Didn't Mat give him a route or something when he sent the junior foxhead?
Yeah, but that was because she exercised that brilliance off-screen. I also that her supposed greatness was another fake-out, since most of the specifics of her actions painted a picture of someone who ruled with her heart instead of her brain. A lot of what she did seems to be governed by sentimentality or emotion instead of law or pragmatism. I figured it was just one of those things Elayne kept harping on about giving a good impression when trying to win the throne herself: basicly, Morgase had managed to present the right image and impress people early on, so they ret-conned her as a great ruler to match the impression they had. So again, with the character-related reasons for calling it clever.

A better way to parse it would be that Sanderson describes people or manuevers as clever, whereas in the Jordan books, the characters are the ones who use that description, instead of the author. Jordan seldom gave such a subjective description except in the mouth or stream of consciousness of a character, whereas Sanderson does so as part of the general descriptions that are supposed to be taken as objective fact.

Completely. Leigh Butler, in the Tor.com re-read, also compared Jordan and Sanderson as products of their generations, claiming that younger writers are heavily influenced by the faster-paced forms of popular entertainment, citing blockbuster action movies as an example. It might not be that he wants to write movies, as that he thinks of movies as a disproportionately important example of storytelling.

Exactly. That applies across the board for a lot of issues on WoT, especially ones where fans keep getting persnicketty about details and precision. Who's stronger in the Power than who, and who's the better swordsman are details on the same level of importance as how the Third Battalion of the Sixth Banner of Cavalary flanked the enemy to draw off the pressure on the Fourth Regiment of Royal Pikemen's advance in echelon. As RJ said, he keeps a list of who's stronger than who, not because it matters to the outcome of any battle, but just so he remembers which Aes Sedai should defer to which sister, and how the strength of a novice, Accepted, Windfinder, Wise One, wilder or freed damane will affect a particular Aes Sedai's reactions and behavior towards that channeler. Character, not tactics.

Since increasing strength in the Power does not bring greater Hit Points, all that matters is whether or not either channeler has sufficient strength to kill a human being. If yes, all that matters is finding a way to bring it to bear, which is all about the situation, and completely unrelated factors. Osan'gar did not die because his adversaries were linked in a circle of three with an enormously powerful sa'angreal, he died because he forgot to check six, not being accustomed to the environment or front line combat in general. These are details of characterization, not the nerdy little aspects of the Power strength system.

Terry Goodkind also said something related when claiming he doesn't write fantasy. According him, "fantasy" as a genre is about those nerdy details, and when he is writing, the magic in his books is only about how it affects the characters and their choices and development. And he has a point - fairy tales, for instance, are short on character. The real star of "Cinderella" is the spell that provides her ball gear.

If you want the tactics and such, you go read military fiction. WoT is a story about people in a gender-twisted society, dealing with the end of days and the difference between reality and belief. There are battles and magic, because those are factors that act on the characters and inform their choices, but those are not what the story is about.

And it did - I sped-read through that part to find out what happened, even as I appreciated the details. I actually like the military and fighting things, but in WoT or aSoI&F, that's not why you read those stories. The details and realism enhance your appreciation of the stakes, but they are best left in their proper place. I don't Sanderson ever got a hang of what exactly those limits were in WoT.

I've pretty much made my peace with his shortcomings in that department, even if I do still rail against them from time to time, but my clenched fist, crying to the heavens "Damn you, Sanderson!" these days is more regret for the circumstances that caused this to come to pass, rather than blaming him for not being up to the task. I'd really rather not have had to wait to get a better aMoL as a 40th birthday present, when I started the series as a teenager.

Yeah, I agree. "Oh the Aiel all went off to Thankandar to watch Rand's back" doesn't really stand up to close examination. And yeah, I remember wondering at times where this "Wolf Guard" had come about, before I recalled that it was Perrin's little band of buddies that originated in tSR. The way that name was tossed around in the battle scenes, it didn't fit a bunch of country boys with bows and some scrounged or inherited pieces of armor.

I wonder if that was supposed to be another one of those things about where legends come from. Maybe there was supposed to be something in the book or epilogue or whatever about the Fourth Age recalling the mythical bands of heroes who played an important part in Tarmon Gaidon, like "the Children of the Light, shining paladins of justice, the Band of the Red Hand, whose superweapons were the marvel of the Age and the mighty warriors of the Wolf Guard." When of course, the reality is a bunch of Perrin-groupies who happened to be born in the one place where they grew up weilding the deadliest pre-industrial weapons known to man. And maybe Sanderson misread the notes or hints.

I think he had to fill in a lot of blanks RJ left in his notes on the dispositions of troops and people, because for RJ thinks like "Tairens, Domani & Aiel with Rand, under Ituralde & channelers with Aviendha" is sufficient. HE knew what it means, after all, and maybe Sanderson took it too literally, or not being sure exactly what RJ's notes about the Companions or Defenders meant, just glossed over that. After all, there are no major Tairen or Illianer PoV characters (or ones associated with the armies of those countries), so the troops with a closer association with Perrin or Mat or Rand or Galad (and thus character significance) would have been mentioned a lot more. Also RJ had always been careful to specify when Seanchan soldiers were local auxiliaries from Tarabon or Altara or Amadicia, but Sanderson seems to be thinking of the Seanchan as relatively homogenous, and I don't recall too much mention of those soldiers from subordinate nations.

Again, I'd guess that maybe RJ knew how he'd write it, but his notes just said that she dies at such and such a point, and B-Sand was like "Uh, okay..."