Killjoy wrote:
Slamlander wrote:
ri[[3r wrote:
I hope Sara thrashes Sarine's arse.
Forlorn hope, that is. Sarine is an Elf. Aside from being longer lived (we'll get back to that), Elves are stronger and faster than humans. They are not so by a minor increment, rather they are substantially stronger and faster. They can also channel orders of magnitude more magical energy than the best human mage.
In opposition, Sara is pure human. Yes, she had an edge in her use of time magic. However, that was mainly an edge of surprise which is now lost. I suspect that Sarine can probably do similar but it may have side-effects that disturb elves and that's why she doesn't use it. That does not mean that Elves haven't developed a counter to it, in the past three millenia, once they know to expect it. As an off-hand example, simply putting up well chosen tactical wards will even things up immensly.
However, where we can see your argument vis-a-vis talent, is with Jon, when he simultaneously saved Sarine's bacon and captured Sara. Sara has yet to show that level of talent. She's not up to her brother's talent, why she was captured by Jon. Compared to Sara, Jon's in a whole other league. Even without time magic, he kicks-ass. Yes, he has "it", whereas Sara does not, as much. Note that even Jon cannot get the drop on Sarine.
Note that Sarine has "it", she's an Elf, and she's had three thousand years to perfect her skill, as well as surviving the Errant War on the side of the half-elves. This means that she has survived against huge odds. Given no nasty surprises, like time magic, she's gonna pwn Sara.
I would say that your example of Jon actually supports my contention that things you've learned (knowledge/skill) are as important as your natural abilities (talent). Jon used what he had
learned about the time ninjas to take down Sara and set up Warrel in one move. What makes Jon special is that he can think that fast in combat -- that's a talent, honed by experience. I'll chalk being able to make the shots in two different directions up to a combination of talent and years of practice.
To use a real-world example, if talent trumpted skill/knowledge, rookies wouldn't have such an adjustment to go through when they enter the big league pro ranks. In some sports, it can take years in the minor leagues before a player is ready for the big show. Why? Because they have a lot
to learn.
Training and knowledge are important only if you have the talent in the first place. You can take someone average, give them enough training, and they'll become good. Take someone talented in an area, train them, and they'll take that training and do something with it, make it better, they do stuff that do one's seen before, they're a fucking genius at it. Without that, you have also-rans making hay in the minor-leagues, foot-sloggers for the majors.
I draw and I'm good at it. I'm that sure I'm good at it I'm about to quit my full-time job, my career, go abroad and work out what I want to do with it. Now, I'm 47, and I only started life-drawing about 1.5 yrs ago. So, I've taken some classes, had some training, but nothing big. I've not studied art as a degree. And yet I am confident that I will do something in that area.
I also write, but I have nowhere near the same amount of confidence in my writing; I've trained myself to become good in that area. I learnt French in order to improve my understanding of language in order to improve my poetry. Read Pound, Eliot, Valery etc. And still I am no more than a foot-slogger for the majors. For me, there's a step-difference between the two modes.
ah well, this is my last post on the subject, as I appear to be trying to explain a Bear's problems to a Shark