that was purely coincidential

Re-nightmare theory : Who’s more likely to die first?



So as you all know,

Arthur and Lilly
 Jeremy Burns
Infected by Skull’s eye
 Mystery Burns

and Kao,

Angel (??) and Demon (??)
  Kao and Howaito

So basically, Jeremy has been a normal cat for 11 years until he infected himself with a shinigami’s eye, that is, Skull’s eye and turns into Mystery Burns, who has been a shinigami for 30 years.

Kao, was born an Angel-Demon Hybrid goat (or Nephalems), and has been a Nephalem his entire life, that is, 24 years.

According to Nephalem Physiology, these creatures, humans or animals, contain divine magic from both Angels and Demons, making the Nephalem stronger than both the Angel and Demon.

And Shinigamis, are Demons who want death to people, or kill people who deserve so.

                  Kao and Mystery have a normal age difference by 17 years.


Kao and Mystery have an experience difference of 6 years, of wielding magic/ powers


Kao -        Angel-Demon
Mystery - Normal cat-Demon 

= Angel-Demon > Normal-Demon
=         Kao        > Mystery


Kao -       24 years experience
Mystery - 30 years experience 

= 24 years > 30 years
= Mystery  > Kao

       By this we can conclude the first part by saying that Kao is just as                                        powerful as Mystery in magical powers.

Now, let’s assume that Kao has a 100% chance of killing Mystery.

However, Kao is meek and not strong enough to wield this nephalem magic that he has within him, which is actually more powerful than mystery’s shinigami magic. This reduces his chance by 40%

Kao loses 6 years of experience in practicing his magic, because I explained so above.
This reduces his chance by 6%

Now to the conclusion
If Kao were to fight Mystery to a death battle, there is a 54% chance that Kao would win against Mystery, and killing him.



@sleepy-kinq hERE

Responses to Miscellaneous Comments/Notes/Reblogs...

1 white iron crown = approximately $5000? JEEEEEEEEESUS.

No wonder whats-his-name got in trouble when Locke hid one in his room…

Yep. if you look at just one convenient example from actual history, the Anglo-Saxon pound, it’s hard to grasp, from our perspective, just what a phenomenal amount of money it represented at the time (say, 1200s - 1500s). A poundweight of silver in an age when the majority of the populace was paid in very small buckets of absolutely fuck-nothing, and were told to feel grateful for the buckets. Locke’s society is quite advanced from that sort of economic state, but it’s still a hellish place by late 20th century industrialized-middle-class standards. (I worry that it might start looking attractive compared to what could happen to mid-21st-century-industrialized-middle-class standards…)

In many currency systems there were also units of account that had no existence as actual coins, but were merely convenient expressions for a certain number of those coins (it’s perfectly valid for you to ask a moneylender for ten dawbershins, and for her to write “ten dawbershins” in her account books, but she can’t set actual dawbershins on her counting board– instead she counts out forty klingledorks, the dawbershin being a 1:4 figure of account for klingledorks, see?). The existence of white iron as a genuine, extremely rare material substance has helped Therin accounting avoid the use of such fictional denominations.

I know that this is enough to make some readers tear their eyeballs out and play basketball with them, but god, this sort of thing just strikes me as SO much more fun than “innkeep, I shall pay you one gold for a cup of your finest ale!”

is the “they” there simply to preserve an ambiguity as to Sage’s gender or because they were a non-cis character? are there others?

The “they” was there because I had quite forgotten Sage Kindness’ gender identifiers (I looked them up later– Kindness is explicitly described as a “he” in the text of TLOLL) and because I’m a proponent of “they” being a perfectly excellent singular pronoun when one is uncertain, and indeed, even when one is certain. I think THORN is the first book in the series where a couple of characters have been deliberately described with names/details but no gender signifiers. I mean, you might be able to dig an example out of the first three, somewhere, but I guarantee it will have been accidental/incidental rather than me saying “Hey, here’s a thing I should occasionally do!”

My. Lynch I am currently rereading the series and about half way though Seas. This time around, having already read Republic, I caught a direct reference to Republic of thieves in Red Seas. Locke says he’s an actor and mentions Jasmer Moncraine to Caldris. Did you know what Republic was going to be about before writing it? Love these books and very excited for Thorn.

Oh, I had a really good general idea of what was coming, working from my master outline that remains pretty intact even after ten years (yes, good god… it’s 2015. LIES was finished and delivered in mid-2005, the year the Decepticons attacked Autobot City). Many details remained to be finessed, however… I’ve posted elsewhere about how my original conception of Jasmer Moncraine was as a much cuddlier father figure, but I realized that after Chains and Maranzalla, the series didn’t need another father figure, it needed someone rougher and more challenging. 

Interestingly, at least to me, I have sometimes reflected that if Chains/Maranzalla form a distinct pair of father figures then Drakasha/Countess Amberglass mirror them somewhat as mother figures; each parental side has a hard-but-nurturing character and a more distant finisher/mentor type figure.

hi scott! merry christmas - i fell in love with your books and because i kept envisioning the shade’s hill orphans similary to the little thieves from the oliver twist movie, a question crossed my mind- was the thiefmaker in any way inspired by fagin from oliver twist or is the similarity purely coincidential?

It’s not coincidence; the Thiefmaker is in some respects a very transparent OLIVER TWIST homage.

Hello! I’m sure you’ve been asked this question thousands of times already and are thoroughly sick of it, but are you scheduling any 2015 appearances in the Boston/Cambridge area again this year!?

Not sick of it at all! In point of fact, I will be attending BOSKONE next month, February 13-15. Panels, signing, reading (THORN OF EMBERLAIN excerpt guaranteed). I will also be at PANDEMONIUM BOOKS on the night of Thursday, February 12. Elizabeth Bear and I will be signing and reading, and there will be cookies, and it’ll be something of a release party for her awesome new novel, KAREN MEMORY.