Linda wrote a really good entry for this on her page.
RJ's 21 level scale was primarily used to keep track of the Aes Sedai pecking order. This wasn't actually meant to accurately depict Nynaeve's real strength compared to Lanfear. Outliers are not present in any way besides placeholding on that 21 level list - because it doesn't really mean anything concrete. It was made by RJ to primarily keep track of deference, not absolute strength.
Thus, because the 21 level list was primarily used for weaker character, it makes sense that RJ imposed this list on the overall bell curve distribution in theory, because the 21 level list was just a way of getting at a subset of the population and it was all relative, anyway, so you could take members of the population present in that list, and place them in the overall bell curve. Being at the topmost level on the 21 level list, in other words, did not mean that some random character out there was much stronger than you. It merely meant that you had not met that stronger person, thus they were not present in the list.
RJ's 21 level scale was primarily used to keep track of the Aes Sedai pecking order. This wasn't actually meant to accurately depict Nynaeve's real strength compared to Lanfear. Outliers are not present in any way besides placeholding on that 21 level list - because it doesn't really mean anything concrete. It was made by RJ to primarily keep track of deference, not absolute strength.
The scale is not a firm indicator of the outcomes of duels. Jordan used the list mainly for ranking the average to weaker channellers: "I have said that in my notes I have such a scale that I use to keep track of everyone, but its main use is for the lesser characters, in particular Aes Sedai, so that I can check on who should defer to whom, who should only listen a little more attentively to whom, and so forth."
- Robert Jordan on his blog
- Robert Jordan on his blog
Thus, because the 21 level list was primarily used for weaker character, it makes sense that RJ imposed this list on the overall bell curve distribution in theory, because the 21 level list was just a way of getting at a subset of the population and it was all relative, anyway, so you could take members of the population present in that list, and place them in the overall bell curve. Being at the topmost level on the 21 level list, in other words, did not mean that some random character out there was much stronger than you. It merely meant that you had not met that stronger person, thus they were not present in the list.
Exactly. The way Jordan phrases it, there are more Aes Sedai in the 21 level list than there would be if the 21 levels were evenly spread out over the whole strength scale (1-100 or 45-85784, makes no difference, they're randomly assigned values). Which is why I'm arguing that it makes no sense to have the 21 levels as the X-axis of the bell curve. Not only is it not a steady progression, its a bunch of discrete values, so a normal distribution over it is not possible.
It's apples and oranges. The bell curve is supposed to represent all possible reflections of strength, while the 21 level list was used as a means of keeping track who was stronger than who among the introduced characters. I have a ruler. I can use it to measure things between 0.1 inch and a foot. I cannot use it to measure anything above a foot, because that was not the purpose of its' design. The purpose of the 21 level list was made to keep track of a social hierarchy, not an absolute value measurable in the real world.
So, yes, strength falls along a bell curve. No, the 21 level list doesn't represent that bell curve. You can impose the 21 level list on the curve to get an idea over where particular members stood in the grand scheme of things, but the 21 level list does not conform in a 1 to 1 relationship absolute values of strength.
So, yes, strength falls along a bell curve. No, the 21 level list doesn't represent that bell curve. You can impose the 21 level list on the curve to get an idea over where particular members stood in the grand scheme of things, but the 21 level list does not conform in a 1 to 1 relationship absolute values of strength.
Exactly what I'm saying RPA. The way I see it, the Aes Sedai have a fairly small range of strength (because they exclude people below a certain strength scale, and also because they haven't had many strong channelers come to them), where quite a few of the 21 levels are represented because the AS seem a lot more prone to look at strength differences. The levels occupied by the Aes Sedai might differe by no more that 2-.2.5 units in a 1-100 scale, yet at the upper levels, the jumps might be around 5 units. Thus, LTT and Ishy at 100, Aginor at 99 and Demandred at 98 can all be considered more or less the same strength. No one up there really cares, because that one unit of strength doesn't matter at all. Frankly, I think if one takes into account skills and Talents, anyone from 70-100 should be able to challenge each other, and the battle wouldn't be a write off.
And I don't think strength means much anyway. You have multiple examples of "weaker" channelers with Talents that can outstrip certain things a stronger channeler can do, and stronger channelers that can't match the skills of weaker ones. Sex itself can determine how good you are at certain feats, so there are things that a Talent might make you truly exceptional at among the population as a whole (blocking gateways seems to be one of them).
Well, exactly. Which is why I'm so hesitant to place Aes Sedai so low on the strength scale. Previous lists out them from 8-25. Which means 37.5% of the population that cannot be Aes Sedai is ranging in strength from 1-8, which is fairly senseless.
Several good MAFOs from Dragonmount
10/06/2010 07:07:55 PM
- 2200 Views
Maria's answer to question 20 is ground-breaking!
10/06/2010 07:36:40 PM
- 1125 Views
No, it merely means that the Bell Curve does not refer to absolute strength...
10/06/2010 07:42:31 PM
- 1002 Views
See the question again man!
10/06/2010 07:48:57 PM
- 962 Views
That contradicts your assertion that Moiraine is stronger than the average woman...
10/06/2010 07:50:11 PM
- 1039 Views
I need to re-evaluate nothing!
10/06/2010 07:46:20 PM
- 974 Views
Think logically for a moment...
10/06/2010 07:49:10 PM
- 819 Views
Who said Egwene is twice as strong as Moiraine?
10/06/2010 07:52:27 PM
- 1064 Views
Aviendha did in FoH...
10/06/2010 07:54:32 PM
- 820 Views
Nope!
10/06/2010 07:55:55 PM
- 982 Views
Your quotes are faulty
10/06/2010 07:57:18 PM
- 995 Views
In what sense though?
10/06/2010 07:59:00 PM
- 985 Views
Forkroot
10/06/2010 08:04:50 PM
- 920 Views
Again... later that night?
10/06/2010 08:05:39 PM
- 767 Views
What do you mean?
10/06/2010 08:07:24 PM
- 971 Views
See below...
10/06/2010 08:11:24 PM
- 885 Views
Re: See below...
10/06/2010 08:12:34 PM
- 931 Views
I just did.
10/06/2010 08:16:09 PM
- 749 Views
Well then we disagree
10/06/2010 08:18:10 PM
- 948 Views
BUT WHAT ABOUT LATER IN THE NIGHT!
10/06/2010 08:20:21 PM
- 799 Views
Ah, you mean later later ...
10/06/2010 08:29:59 PM
- 893 Views
Forkroot wears off, you know?
10/06/2010 08:45:33 PM
- 993 Views
Yes I know
10/06/2010 09:05:29 PM
- 984 Views
I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:17:10 PM
- 971 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:37:39 PM
- 963 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:51:40 PM
- 898 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 10:05:37 PM
- 927 Views
Are you sure you're feeling fine?
10/06/2010 10:18:44 PM
- 993 Views
RJ writes that Amys cannot hold Egwene. BS writes that Barasene can. Who are you gonna believe?
10/06/2010 08:31:35 PM
- 811 Views
It wasn't BS... both were RJ!
10/06/2010 08:41:54 PM
- 890 Views
In that case, there is no problem...
10/06/2010 08:45:05 PM
- 859 Views
But that isn't what the text says...
10/06/2010 08:57:42 PM
- 769 Views
How can Egwene be strong enough to overcome Katerine and Silviana together then?
10/06/2010 09:07:36 PM
- 971 Views
Yeah, both were RJ
10/06/2010 08:49:13 PM
- 878 Views
Yeah yeah... RJ lied, Maria lied. Only you make sense. I'm finished with this debate.
10/06/2010 08:59:06 PM
- 976 Views
10/06/2010 09:07:52 PM
- 947 Views
Really?
10/06/2010 09:29:22 PM
- 826 Views
Re: Really?
10/06/2010 09:39:21 PM
- 932 Views
Here's what is clear:
10/06/2010 09:02:41 PM
- 864 Views
IMO it's easy to disprove
10/06/2010 09:22:23 PM
- 853 Views
Dude...
10/06/2010 09:27:34 PM
- 772 Views
At least we agree on one thing
10/06/2010 09:29:14 PM
- 864 Views
yet 4 women can still hold Rand in LoC ... he can't break the Shield until it's down to 3
13/06/2010 12:47:43 PM
- 703 Views
Have to agree with Sidious on this point
11/06/2010 02:49:58 AM
- 806 Views
The rate forkroot wears off?
16/06/2010 12:36:38 PM
- 907 Views
You missed that she isn't being given Forkroot at night at all!
16/06/2010 04:47:59 PM
- 824 Views
Maria's other answer adresses this...
10/06/2010 08:14:54 PM
- 701 Views
Then one Aes Sedai cannot shield her. But one did.
10/06/2010 08:16:41 PM
- 835 Views
You can be much weaker than someone, and hold them shielded, if they are already cut off...
10/06/2010 08:19:15 PM
- 800 Views
But, if you are much stronger, you can break that shield...
10/06/2010 08:22:25 PM
- 814 Views
Easy...
10/06/2010 08:24:59 PM
- 781 Views
What has that got to do with it?
10/06/2010 08:32:56 PM
- 964 Views
Amys is not LESS than half of Egwene's strength. You cannot hold someone if you are LESS than half..
10/06/2010 08:47:41 PM
- 869 Views
Amys is as strong as Moiraine, at the most one level lower. Barasine is weaker than Katarine, who...
10/06/2010 09:00:26 PM
- 1012 Views
I can agree with that.
10/06/2010 09:09:07 PM
- 770 Views
...
10/06/2010 09:12:21 PM
- 752 Views
Agreed, but...
10/06/2010 09:13:59 PM
- 925 Views
Re: Agreed, but...
10/06/2010 09:16:30 PM
- 722 Views
Good point...
10/06/2010 09:18:53 PM
- 941 Views
Or, you know, you can have the grace to question your antiquated strength list...
10/06/2010 09:22:51 PM
- 809 Views
I'd be perfectly happy to adjust my list if it made sense
10/06/2010 09:32:35 PM
- 743 Views
Uhhh?
10/06/2010 09:41:59 PM
- 756 Views
Re: Uhhh?
10/06/2010 09:48:58 PM
- 757 Views
DUDE!
10/06/2010 09:58:59 PM
- 784 Views
Rand seems to shield Egwene and Elayne TOGETHER, pretty easily...
10/06/2010 09:54:03 PM
- 1346 Views
That's fairly simple, actually...
10/06/2010 10:08:53 PM
- 980 Views
Nope. Rand was also cut off from the Source when he broke a shield held by 3 Aes Sedai...
10/06/2010 11:18:41 PM
- 958 Views
Because that channeler is much stronger? I'm not getting your confusion here. *NM*
10/06/2010 11:27:31 PM
- 470 Views
Your Aes Sedai are close to the average woman in strength, right...
10/06/2010 11:42:01 PM
- 1008 Views
No, here's the quote: I hate having to pull out my books with their yellowed pages...
10/06/2010 08:01:54 PM
- 801 Views
Why would she need surprise against two? That was against five of them...
10/06/2010 08:04:57 PM
- 817 Views
Very poor evidence
10/06/2010 08:11:26 PM
- 923 Views
no she said Egwene is stronger than Amys and Melaine combined
11/06/2010 12:46:29 AM
- 874 Views
The actual quote says Amys and Melaine combined...
11/06/2010 12:25:07 PM
- 931 Views
Here's the problem with that...
11/06/2010 12:42:41 PM
- 783 Views
I think you are misreading her.
10/06/2010 07:47:06 PM
- 724 Views
Please explain what you mean by "channeler" and "power" distribution. *NM*
10/06/2010 09:23:36 PM
- 507 Views
Re: Please explain what you mean by "channeler" and "power" distribution.
10/06/2010 10:11:23 PM
- 964 Views
Yes. You can't extrapolate a generalized macro level scale to micro level individuals.
11/06/2010 12:16:24 AM
- 810 Views
I don't agree
10/06/2010 07:49:41 PM
- 795 Views
BAH! Its infuriating how you have so many blinders... Eerily Aes Sedai of you.
10/06/2010 07:54:23 PM
- 900 Views
Hmm...
10/06/2010 07:55:59 PM
- 713 Views
Because of the question to which she responded...
10/06/2010 07:57:55 PM
- 754 Views
Re: Because of the question to which she responded...
10/06/2010 08:06:16 PM
- 883 Views
Without contradicting the latter...
10/06/2010 08:15:11 PM
- 785 Views
Ah well
10/06/2010 08:20:32 PM
- 750 Views
Great! Two of my OP strength ideas have been solidified!
10/06/2010 07:39:53 PM
- 1004 Views
Nope...
10/06/2010 07:46:31 PM
- 856 Views
Who said Cadsuane was 50?
10/06/2010 07:51:14 PM
- 888 Views
So how can Egwene be twice as strong as Moiraine, if Moiraine is at 55?
10/06/2010 07:53:11 PM
- 759 Views
She cannot be because she isn't. Silviana can shield Egwene alone, for God's sake. So can Amys!
10/06/2010 07:56:26 PM
- 699 Views
Amys can't hold her properly
10/06/2010 07:59:47 PM
- 727 Views
What about later that night?
10/06/2010 08:02:16 PM
- 720 Views
No she didn't
16/06/2010 03:02:21 PM
- 853 Views
No she didn't what?
16/06/2010 04:46:05 PM
- 908 Views
Re: No she didn't what?
17/06/2010 06:16:16 AM
- 741 Views
Why do you think it's a linear scale?
16/06/2010 05:25:56 AM
- 873 Views
That's simple...
16/06/2010 06:36:44 AM
- 826 Views
Re: That's simple...
16/06/2010 12:27:07 PM
- 773 Views
Your concept is not mathematically right. So yeah, forget discussing it.
16/06/2010 04:41:13 PM
- 964 Views
Dang, Cyndane isn't using Cabriana's body.
10/06/2010 08:25:20 PM
- 806 Views
The blue flash RAFO irritates me- I can't see how that will be relevant. The Min thing was new
10/06/2010 08:50:52 PM
- 943 Views
RJ already RAFOed the incident with Thom's knives/daggers before
10/06/2010 08:57:52 PM
- 1021 Views
It isn't, unless she's implying the Creator helped him out or some other such thing
11/06/2010 12:56:49 AM
- 775 Views
Just to make things clear on the strength thing...
10/06/2010 09:08:02 PM
- 1053 Views
It is possible Maria was answering the first question and ignoring the second...
10/06/2010 09:29:59 PM
- 781 Views
That still proves my point...
10/06/2010 09:33:10 PM
- 956 Views
Re: That still proves my point...
10/06/2010 09:45:39 PM
- 809 Views
Then why...
10/06/2010 10:00:00 PM
- 901 Views
Re: Then why...
10/06/2010 10:07:56 PM
- 770 Views
God, what stupidity!
10/06/2010 10:10:32 PM
- 767 Views
Re: God, what stupidity!
10/06/2010 10:16:38 PM
- 875 Views
It doesn't have to be 1-100.
10/06/2010 10:32:17 PM
- 829 Views
Re: It doesn't have to be 1-100.
10/06/2010 10:41:02 PM
- 1094 Views
That's a mathematical impossibility...
10/06/2010 11:26:23 PM
- 918 Views
Just popping in. I think you're arguing over non-existent delineations.
11/06/2010 12:44:40 AM
- 858 Views
You're pretty much agreeing with me, you know?
11/06/2010 12:32:44 PM
- 824 Views
You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 12:25:05 AM
- 845 Views
Re: You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 03:22:53 AM
- 963 Views
Re: You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 12:29:37 PM
- 889 Views
I agree
11/06/2010 01:14:36 PM
- 1006 Views
Re: I agree
12/06/2010 03:02:32 PM
- 787 Views
BS didn't answer with "Read and find out"
12/06/2010 03:28:05 PM
- 816 Views
We were speaking about Maria giving a RAFO on the topic, not Sanderson. *NM*
13/06/2010 12:05:17 AM
- 482 Views
Actually she said "No"... *NM*
13/06/2010 01:06:18 AM
- 574 Views
I'll rephrase then. It was about Maria saying that she considered giving a RAFO on the question.
13/06/2010 01:44:19 AM
- 818 Views
Eh, practically useless.
14/06/2010 11:50:06 PM
- 791 Views
I agree. I think she is saving the good stuff for the encyclopedia. *NM*
15/06/2010 04:17:07 PM
- 454 Views
Yeah. I do think she's taking advantage of these poor saps, though.
17/06/2010 03:52:33 PM
- 1358 Views