I agree with what was mentioned previously. Kellhus or any Dunyain cannot be smarter than their creator as all their thoughts are just inputs from their creator. However, if a Dunyain were to be dropped into our world, they would no longer be constricted by the creator's vision and would likely adapt in the way AI does, to the point that it outsmarts humans.

I think the Boy has one or two sections from his POV at the end of TGO. Otherwise, it seems right to me.

Feel free to add them to the wiki whenever you want to, it definitely needs more work and all help is appreciated.

I don't remember the Boy having a POV in TGO. I always thought it was Korringhus the whole way through, but I could be misremembering.

I noticed that the PON wiki doesn't have them up on it's page so I'd like to confirm them. I've already read the books, but I just want to make sure I didn't miss anything and maybe even add them to the Wiki in the future.

TGO:

Achamian
Mimara
Korringhus
Sorweel
Serwa
Proyas
Saubon
Kellhus
Esmenet
Kelmomas
Malowebi
Issiral (White Luck Warrior)

TUC:

Achamian
Mimara
Esmenet
Kelmomas
Sorweel
Proyas
Moenghus
Malowebi/Ciphrang
Serwa
Kalakiol (another Ciphrang)
Aurang
Cnaiur? (was that his POV at the end)
Sacarees? (Did we get his POV during the battle?)


Am I'm missing anything? I hope this topic is in the right forum as the books have been out for quite a while now.

All I can say is that I hope Bakker doesn't compromise his vision. If his intent is to give us a truly bleak ending, I hope he carries through with it.

Tolkien already wrote what could be described as the darkest work of fantasy so the notion isn't unprecedented. I'm talking about the Silmarillion and the events that transpire at the end of the First Age. Sure, it's not the ultimate endpoint, but it marks a major shift.

P.S.: Erikson's Kharkanas trilogy isn't cancelled. It's been put on hold till after the first Toblakai novel.

I'd hesitate to call Malazan similar to TSA on almost any metric. Loved the series, don't get me wrong, but other than both of them being fantasy war novels I'd say they are quite dissimilar, tbh. Plenty disagree though

They have some superficial similarities such as both having philosophical elements that spread throughout the series in addition to the focus on war. Theology plays a big role on both series, though the approach to divinity differs, with Malazan taking on a Silmarillion style.

Just for fun I think we can equate the following:

Cnaiur = Karsa (both of them are barbarians with a penchant for violence and an intellect that goes beyond what their station would suggest). Both also say "witness" 

Wracu = Eleint (Incredibly superficial since they both serve different purposes. The only real similarity is that both universes feature powerful  sentient dragons)

the Ark = Jade Statues?

No God = Crippled God
Outside (damnation) = Dragnipur (both are places of eternal torment)

Assassins Creed Origins. Very good. It’s like an egyptian witcher.

That's good to know. Most reviews praise the scope of the game with it's impressively designed world and superior quest design, but criticize the  RPG centric combat and the plethora of bugs.

Without giving anything away, what's the story like? Do we get taken out of the animus again? One thing I didn't like about the last few games was how the present storyline was neglected.

I really want to pick it up, but I'm unsure whether to get Origins or Shadow of War. Sure, they're both very different games, but they have some superficial similarities.

Yeah, what Red says - I highly recommend you don't look for the answers, the discovery in the reads in front of you is delightful ( er, at least for me ).

I'm so jealous, wish I were at your point in the read so I can experience it all over again.

But don't stop asking questions up to this point. The nice people haunting this forum helped me out big time back in the day.

 I figured as much. I’m avoiding spoilers as much as possible. I just wasn’t sure whether some of the things would be left vague intentionally.