or not Alric's info was misinformation. The Narrator states what Alric states--that the Lords will become powerless. This is what I mean by his "being on my side." I'm just saying that, if we don't have any convincing reason to believe that the Lords didn't suffer any power loss, then we should accept what the Narrator said Alric said at face value.
: And, we're not really speculating. There is no evidence
: that Balor's death weakened the Fallen Lords. Shiver
: was killed by Rabican.
Right, Shiver's already dead, no evidence there (I've already said I have no conclusive evidence, but neither is there evidence to the contrary).
:The Watcher was defeated by the
: Legion.
Ditto, not evidence.
:The Deceiver was wounded by the Watcher and
: the Legion reportedly found him and forced him into
: falling in the heavy Dramus current. Without his
: sceptar, the Deceiver is powerless. He derives his
: power from the staff and once it is lost his sorcery
: is reduced. Balor's death is not tied with this.
What I was suggesting is that it was Balor's death that contributed to the Deceiver's defeat at the Stair of Grief and the loss of his scepter, not what happened after. My idea is entirely possible--no evidence either way.
:As
: for Soulblighter, he fled to the Untamed Lands and
: learned new skills. He was obviously not weakened if
: he could change into his crow form and fly hundreds of
: miles south.
The crow is a good point, but I've heard that Gurps reports that his ability is innate and, therefore, can't be lost (unless something really special happens, I guess, like a part of him is stolen by Myrdred, i.e., the one crow). Also, Alric probably wasn't implying that they'd all become permanently powerless. Again, he knew that they all had power before Balor, and probably knows that, after some time, they could probably get it all back and then some.
: The qoute could mean anything.
: Again, his weakness was brought on by the Watcher and his
: loss of his staff.
The quote, actually, is quite specific, suggesting that the Deceiver fell after Balor. But, again, I conceded that there's nothing conclusive to suggest that his fall was caused by Balor's death.
: Your "evidence" above is not evidence. Just
: speculation on how the characters would act and how
: they think based on facts.
Call it what you want, but they're all pretty damn good reasons (You yourself say that it's "speculation...based on facts." I'd say that's the definition of evidence). You haven't even ATTEMPTED to answer them, which I have had the courtesy to do concerning everything you've brought up.
BTW, here are the six points again:
1. Alric says he learned the info "by chance," implying it wasn't as a direct result of someone giving him info. Making a deal doesn't happen "by chance."
2. The Deceiver would tell Alric to stay away from the Watcher's arm, reassuring him that he would take care of the Watcher himself. Or they would come to some agreement whereby they wouldn't fight over it.
3. If they were secret allies, Alric wouldn't let his troops vanquish the D at the end of the Great War. You'd think he'd go to great efforts to ensure the safety of his ally, given both that it is the moral thing to do, and given that the D is a powerful ally.
4. If they were allies, Alric would have rescued the Deceiver from the glacier SOMETIME in that sixty year period, before he absolutely had to, again, because it's moral and becaue the D is a powerful ally (and, no, the D wasn't staying there because he liked it...if you wait long enough in the mission "The Deceiver," the D gets smashed by mauls--he really was comatose).
5. Alric would be a little peeved at his "ally" upon finding that killing Balor didn't really make the Fallen Lords powerless, as the D had said it would (this point only applies if you're right about the info being misinformation, and you might be right).
6. The D would be a little peeved at his "ally" for having taken so long to rescue him from the ice.
But, maybe it doesn't matter, because they're all meant as answers to the idea of a Deceiver-Alric pact, and now you seem to be pushing the idea that the Deceiver simply "let something slip." To which I first ask you, do you believe Balor was present? Surely you must think Balor wasn't, because if he was, he wouldn't let Alric get away. If Balor was present, the D would know that Balor wouldn't let him escape, so the D wouldn't even bother slipping Alric this info.
So, you must believe that Balor wasn't there, and that the D himself let Alric escape. We've already talked about whether Alric was allowed to escape. I still don't see any convincing ev...Remember what I've said: Playing Light v Dark on the Last Battle, the dark always wins, as opposed to Balor, whom you can beat on the solo levels, so Balor certainly isn't perfect because Myth players manage troops better than he does. He simply made a mistake in not guarding Alric--or, to put it another way, Bungie is making it possible to win. Also, there's evidence that Alric is not being allowed to escape...if your five champions die, you next see post-game art depicting Alric slain by Dark forces. And, in a thread that's now vanished from sight, I responded to your linearity arguments. You never answered me. So, if you want to keep pushing it, you'll have to read the last messages I posted in that string.
But, OK, let's say hypothetically you're right--the Deceiver was Alric's captor, he "accidentally" slipped some info to Alric without making a pact. In that case, here are the problems.
1. I've already noted this many times, you still haven't answered. Why would the D do this? It's very risky. Alric might not pick up on the D's hint, whatever it is--to make it really explicit would make Alric suspect something. Also, the D knew there was a possibility that Alric might die in escaping, exemplified by the many ways there are to lose in "The Five Champions" and "Out of the Barrier." So, my point is, rather than create this entire facade, why not just make a deal with Alric? (And, no, I'm not arguing that's what happened, I still believe my six points). He could tell Alric "I am an Avatara who has been bound against my will. Kill Balor and I will help you." Alric would believe this because Myrdred was an Avatara, and it's practically the truth. As a further gesture to prove his sincerity, the D could then, literally, let Alric go. He could then tell any story he wanted to to Balor--something along the lines of "these five guys came and paratrooped in and rescued him, I just wasn't expecting it!" He could even create a whole mess of dead undead to complete the illusion, but there's no reason that Balor would come inspect the site anyway. If you think that the shades might have reported to Balor, no, because if the Deceiver controlled the army that captured Alric, then the shades would be controlled by the Deceiver.
Now, for #2. If Balor wasn't present at the site of Alric's imprisonment, and the D didn't disguise himself (you quite publicly dropped your "cloaking theory"), why would Alric say he had been imprisoned by Balor??? Why would he say he had been interrogated by Balor???
: Well, the binding you describe above is what I had said.
: It gives no mention of any power flow between the
: Lords and Balor. Are ytou dropping this now?
No, didn't mean to imply that. The three things that I mentioned were what I believe to be the three things that Balor is able to force the Lords to do. In addition, I believe the nature of the bond itself makes them dependent on him for power, where once they had been independent.
: The pause was for a little over ten years. That's nothing
: for mages who have been alive for thousand(s) of
: years. Maybe things did happen but the journalist
: didn't record anything because he hadn't started
: writing yet. We do know that the Deceiver was looking
: for the Watcher's arm for over a year. But, possibly,
: Balor (who is a general, remember) told them to stay
: away from each other and ordered them to attack
: different cities. Their armies probably never came
: within eye sight of each other after Tyr and right up
: until Seven Gates.
Obviously, what I wrote was not conclusive evidence. It doesn't really matter anyway. It's clear that some sort of bond exists between Balor and the rest--even if he can't force them to do much, it's still possible that they're dependent on him.
: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The deal was
: one of many ideas. The idea I was leaning to was the
: Deceiver slipped Alric some info in hopes of breaking
: up this war and giving him some peace. The Deceiver
: wanted a return of the Cath Bruig and the death of the
: Watcher.
Well, if you want to push your "deal" theory, you'll have to answer my six points, no matter how much you don't want to. If you want to push your "slipped info" theory, you'll have to answer the two points I just brought up above.
