323 replies to this topic

[Marty]

That was... pretty insulting. I attempted to summarize both arguments and provide counter-arguments to each. Lionharted responded in a very positive way and I'd like to point out that I accepted some of his arguments on board. I did look at the other side of the argument to the best of my ability, but obviously it will be tainted by my own thought processes. The purpose of posting in summaries was to encourage new arguments, like those presented by Lionharted, so I could debate them and perhaps revise my own point of view.

You have made some excellent points throughout this thread, some of which really opened my mind to the 'against' side of the argument. Its a shame that you decided to insult me at this stage. I would like to address some of the points you made in your post, but I won't until you apologize.

[Raien]

I'm saying this just shows that you three are unwilling to look at the other side if the argument because you're already set on your own theories. Indeed, you three never have.

Since you elaborated that "you three" includes me, I just wish to say in my own defence that I have never said the "power of the gods" is not the Triforce. I simply believe that the context which surrounds the "power of the gods" is not altogether similar to previous games, it's not particularly defined like in other games, and thus it could potentially indicate another power. I'm not making statements either way, so I think that fits under the definition of open-mindedness.

Looking for "similarities" is what a good theorist would do.

Looking for similarities is only part of the theorising process. Deciding whether similarities represent a deliberate timeline progression, and in some cases, filling in gaps with speculation, is what is under scrutiny here. The problem with parallels is that they are ambiguous; either the "before" and "after" states aren't defined, or the progression between states is never defined, and that means theorists are reliant on speculation to make the parallels work. I guess it's true that parallels are to some extent unavoidable in timeline theorising, but I do think we should try to avoid relying on them whenever possible, and what I stand against is people taking liberties over the ambiguous nature of parallels to suit their theories.

The source of this power isn't mentioned because it doesn't need to be. You can figure it out through common sense and/or a knowledge of the other games. If you, Raian and NM don't believe we should use other games in theorizing then you shouldn't expect anyone to really agree with any of your theories. Realize that's what theorists have always done.

What theorists have always done doesn't mean it's always right. Are you telling me that your approach to timeline theorising has not changed in the last two-three years that you've been theorising, in order to accommodate what you've learned from the developers and through discussion? Would you approve of the decisions you made back when you started? I honestly can't say I'm the same person I was three years ago, and I like to think my understanding of the timeline is more atuned to the developers now. That's why I choose not to rely on other games to establish plot points, because the Zelda developers have themselves said that they would not choose to take that approach; a basic philisophy that originated with Miyamoto in the early years. They take the view that every new game is going to attract new players and relying on past games to establish key plot points is only going to lead to confusion. And to be quite frank, the Zelda timeline wouldn't be so disconnected if it wasn't for this philosophy, and given that TP makes only vague references to past titles, it stands to reason that the philosophy still exists.

Yes, it can and should be overlooked because it's a common element in story telling. The game not saying "Triforce" doesn't change the fact that A) We are told that other people have had the very same "power of the gods" before, and that in OoT the power of the gods they had WAS the Triforce and B ) That the "power of the gods" is referred to as having "once slumbered" in Hyrule, further proving their is no distinction between the "power of the gods" in other games and the "power of the gods" in this game. The fact is, omitting a phrase isn't same as distinguishing what that phrase refers to from something else.

As I pointed out to Lex, the Wind Waker was also referred to as the "power of the gods" by the King of Red Lions. The term is clearly a description, not a title, which means any form of magic that originates from the gods can be called the "power of the gods". Given that the trio's magic was given by the gods themselves, it is by no means a leap of faith to believe that the magic came from the gods themselves.

I'd like to add to the counterpoint that this supposed "difference" doesn't mean anything beyond the fact that this game had a different style than other games. It's funny that some of the same people who argue that the Triforce isn't in TP also argue that every mention of "force" in FSA, TMC, and PH is referring to the same thing, that Hyrule is the same and in every game, and that the Twilight Mirror is the same thing as the Dark Mirror. Pray tell, what is the difference between these things? And why aren't other things held to the same rule? If the Triforce isn't in Tp, then the Four Sword of TMC and ALttP isn't the one from the other games and the Master Sword of TWW isn't the one from OoT, ALttP, or TP.

Each example is dependent on its' own context.
"Life force" is a power that all living things possess, and thus it can be found practically anywhere. Only the Light Force and the Sand of Hours are known to be especially powerful, and there is no evidence they are related to each other.
The Twilight Mirror could be the Dark Mirror, but the debate is over ambiguities in the mirrors' histories and functions. I'm not getting into that one.
The Four Sword, like the Master Sword, maintains its name and function throughout the timeline, and thus there is simply no reason to believe it is different from one game to the next.

The Triforce is an item that has various staples attached to it in OoT and TWW, but some of those staples (like Ganondorf trying to reunite the Triforce) don't appear, and that ambiguity raises doubt, and from that doubt comes the open-minded belief that possibly, just possibly, the "powers of the gods" are not the Triforce.

Edited by Raian, 27 May 2008 - 08:27 PM.

[NM87]

Marty, Raian, don't justify yourselves to this person. Besides, its not a personal attack, the high and mighty just wants to insult you in public and tell you that you are a biased idiot.

Here is what I see as the other side of the argument: The crests mean that Ganondorf, Link and Zelda have the Triforce pieces because it is similar to those games in which they also appeared. I can see the other side, and I see right through it. What I haven't seen, is one shred of solid evidence from TP itself that proves the crests are definitely the Triforce pieces, especially considering its also unprecedented that the goddesses simply give away the pieces. Where are the rules set by precedent for that? There aren't any, so there is no reason we should apply the same rules from elsewhere.

I’m sure that I will get another haughty response, but I’ll ignore it like every other supercilious response directed toward me.

Edited by NM87, 27 May 2008 - 11:32 PM.

[LionHarted]

No its not. In OOT Link and Zelda were chosen because of Ganondorf touching the Triforce. In TP, they were all equally chosen for no apparent reason. In OOX/AOL, Link was chosen to be the hero, nothing else.

In OoT, Link and Zelda were chosen, and that is obviously why they received the other two parts. They were chosen by destiny, and it is they who would receive them. They are not chosen because of the Triforce, but it is because they are chosen that they receive it.

In TP, Link and Zelda were chosen, but no one can understand why Ganon would be able to receive the chosen power of the goddesses. Midna even refutes his claim for being chosen as pure conceit, stating prior that the gods of both worlds are on Link's side.

AoL and OoS/OoA each provide their own explanations for the crest that may or may not have anything to do with possession of Triforce pieces, but neither likens it to the "power of the gods."

I checked the manual, the crest doesn't glow in AoL.

Official art strikes again!

Although you're right that the mark isn't specifically said to glow in OoS/OoA.

I'd like to see the quote for the chosen wielders

It's more a compilation of quotes.

Those two parts will be held within others chosen by destiny, who will bear the Triforce mark on the backs of their hands.

While it doesn't specify that only the chosen ones can hold Triforce parts "within" them, take this in light of the next quote.

Oh! What is this? There, on your hand--the
Triforce piece now dwells within you!

It is the Triforce of Courage--proof
that you are indeed the true hero.

Essentially this says to me that only Link/the true hero can assume the Triforce of Courage.

Ergo, I would assume the same applies to the other parts, in lieu of evidence to the contrary.

However, the 'for' argument I presented was similar power granted directly by the Goddesses

As stated earlier, Midna concludes for us that Ganondorf is not chosen by the goddesses and that his assumption that he is is pure conceit, and that the gods are on their side. I personally see her as a more reliable source than Ganondorf.

Why is Ganondorf said to be chosen in TP, but not in OoT?

Only he says he's chosen.

Please feel free to contradict me if I'm mistaken.

Whenever someone is said to be "chosen", it is because the goddesses labelled them as "chosen" through their own intervening actions. It was known that TP Link was "chosen", for example, because he was given the form of the divine beast.

In OoT, this was done through the simple mechanics of the Triforce itself, not an intervening action of the gods.
Even more so in TWW, where Link completes a trial to obtain both Master Sword and Triforce of Courage.

Interestingly, what defines the context in which someone is "chosen" also defines the context in which "destiny" is said to occur. Destiny has always been a tool to guide the "chosen" and to make things happen when they otherwise would not (like the divine beast).

Link and Zelda's destiny is to overthrow Ganon when he takes the Triforce.

This particular slice of destiny does not change with the context.

Edited by LionHarted, 28 May 2008 - 12:56 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Already off to a bad start. I expected biased idiocy and you delivered, my friend. Keep in mind, this is not a personal attack. I'm saying this just shows that you three are unwilling to look at the other side if the argument because you're already set on your own theories. Indeed, you three never have.

Not a personal attack, my ass. You basically called him a biased idiot. What the hell is your problem? First you call me an idiot and then you do this. Knock it off or get out.

[Raien]

Only he says he's chosen.

Please feel free to contradict me if I'm mistaken.

Zelda isn't said to be chosen either, so by that logic the Triforce pieces have no relation to whether someone is chosen. But the simple thing is that you're looking at this from the wrong angle.

Words like "chosen" and "destiny" don't have to be used only in the contexts which I described, because they are general everyday words that we can all use in a variety of contexts. And likewise, these words are not titles, which means they do not apply strictly to singular entities. My argument is that the choice of words is used in the contexts I described simply because they fit the meanings best.

Being "chosen", as a base meaning, refers to being singled out from other people. If you're playing a game of Tag, and you choose someone to be It, then that person was "chosen" to be It. And so, if the goddesses single out a person who they deem important enough to receive their power, or access to their power, then that singling out defines them as "chosen"; just like the Hyrulians are the "chosen" people of the gods. If Ganondorf takes power himself, then that is no sign the goddesses had meant/wanted Ganondorf to take power, and without that action of singling out, Ganondorf is not believed (and/or does not believe himself) to be chosen.

Likewise, "destiny", as a base meaning, refers to events being prescribed to occur at a specific point in time. This could logically apply to everything in the Zelda universe, but it is only used in contexts relating to prophecy. And if events happen purely to make prophecy work, then it is said destiny is the cause of those events. Hence, I apply the context.

In OoT, this was done through the simple mechanics of the Triforce itself, not an intervening action of the gods.

The cause of the Triforce split was ambiguous in OoT; all that was said is that the Triforce would split, according to Sheikah legend. And if you remember what Sheik said about the Triforce-splitting, she said that the other two pieces would go to people chosen by destiny. In other words, the act of being chosen is defined by the specific events of OoT; it isn't necessarily going to apply to TP.

[FDL]

That was... pretty insulting. I attempted to summarize both arguments and provide counter-arguments to each. Lionharted responded in a very positive way and I'd like to point out that I accepted some of his arguments on board. I did look at the other side of the argument to the best of my ability, but obviously it will be tainted by my own thought processes. The purpose of posting in summaries was to encourage new arguments, like those presented by Lionharted, so I could debate them and perhaps revise my own point of view.

You have made some excellent points throughout this thread, some of which really opened my mind to the 'against' side of the argument. Its a shame that you decided to insult me at this stage. I would like to address some of the points you made in your post, but I won't until you apologize.

I apologize, I was in a bad mood at the time. Let me explain why I was mad though. You posted that thing, completely overlooking my theory and claiming it's a non-possibility. Then I see Raian insulting the one person who disagrees with you guys simply because he wants him to look stupid so what he's saying holds no water. Lex does what he was being accused of often, but not this time. However, I am sorry. I should not have implied that you were an idiot. I'm still a little insulted that you would act as though my theory isn't possible compared to any other one, but I still should not have used the term "idiocy". I had a bad day, I shouldn't have taken it out on this board, nor should I have taken out my grievances with other posters on you. Again, sorry.

Since you elaborated that "you three" includes me, I just wish to say in my own defence that I have never said the "power of the gods" is not the Triforce. I simply believe that the context which surrounds the "power of the gods" is not altogether similar to previous games, it's not particularly defined like in other games, and thus it could potentially indicate another power. I'm not making statements either way, so I think that fits under the definition of open-mindedness.

Fair enough, but explain to me why you and NM always show up in the same threads and say similar things. It seemed to me you both believe in the same things, such as not using other games in arguments and that the "power of the gods" isn't the Triforce and what not. However, I'm sorry for acting like you guys were some kind of alliance.

Looking for similarities is only part of the theorising process. Deciding whether similarities represent a deliberate timeline progression, and in some cases, filling in gaps with speculation, is what is under scrutiny here. The problem with parallels is that they are ambiguous; either the "before" and "after" states aren't defined, or the progression between states is never defined, and that means theorists are reliant on speculation to make the parallels work. I guess it's true that parallels are to some extent unavoidable in timeline theorising, but I do think we should try to avoid relying on them whenever possible, and what I stand against is people taking liberties over the ambiguous nature of parallels to suit their theories.

Thing is, you usually seem to argue that it's actually a bad thing to do that. It isn't usually all that bad, as long as you dont do it to an insane degree. I have made it a point to not include any of my speculation in these discussions, so I'm not sure exactly who you're scrutinizing.

What theorists have always done doesn't mean it's always right. Are you telling me that your approach to timeline theorising has not changed in the last two-three years that you've been theorising, in order to accommodate what you've learned from the developers and through discussion? Would you approve of the decisions you made back when you started? I honestly can't say I'm the same person I was three years ago, and I like to think my understanding of the timeline is more atuned to the developers now. That's why I choose not to rely on other games to establish plot points, because the Zelda developers have themselves said that they would not choose to take that approach; a basic philisophy that originated with Miyamoto in the early years. They take the view that every new game is going to attract new players and relying on past games to establish key plot points is only going to lead to confusion. And to be quite frank, the Zelda timeline wouldn't be so disconnected if it wasn't for this philosophy, and given that TP makes only vague references to past titles, it stands to reason that the philosophy still exists.

I certainly agree that not every thing a theorist does is right, but I do believe looking for similarities in a series such as this is a good policy. While they may say they make each Zelda for new players, that doesn't really seem to hold true. Pretty much every game after the original one uses knowledge of previous games to tell the story, whether it's in the manual, on the back of the box, or in the game itself. If we try to look at each game as standalone, and don't try to compare them in anyway, then we might as well stop thinking about the timeline in general.

As I pointed out to Lex, the Wind Waker was also referred to as the "power of the gods" by the King of Red Lions. The term is clearly a description, not a title, which means any form of magic that originates from the gods can be called the "power of the gods". Given that the trio's magic was given by the gods themselves, it is by no means a leap of faith to believe that the magic came from the gods themselves.

But the Wind Waker doesn't resemble the "power of the gods" from other games, nor does it do the same things. On the other hand, there are almost no differences with the "power of the gods" in TP and the power of the gods/Triforce of the other games.

Each example is dependent on its' own context.
"Life force" is a power that all living things possess, and thus it can be found practically anywhere. Only the Light Force and the Sand of Hours are known to be especially powerful, and there is no evidence they are related to each other.
The Twilight Mirror could be the Dark Mirror, but the debate is over ambiguities in the mirrors' histories and functions. I'm not getting into that one.
The Four Sword, like the Master Sword, maintains its name and function throughout the timeline, and thus there is simply no reason to believe it is different from one game to the next.

1) I have seen people who argue the same thing you and Marty are arguing claim that all "forces" are the same thing and it even appears to a commonly-held belief over here. I don't know too much about this, though, so someone else should explain this further if they feel like it.
2) Again, you may not be claiming this, but many are.
3) The Master Sword in TWW has to have sages praying to the gods for it to work and turns Ganondorf into stone when it stabs him. It also inexplicably sealed Hyrule and Ganondorf under water. The FS in TMC creates phantom images of Link rather than actually splitting him into four versions of himself. Hyrule has slightly different geography in each game. And yet most of us agree they're the same. That's what I was trying to say before.

The Triforce is an item that has various staples attached to it in OoT and TWW, but some of those staples (like Ganondorf trying to reunite the Triforce) don't appear, and that ambiguity raises doubt, and from that doubt comes the open-minded belief that possibly, just possibly, the "powers of the gods" are not the Triforce.

See, this is what has been pissing me off about you guys. If you disagree with me, and actually refute my points, that's fine. But if you simply ignore points I make and continue forward that's something else entirely. While I should not have called anyone an idiot, you, NM and Marty have all done this. That's why I get mad.

Marty, Raian, don't justify yourselves to this person. Besides, its not a personal attack, the high and mighty just wants to insult you in public and tell you that you are a biased idiot.

Shut. Up. You have no business claiming you know me in any way, and I don't really need another hypocritical diatribe from you anyway. What I said to Marty before was inappropriate, what I have said to you in the past was not. I'm also sick of you showing up just to passive aggresively flame me whenever you get the chance, so stop that as well.

Here is what I see as the other side of the argument: The crests mean that Ganondorf, Link and Zelda have the Triforce pieces because it is similar to those games in which they also appeared. I can see the other side, and I see right through it. What I haven't seen, is one shred of solid evidence from TP itself that proves the crests are definitely the Triforce pieces, especially considering its also unprecedented that the goddesses simply give away the pieces. Where are the rules set by precedent for that? There aren't any, so there is no reason we should apply the same rules from elsewhere.

I have answered every single one of these points in the past. The fact that you continue to ignore them is a failing on your part, not on mine.

I’m sure that I will get another haughty response, but I’ll ignore it like every other supercilious response directed toward me.

Accusing me of shit I haven't done every single time I post anything is not the same as ignoring me, my friend.

Not a personal attack, my ass. You basically called him a biased idiot. What the hell is your problem? First you call me an idiot and then you do this. Knock it off or get out.

When have I ever called you an idiot? I have shown you nothing but respect, MPS. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else, before this I wasn't doing anything like this(aside from respond to NM's hostiity with my own). Also, why are you not engaging in this debate yourself? Maybe I'd be less angry if I had more people who have similar theories to my own backing me up rather than being ganged up on by several people who are ignoring every point I make.

I dont really care about NM, but I reiterate my apology to the rest of you guys. I should have been less personal in my post from yesterday.

[LionHarted]

Zelda isn't said to be chosen either

Again, we already know that she is, because we've played OoT.

so by that logic the Triforce pieces have no relation to whether someone is chosen.

See above.

But the simple thing is that you're looking at this from the wrong angle.

I'm looking at this from the only angle in which the chosen one's relationship to the Triforce is explained in the entire series. What other angle can I possibly look at it from?

And likewise, these words are not titles, which means they do not apply strictly to singular entities.

Except in the Zelda series.

If Ganondorf takes power himself, then that is no sign the goddesses had meant/wanted Ganondorf to take power, and without that action of singling out, Ganondorf is not believed (and/or does not believe himself) to be chosen.

We know for absolute certain that Ganon sought to take power himself, for this precise wording was used in TWW.

This could logically apply to everything in the Zelda universe, but it is only used in contexts relating to prophecy.

Actually, the context in which the legend of the chosen ones is explained is pretty universal. If anyone with an unbalanced heart takes the Triforce, the other two pieces will find those chosen by destiny to bear the other two parts, we presume in order to defeat the one with the unbalanced heart.

The cause of the Triforce split was ambiguous in OoT; all that was said is that the Triforce would split, according to Sheikah legend.

The cause was labeled simply as "if someone takes the Triforce."

Not "if someone takes the Triforce on the third full moon of the hundredth year of the hundredth century."

If the Triforce is touched twice by two unbalanced people, then it should split twice. Its mechanics should not magically change because a prophecy has been fulfilled. In fact, what you describe as a prophecy serves more as a description of the Triforce. The Triforce is a balance of the three Forces, and it does only permit the one who touches it to wield the True Force if his heart is in balance. Then it goes on to explain what will happen if someone touches it and his heart is not in balance.

This really doesn't suit a typical fulfillment prophecy by any stretch. It's more like a statement about the Triforce.

Or is the legend that the Triforce will grant the wish of the one who touches it a prophecy, too?

[Raien]

I'm looking at this from the only angle in which the chosen one's relationship to the Triforce is explained in the entire series. What other angle can I possibly look at it from?

Your argument is that the word "chosen" is used in a particular context in OoT, and thus that context must be the same in TP.
My argument is that the word "chosen" can be used in multiple contexts, because it has a base meaning unrelated to the Triforce.

The Hyrulians are said to be the "chosen people of the goddesses". By your logic, they must all possess the Triforce pieces because they are "chosen". But clearly they don't so this is an example of "chosen" used in a context unrelated to the Triforce. And thus, "chosen" is by no means proof that people possess the Triforce.

We know for absolute certain that Ganon sought to take power himself, for this precise wording was used in TWW.

Did you just completely ignore what I said?

In order for someone to be chosen, they have to be singled out by the goddesses; the very definition of "chosen" depends on that action of singling out. If Ganondorf was not singled out to receive power in OoT and TWW, then the goddesses didn't choose him to wield power; he was not "chosen". If Ganondorf receives power from the goddesses, then he has every reason to believe he was "chosen" because the goddesses singled him out.


PS: Can't a Triforce mechanic be set to happen in accordance with destiny? After all, the Triforce only split once in the history of the timeline, and that split involved destiny. I think whichever way you look at it, the Triforce split was a destined event.

Edited by Raian, 28 May 2008 - 11:01 AM.

[LionHarted]

Your argument is that the word "chosen" is used in a particular context in OoT, and thus that context must be the same in TP.

My argument is that the word "chosen one" when used to describe someone with a Triforce mark constitutes the same context that appears in OoT.

By your logic, they must all possess the Triforce pieces because they are "chosen".

No; by my logic those "chosen by the goddesses" who possess Triforce marks that indicate Triforce pieces possess Triforce pieces.

If Ganondorf was not singled out to receive power in OoT and TWW, then the goddesses didn't choose him to wield power; he was not "chosen". If Ganondorf receives power from the goddesses, then he has every reason to believe he was "chosen" because the goddesses singled him out.

The only one who argues this is Ganondorf himself.

Can't a Triforce mechanic be set to happen in accordance with destiny?

Can the wishing mechanic be set to happen in accordance with destiny?

[NM87]

In OoT, Link and Zelda were chosen, and that is obviously why they received the other two parts. They were chosen by destiny, and it is they who would receive them. They are not chosen because of the Triforce, but it is because they are chosen that they receive it.

And why were they chosen by destiny to recieve the pieces? Ganonodrf touching the Triforce which resulted in the other two pieces being hidden from him in chosen ones. Not because the goddesses decided to give hem away like in TP.

In TP, Link and Zelda were chosen, but no one can understand why Ganon would be able to receive the chosen power of the goddesses. Midna even refutes his claim for being chosen as pure conceit, stating prior that the gods of both worlds are on Link's side.

Of course no one is supposed to understand, it was a divine prank. They recieved their power due to the goddesses granting them that power in which it is never specified what power they had recieved. The Sacred Realm was not disturbed in this reality, so there is no way its pieces would leave their resting place. Also, if Ganondorf had entered, do you think the sages would have menioned it? They made such a big deal over who was placing dominion over it in the war of the mages.

[LionHarted]

And why were they chosen by destiny to recieve the pieces? Ganonodrf touching the Triforce which resulted in the other two pieces being hidden from him in chosen ones. Not because the goddesses decided to give hem away like in TP.

Except no one ever says this happens in TP.

Of course no one is supposed to understand, it was a divine prank.

A "divine prank" is an expression used to refer to an unfortunate happening that seems oddly ironic.

For example, a man who wins the lottery has his identity stolen the next day. That would be an example of a divine prank. Something so ironic that it would seem the divine hates him.

Does that mean that, in fact, the gods willed his money be stolen? Maybe, but there's no reason to assume that when (1) the gods never tell us this specifically and (2) it is known that the thief sought to steal it by the thief's own will.

Also, if Ganondorf had entered, do you think the sages would have menioned it?

Not necessarily.

Edited by LionHarted, 28 May 2008 - 04:29 PM.

[NM87]

Except no one ever says this happens in TP.

Except

Probably by a prank of the gods, the fellow, too, was somebody chosen by the gods to have power.

They don't even say power of the gods in the Japanese, they merely claim they gave him power! They're just giving it away!

A "divine prank" is an expression used to refer to an unfortunate happening that seems oddly ironic.

For example, a man who wins the lottery has his identity stolen the next day. That would be an example of a divine prank. Something so ironic that it would seem the divine hates him.

Does that mean that, in fact, the gods willed his money be stolen? Maybe, but there's no reason to assume that when (1) the gods never tell us this specifically and (2) it is known that the thief sought to steal it by the thief's own will.

I didn't know the dictionary had a specific entry for "divine prank". Divine, by the gods, prank, mischievous trick.

Not necessarily.

True, but funny they didn't.

[Chaltab]

t the thief sought to steal it by the thief's own will.

Also, if Ganondorf had entered, do you think the sages would have menioned it?

Not necessarily.

But if he had entered, would they have underestimated him as they did? If they thought or knew he had the Triforce of Power, would they have not been more careful? Or, assuming he did have it, why wouldn't he have used it to escape Arbiter's Grounds before his life literally depended on it kicking in?

I don't believe there was a literal divine prank, but it seemed pretty clear to me from the cutscene that he just received it when it activated.

[LionHarted]

They don't even say power of the gods in the Japanese, they merely claim they gave him power! They're just giving it away!

This is actually one of Jumbie's sloppier translations.

I didn't know the dictionary had a specific entry for "divine prank". Divine, by the gods, prank, mischievous trick.

You're quite right that the dictionary has no entry for it.

Run a Google search on the phrase, and you'll see that common language usage does, however.

As does literature.

True, but funny they didn't.

Backstories fail to mention lots of things. TWW doesn't mention the Sacred Realm at all, and none of its legends talk about the sages sealing Ganon. ALttP tells us that it was feared a hero would never again rise, which surely implies that a hero rose before, but we are not told what he did. Same is true of TP. We hear of the Bound Chest in TMC, but it is never specifically connected to the legends at the beginning of the game.

But if he had entered, would they have underestimated him as they did? If they thought or knew he had the Triforce of Power, would they have not been more careful? Or, assuming he did have it, why wouldn't he have used it to escape Arbiter's Grounds before his life literally depended on it kicking in?

1) Even Link and Zelda clearly underestimate him in OoT.
2) If it truly was a "divine prank," there was nothing they could have done, and thus no carelessness to be had on their part.
3) Perhaps his power was bound, and they dropped their guard when they thought him dead.

[Marty]

I apologize, I was in a bad mood at the time.

Thank you. Apology accepted and may I add that it was very big of you to be able to stand up and make such an apology in this environment. Perhaps I should make one of my own.

I did attempt to argue the 'against' argument but I accept that it was clouded. If I implied that similarity arguments are poor, which I suppose I have since this has clearly been expressed to have been felt, then I apologise. I actually think the similarity arguments are quite compelling. It was the rather simple fact, likely down to story telling methods and focus (ie. the "different style" you mentioned), that I could prove my statement false in other games that sets TP aside and I feel that this warrants at least a debate.

I'd like to add to the counterpoint that this supposed "difference" doesn't mean anything beyond the fact that this game had a different style than other games.

Accepted.

Much the way Link was bestowed the power of the gods/Triforce in TWW, right? Oh wait...

I overlooked this bestowment by mistake and I should have included it. If I had I would have pointed out that in this example Link still made an action, ie. he collected the pieces, before he received the bestowment. The bestowment is a result of an action, similar to OoT where the bestowments are a result of Ganondorf's action. In TP it appears, to me at least, as though the bestowment is made unrelated to any character interaction with the triforce.

Official art strikes again!

Heh, nice work, I concede the point

As stated earlier, Midna concludes for us that Ganondorf is not chosen by the goddesses and that his assumption that he is is pure conceit, and that the gods are on their side. I personally see her as a more reliable source than Ganondorf.

Interesting. If he is not chosen then he must have obtained the ToP on his own. I accept the theory that he could have done this during the OoT childline aftermath period as previously proposed, but that theory leaves open the question of how the ToW and ToC were passed down through the generations. That is why I disagree with this theory, I don't think its poor/wrong I just haven't seen any evidence presented yet to explain the ToW/ToC gap.

A) We are told that other people have had the very same "power of the gods" before, and that in OoT the power of the gods they had WAS the Triforce and B ) That the "power of the gods" is referred to as having "once slumbered" in Hyrule, further proving their is no distinction between the "power of the gods" in other games and the "power of the gods" in this game. The fact is, omitting a phrase isn't same as distinguishing what that phrase refers to from something else.

Lionharted brought this up as well. I've looked up the quote and I'm astonished that neither of you presented it in full because it is a real whopper:

"This was once the land where the power of the gods was said to slumber. This was once the kingdom of Hyrule."

I can't believe I missed that. The game doesn't explore this concept further so really it can only be accepted as a reference to external sources. The logical conclusion is that she has referenced the Triforce. With this in-game reference the similarities become water tight.

I still believe that the 'for' case I presented earlier holds a lot of reason but the 'against' case is now much stronger. I shall re-evaluate my position and share my thoughts when I have done so.

Again, thank you for the apology. I have rather enjoyed this debate on the whole, I think it has brought forth many interesting points, and I'd like it to continue in that manner. I hope everyone can embrace that as you just have again.

[Hero of Legend]

I can't believe I missed that. The game doesn't explore this concept further so really it can only be accepted as a reference to external sources. The logical conclusion is that she has referenced the Triforce. With this in-game reference the similarities become water tight.

Excelent! Well, that's that; the Triforce is in TP. What else is new?

edit: Well, that's asuming NoA didn't pull a fast one.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 28 May 2008 - 05:42 PM.

[LionHarted]

accept the theory that he could have done this during the OoT childline aftermath period as previously proposed, but that theory leaves open the question of how the ToW and ToC were passed down through the generations. That is why I disagree with this theory, I don't think its poor/wrong I just haven't seen any evidence presented yet to explain the ToW/ToC gap.

Going off of the crests seen in other games, and partly off of TWW, it's possible that the pieces can be passed down physically (as they are in TWW), with "destiny" simply "choosing" those who can hold their power within them.

Whether this applies to Ganondorf is a matter of debate, but we can be assured that he is not included among the "chosen ones" in OoT; he has the power because he took the Triforce and that's the part that most represented his heart. Therefore we can either conclude that it is the same in TP or that TP's situation resembles OoT's exactly but is altogether different.

Lionharted brought this up as well. I've looked up the quote and I'm astonished that neither of you presented it in full because it is a real whopper:

"This was once the land where the power of the gods was said to slumber. This was once the kingdom of Hyrule."

I can't believe I missed that. The game doesn't explore this concept further so really it can only be accepted as a reference to external sources. The logical conclusion is that she has referenced the Triforce. With this in-game reference the similarities become water tight.

I guess I just assumed most people had this first reference to it drilled into their heads before speculating about what the phrase means throughout the remainder of the game. XD

[Raien]

I have to hold up my hands and admit that I too forgot Zelda's reference to the "power of the gods", so I guess there's no point in discussing that further. But I can at least address the other point Lex made.

Can the wishing mechanic be set to happen in accordance with destiny?

As I have said previously, if destiny is existent in the Zelda universe, then it should logically be involved in everything in the Zelda universe. But that’s not what I’m looking at here; I’m looking at the use of destiny in the text and what it is meant to signify to the player. In my experience, destiny gives a wider meaning to events. If an event is destined to occur, then it symbolises a greater purpose. So if Link is destined to become the divine beast, it symbolises that Link has an important purpose to play in the world. And since destiny is tied to a fundamental purpose, destiny is ultimately tied to the goddesses. Just as the goddesses “choose” people, thus giving them their status, destiny has this exact same effect. And since in some cases, like with TWW's King of Red Lions, destiny is directly tied to the goddesses, it doesn’t need to be further explained that the two forces are intricately connected.

Edited by Raian, 28 May 2008 - 10:05 PM.

[NM87]

This is actually one of Jumbie's sloppier translations.

That’s kind of like a last resort kind of response isn’t it?

Run a Google search on the phrase, and you'll see that common language usage does, however.

As does literature.

Yes, American literature and common language specifies its use.

Backstories fail to mention lots of things. TWW doesn't mention the Sacred Realm at all, and none of its legends talk about the sages sealing Ganon. ALttP tells us that it was feared a hero would never again rise, which surely implies that a hero rose before, but we are not told what he did. Same is true of TP. We hear of the Bound Chest in TMC, but it is never specifically connected to the legends at the beginning of the game.

And in none of those instances were any of the examples mentioned in tandem with another important story element. The Sacred Realm is never mentioned in WW. I would like to see where they mention fearing a Hero would never again rise in ALTTP: “Among the descendants of the Knights Of Hyrule a hero must appear“. The Bound Chest could easily be the seal on the monsters stopped by the Hero of men, and it never really mattered to the story anyway.

If TP is going to mention the Sacred Realm being coveted by mages in which they were stopped, its going to at least anecdote Ganondorf entering and laying his hand on the Triforce (a groundbreaking important event according to the legends).

Edited by NM87, 28 May 2008 - 10:21 PM.

[NM87]

This was once the land where the power of the gods was said to slumber. This was once the kingdom of Hyrule.

By some divine prank, he, too, had been blessed with the chosen power of the gods.

These are the two quotes from the English version of the game that mentioned "power of the gods". One of them, we know was due to NOA including the phrase. The other, was the line in question. So re-"discovery" of this quote is irrelevant. Of course the power of the gods slumbers in Hyrule, and the three chosen ones receive the power of the gods, but not in the form of the Triforce.

Edited by NM87, 28 May 2008 - 10:20 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

but that theory leaves open the question of how the ToW and ToC were passed down through the generations.

Again, we don't know much of any of the circumstances regarding a Triforce piece residing inside a chosen. It may perhaps reincarnate with them until the chosen completes their destiny.

These are the two quotes from the English version of the game that mentioned "power of the gods". One of them, we know was due to NOA including the phrase. The other, was the line in question. So re-"discovery" of this quote is irrelevant. Of course the power of the gods slumbers in Hyrule, and the three chosen ones receive the power of the gods, but not in the form of the Triforce.

You're really, really grasping.

[LionHarted]

That’s kind of like a last resort kind of response isn’t it?

It doesn't appear to match his stated opinions on the issue, does it?

Yes, American literature and common language specifies its use.

As a metaphor.

And in none of those instances were any of the examples mentioned in tandem with another important story element.

The Triforce really isn't important to TP.

If TP is going to mention the Sacred Realm being coveted by mages in which they were stopped, its going to at least anecdote Ganondorf entering and laying his hand on the Triforce (a groundbreaking important event according to the legends).

Just like it anecdote'd the actions of the ancient hero, who frankly I'm not convinced exists.

Of course the power of the gods slumbers in Hyrule, and the three chosen ones receive the power of the gods, but not in the form of the Triforce.

Nice fact?

[Sparx401]

Just throwing something out here, the Wind Waker itself is said that it can be used to borrow the power of the gods (of course, with the Wind Waker in-game, we know it holds more power or something other than the triforce). The power of the gods is merely a descriptive phrase and seems to be used as a specific and general reference (the specific being the triforce and the general being just the broad stuff like Zephos' or Cyclos' power of the winds). Have at it folks.

And just as a little (and more than likely negligible) observation: The wind waker was used as a conducting baton and in TP we see the decrepit ruins of what appears to be an amphitheater....good day!

[NM87]

As a metaphor.

In America - not in Japan.

The Triforce really isn't important to TP.

We weren't talking about the Triforce, we were talking about the Sacred Realm, which is important in the story.

Just like it anecdote'd the actions of the ancient hero, who frankly I'm not convinced exists.

Even though a skeleton appears and states he accepted life as the hero.

Of course the power of the gods slumbers in Hyrule, and the three chosen ones receive the power of the gods, but not in the form of the Triforce.

Nice fact?

The Triforce contains the power of the gods, albeit a small fraction, which it symbolizes that power. Its essence is the power of the gods not the artifact itself. Zelda mentioning the power of the gods means she is referencing the Triforce's symbol and what it stands for as the power of the gods, not that she is talking about the artifact. "The power of the gods was said to slumber here", which it is, the power. TP makes plenty of signs toward the mere power of the gods, not the actual Triforce. ALTTP makes clear that the people wouln't want the Triforce if it was a mere symbol, they discover it contains the gods power and search for that.

[LionHarted]

In America - not in Japan.

Are you Japanese?

We weren't talking about the Triforce, we were talking about the Sacred Realm, which is important in the story.

Jumbie has concluded that it apparently isn't.

Even though a skeleton appears and states he accepted life as the hero.

Doesn't mean he ever actually DID anything.

The Triforce contains the power of the gods, albeit a small fraction, which it symbolizes that power. Its essence is the power of the gods not the artifact itself. Zelda mentioning the power of the gods means she is referencing the Triforce's symbol and what it stands for as the power of the gods, not that she is talking about the artifact. "The power of the gods was said to slumber here", which it is, the power. TP makes plenty of signs toward the mere power of the gods, not the actual Triforce. ALTTP makes clear that the people wouln't want the Triforce if it was a mere symbol, they discover it contains the gods power and search for that.

Possessing the power of the gods means you possess the Triforce within you. (Citation: OoT and TWW)

[Raien]

Possessing the power of the gods means you possess the Triforce within you. (Citation: OoT and TWW)

So Link must possess the Triforce before acquiring the Triforce of Courage because he possesses the power of the gods with the Wind Waker (Citation: TWW).

[LionHarted]

So Link must possess the Triforce before acquiring the Triforce of Courage because he possesses the power of the gods with the Wind Waker (Citation: TWW).

Clearly I have already distinguished between the Wind Waker and the Triforce. If you will continue to refuse to acknowledge this you can only expect your credibility to continue to slide.

[Raien]

Clearly I have already distinguished between the Wind Waker and the Triforce. If you will continue to refuse to acknowledge this you can only expect your credibility to continue to slide.

My point is that the outside context, not the actual term "power of the gods", distinguishes the Triforce from the Wind Waker. I've just never seen you acknowledge the point, so I'm going to harp on until you do. If there ever again comes a time when "power of the gods" appears without the crests or the "slumbers in Hyrule" line, then you will have difficulty asserting that "power of the gods" means the Triforce in that context.

[LionHarted]

My point is that the outside context, not the actual term "power of the gods", distinguishes the Triforce from the Wind Waker. I've just never seen you acknowledge the point, so I'm going to harp on until you do.

Actually, the fact that the Wind Waker has nothing to do with crests distinguishes the Triforce from the Wind Waker, regardless of the other context.

If there ever again comes a time when "power of the gods" appears without the crests or the "slumbers in Hyrule" line, then you will have difficulty asserting that "power of the gods" means the Triforce in that context.

Certainly because we're talking about TP I'm obviously talking about the context of the crests and nothing else.