|
I'm not buying a non-digital copy of this book, or any other book in the foreseeable future. I've waited so many years, I can wait a few more months.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
I want to be able to say that, but I know myself too well. I tried to hold out with ToM, but wound up tearing across two towns until I managed to find a hard copy. And I'll certainly buy a digital copy when its available too. Tor probably accepts Harriet's crazy demand simply because they know how many of us will double up the purchase.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
#33 Rand stiffened. He'd known what he was doing, on some level, but to hear it explained was disconcerting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
api call girl posted:#33 Rand stiffened. He'd known what he was doing, on some level, but to hear it explained was disconcerting. While I wish they hadn't done it, I guess one erotic scene in a 14-book series isn't too bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Nemo posted:I'm not buying a non-digital copy of this book, or any other book in the foreseeable future. I've waited so many years, I can wait a few more months. I think you'll be one of the few, most people who wont have access to a digital copy simply wont buy any copies at all. And it serves that woman right. Every sale lost is a small victory against those people still living in the 20th century.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Wasn't the basis behind that decision something to do with how the NY Times calculates their Best Seller's list? (it used to not count eBooks). Is that still true?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
syphon posted:Wasn't the basis behind that decision something to do with how the NY Times calculates their Best Seller's list? (it used to not count eBooks). Is that still true? Supposedly. At this point, who knows. It's just incredibly aggravating; in this day and age, who wants to port around a 1000 page hardcover instead of an e-book reader?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/combined-print-and-e-book-fiction/list.html Down at the bottom it says this: quote:E-book sales are tracked for fiction and general nonfiction titles. E-book sales for advice & how-to books, children's books and graphic books will be tracked at a future date. Titles are included regardless of whether they are published in both print and electronic formats or just one format. E-books available exclusively from a single vendor will be tracked at a future date. So it's probably not the NY Times' fault.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 22:43
|
|
|
Velius posted:in this day and age, who wants to port around a 1000 page hardcover instead of an e-book reader?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
Really depends on the individual. Lots like e-readers, but for me, I tend to keep whatever book I'm reading at the time in my car, then bring it out during lunch when I want to get the gently caress away from my co-workers for a bit. Sucks if the book gets lost or damaged, but I'm not out one to three hundred bucks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
Your not really reading unless you're holding something that could crack chestnuts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
isk posted:Lots like e-readers, but for me, I tend to keep whatever book I'm reading at the time in my car, then bring it out during lunch when I want to get the gently caress away from my co-workers for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
I'm going to get the book on release day just so I can read it at my leisure over a few weeks (or days or day depending on how good the fucker is) but the lack of a digital option is annoying. Real books are quite flimsy and I am not much for buying "extra" copies, one to read and have fall apart and one to stay pretty on a shelf or some such thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Nemo posted:http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/combined-print-and-e-book-fiction/list.html In practice, the list anyone tend to care about is the hardcover bestseller list.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 02:11
|
|
|
isk posted:Really depends on the individual. Lots like e-readers, but for me, I tend to keep whatever book I'm reading at the time in my car, then bring it out during lunch when I want to get the gently caress away from my co-workers for a bit. Sucks if the book gets lost or damaged, but I'm not out one to three hundred bucks. Agreed. I've been resisting the e-book craze, not because I think it's stupid or inefficient, because it's not, but because I would miss books too much, even the type of book that could suffocate you if you fell asleep with it on your belly. How a book smells, especially a new book you haven't read into oblivion yet, is something I would find lacking with a reader. And how they crackle and whisper with every turned page, and how they feel in my hand when I'm carrying them, and... Why, yes, I am a librarian, how did you guess?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
I haven't picked up WoT on my kindle because I have them all in hardcopy and I'm too cheap to buy books that I already have 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 03:31
|
|
|
Mortanis posted:I want to be able to say that, but I know myself too well. I tried to hold out with ToM, but wound up tearing across two towns until I managed to find a hard copy. And I'll certainly buy a digital copy when its available too. Tor probably accepts Harriet's crazy demand simply because they know how many of us will double up the purchase. Don't forget that in addition to being Robert Jordan's wife Harriet is also the editor for the series, so she has quite a bit of say in what happens. It doesn't bother me at all because there is no way I'd not buy a physical copy to complete the set on my shelf, although I use the kindle versions for general reading. It would be nice if there was a system whereby buying a physical copy of a book granted you a licence to get a free ebook version though, kinda how many Blu-ray movies also include a dvd and digital copy in the box. In any event, none of you guys living in the states have any business complaining, we pay $30 for a new release paperback here in Australia. Even the other wheel of time books would be $18 or so each to buy at a bookstore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 05:07
|
|
|
I'm buying the hardcover the day it comes out; there is something about a bigass book that makes it feel more real to me. I've switched over to my kindle for the other big books I've picked up (The Way of Kings for example), but I have an older version and it makes navigating the book harder. It's much easier to find an awesome spot in a real book when I can just flip to the approximate page area and skim for a few seconds when compared to how my kindle operates.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 06:32
|
|
|
syphon posted:Wasn't the basis behind that decision something to do with how the NY Times calculates their Best Seller's list? (it used to not count eBooks). Is that still true? This was specifically the reason given by Brandon at a co-signing he did with Harriet at a local Borders. But this was a couple years ago when The Gathering Storm first came out so it looks like NYT has changed their tune in the meantime? They might not track all ebook sales through all vendors though (Amazon, B&N, Sony, Apple, etc). Its a similar reason why the NPD is not really an important group anymore especially among PC Game sales and the widespread use of digital dist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
treeboy posted:This was specifically the reason given by Brandon at a co-signing he did with Harriet at a local Borders. But this was a couple years ago when The Gathering Storm first came out so it looks like NYT has changed their tune in the meantime? This is true. NYT didn't add e-books to their bestseller lists until sometime before ToM. However, e-books are still also stuck in the ghetto with the "all printed editions" list. The all-important bestseller list for "serious" books is still the hardcover list, since that's dominated by current release/first editions etc. For an illustration of why that combined list is bunk: Fifty Shades of Grey shows up on the top 15 on it 3 goddamn times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
Velius posted:You and probably everyone else on these forums. It's incredibly dumb and I have no idea why they let this woman dictate terms about how it gets released; everything I've hears about publishing is that authors have no say in anything regarding releases. Authors do have quite a bit of say if they are consistent bestsellers, since they can easily take their business to any other publisher barring an ongoing contract, and expect to get signed up more or less immediately.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 09:38
|
|
|
They've started sending out copies to people, since pro-commentator and wacky theory generator Terez has one now, drat her eyes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 12:22
|
|
|
I love my Kindle, but it will never replace the fun awkwardness of reading Fantasy with awful covers in public "Hey Personsperson14, is that a romance novel or something" "N-no, it's Lord of Chaos, the sixth book in the Wheel of Time fantasy series" "Oh, cool" You can't start a conversation like that with a Kindle copy of Lord of Chaos. So, I don't have a problem getting the hardcover. I like having Hardcovers of books I like anyways. I'll probably get the whole series on my kindle anyways during my post-AMOL re-read.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 12:32
|
|
|
Illuyankas posted:They've started sending out copies to people, since pro-commentator and wacky theory generator Terez has one now, drat her eyes. I like to think that I'm a strong man, but there's no way I'm going to be able to keep myself from reading spoilers when they come up. This will in no way denigrate my reading experience on the 8th, however.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 13:57
|
|
|
Illuyankas posted:They've started sending out copies to people, since pro-commentator and wacky theory generator Terez has one now, drat her eyes. I guess her longest still-standing theory is the Moiraine balefires Rand one. I'm pretty morbidly curious to see if that's the case at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 14:56
|
|
|
api call girl posted:I guess her longest still-standing theory is the Moiraine balefires Rand one. I'm pretty morbidly curious to see if that's the case at this point. ...Moirane balefires Rand? What? Where did that theory even come from?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
The Midniter posted:...Moirane balefires Rand? What? Where did that theory even come from? I tried really hard to think of a way that this theory would make sense, and I couldn't. Why does this person get to read this book before me. WHY.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
It actually makes quite a bit of sense: Moiraine's the first person to use balefire in the series. Despite her relative strength (strong compared to most Aes Sedai, but relatively weak compared to all protagonist channelers) she's quite proficient with it, using it to kill darkhounds and Be'lal before we ever learn the importance of balefire. Rand is still tied to Moridin and thereby linked to the Dark One. The full consequences of this is supposedly still to be addressed (in AMoL). There's Callandor prophecy that states that Rand is vulnerable to some sort of attack, something to the effect of "all that he is may be seized", when he stands at Shayol Ghul with the flawed sa'angreal. Rand's supposed to die, there's numerous allusions to "3 days of darkness", and then he will come back, and the day dawns twice. This is pretty clearly allusion to Jesus Christ, but the mechanisms of this death and resurrection, plus the day dawning twice 3 days of darkness apart? Moiraine's supposed to have something important to do still, or Rand's task will fail. The theory goes that Rand will be attacked and taken by the Shadow during his attempt at Shayol Ghul, and Moiraine will kill him (there's a lot of foreshadowing that somebody will eventually have to kill him for any one of many possible reasons) thus assuring that he isn't taken by the Shadow. Balefire is convenient, but it's certainly not powerful enough to turn the entire earth back 3 days--though some sort of interaction with the most powerful ta'veren ever with the strongest known remaining sa'angreal might well do it, but this is flimsy. Then Rand returns (pulled out of T'A'R by Nynaeve) and kicks the Shadow's rear end. It's also convenient, therefore, that the two best candidates for Rand's death and resurrection are also the pair going with him to the pit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
Plausible, but where does Alivia come into this? I was assuming she'd be involved in the Callandor circle, but if it's Nynaeve and Moiraine, well...
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:45
|
|
|
wellwhoopdedooo posted:Plausible, but where does Alivia come into this? I was assuming she'd be involved in the Callandor circle, but if it's Nynaeve and Moiraine, well... Going by the cover art, it is Nynaeve and Moiraine following Rand down into Shayol Ghul. Alivia still might only be tangentially related to Rand's death. Min's viewings aren't 100% accurate predictive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
drat, I may need to go into media blackout mode soon. With final copies going out, it's only a matter of time before spoilers show up here. (Properly tagged or not.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
#34 If the end of the Aiel was the sacrifice required for Rand to win, she would make it. !
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
api call girl posted:
How would this part work, though, given that anyone nuked by balefire is removed from the pattern in their entirety? I maintain that balefiring Rand with any kind of strength would probably just obliterate the pattern, given that he's a pretty pivotal thread at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
VanillaGorilla posted:How would this part work, though, given that anyone nuked by balefire is removed from the pattern in their entirety? I maintain that balefiring Rand with any kind of strength would probably just obliterate the pattern, given that he's a pretty pivotal thread at this point. But it doesn't. Balefire does not 'destroy you from the pattern', it simply kills you before the shot hits you, removing your corpse in the progress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
veekie posted:But it doesn't. Balefire does not 'destroy you from the pattern', it simply kills you before the shot hits you, removing your corpse in the progress. Right - the reason why it's bad is that it introduces paradoxes, not that it completely removes someone's thread. For example, if at 11:43 you stabbed me in the face, and then at 11:44 Rand balefired you and burned your thread back five minutes (so that your thread left the pattern at 11:39), I would be simultaneously stabbed and not stabbed. The fly you swatted on your way to stabbing me would be both squashed and unsquashed, and if (had you not swatted it) it would have gone on to land in my orange juice, my juice would be both contaminated and uncontaminated. And so on, and of course it'd be worse the more people were burned out of the pattern or the farther back their threads were affected. IIRC it wouldn't even be possible to burn someone's thread completely out of the Pattern, unless they were a baby one or two minutes old or the like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:IIRC it wouldn't even be possible to burn someone's thread completely out of the Pattern, unless they were a baby one or two minutes old or the like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
Presto posted:No, pretty sure balefire is supposed to completely burn your thread from the pattern. If you hit someone with it, they don't just die, they're completely erased from existence backward in time. Not completely, just back a distance in time relative to the strength of the balefire. That's why kingdoms aren't collapsing because Forsaken never were kings (or whatever). It's why Matt's death is a mess of theorycrafting insanity. It's like the thread gets burned backwards in the pattern, and the balescream is the pattern rushing to fill the void.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
Presto posted:No, pretty sure balefire is supposed to completely burn your thread from the pattern. If you hit someone with it, they don't just die, they're completely erased from existence backward in time. They're erased backward in time a certain distance from the point they were hit with the balefire. I assume that how far backward is based on how strong the weave is or something. So, for example, when Rand balefires Rahvin, he brings Aviendha and Mat back to life (because Rahvin had just killed them shortly before), but it doesn't undo the compulsion on Morgase or the other stuff Rahvin had done, because he was only 'burned out' a few minutes backwards in time, not all the way back to the Age of Legends (which would completely change history, instead of just slightly changing history by bringing Aviendha and Mat back to life).
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
treeboy posted:This was specifically the reason given by Brandon at a co-signing he did with Harriet at a local Borders. But this was a couple years ago when The Gathering Storm first came out so it looks like NYT has changed their tune in the meantime?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
Fintilgin posted:They're erased backward in time a certain distance from the point they were hit with the balefire. I assume that how far backward is based on how strong the weave is or something. So, for example, when Rand balefires Rahvin, he brings Aviendha and Mat back to life (because Rahvin had just killed them shortly before), but it doesn't undo the compulsion on Morgase or the other stuff Rahvin had done, because he was only 'burned out' a few minutes backwards in time, not all the way back to the Age of Legends (which would completely change history, instead of just slightly changing history by bringing Aviendha and Mat back to life). The point remains though that's it's not a regular death, wherein Rand's soul would return to TAR to await the next cycle of the wheel. Regardless of how far back his thread is burned, he's erased for some measure of time as if he'd never existed. It's been implied a number of times that there's no coming back from being balefired - it's the only thing that can remove one of the Forsaken from the Dark One's ability to resurrect them, for instance. On top of that, time continues on in a linear fashion as the pattern attempts to deal with the paradox. When Rand balefires Rahvin, he doesn't get a "do over" on the last hour. He trots back out to the courtyard and only Rahvin's actions are unaccounted for (and not even really unaccounted for, as Rand remembers them). So in the above theory, Evil Rand gets balefired by Moiraine (who isn't even at full power - she needs to rely on the angreal to be close to her original power levels). We don't get a second sunrise, and Rand doesn't come back from the dead. Any damage Evil Rand might have done might be erased for a finite measure of time, but then they're still facing down the Dark One without the Dragon. There would have to be some serious deux ex machina for that whole deal to work given the rules that have been established for balefire. I imagine there's going to be some of that, no matter what, but probably not on this level.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 19:34
|
|