Active Users:1105 Time:14/11/2024 06:03:21 AM
Re: "Three shall be one" ... Datakim Send a noteboard - 12/07/2010 11:22:01 PM

That's true, but usually when a character misinterprets something, it's just a brief thought (maybe a paragraph), like when Elaida misinterprets her Foretellings, or when Rand misinterpreted (I assume) that LTT was the person he was to merge with.

In this case, an entire scene was devoted to Min & Cadsuane discussing the prophecy, which I think makes it far more likely to be the correct interpretation.


Just because more time was spent on the prophecy does not necessarily mean that the interpretation of the characters is anymore accurate. Ultimately we will just have to wait and see.


If, in the scenario you described, Rand was the one channeling through Callandor, then I'm not sure the circle would protect him. But if the other man were, say, Narishma, and Narishma held Callandor while Rand lead the circle and channeled through him, that should be "safe", I would think. I don't know ... I guess there's something about the lack of buffer that makes it necessary for a woman to lead the link. Still, it wouldn't have to be 2 women and 1 man. 3 women and 1 man would be OK, or any other circle that a woman could lead. *shrugs*


Good point about Rand not being the one using Callandor. Actually, that might explain the idea why women are "supposed" to be in control. I mean Cadsuane read about the flaw and the link solution in some old text right? So presumably those ancient AS who wrote that text would assume that the Dragon Reborn would be the only male channeler available due to the taint. They would not have predicted that Rand would create the Asha'man. And if the one who is holding Callandor cannot be the one to use it then by definition a woman would have to do the channeling if only a single male was available.

But maybe now that there are more males, Narishma could hold Callandor while in a link with Rand, and Rand will control the link and pull power through the link which makes it safe.


Maybe, but then you would think he'd have said something like "in most cases, angreals cannot be used with the TP", rather than provide a blanket answer that doesn't appear to allow for exceptions.


Except that if RJ had said that, he might aswell have openly said "Callandor is a TP angreal". If Callandor is completely unique then the general answer about angreal could well apply.


Yeah, I guess it could be that simple. Or maybe callandor can be used to amplify the ta'veren affect, which is crucial in defeating the Shadow? I don't see how, but that would at least fit with what I'm thinking.


I don't see how Callandor could be used for that to be honest. I mean all thats different with Callandor is that it lacks a buffer that prevents the user from drawing too much power. How would that suddenly allow for some ta'veren boost. I don't think there is anything to even suggest that ta'veren and OP are linked in that way.

I think just having all three ta'veren together will be sufficient as far as ta'veren is concerned and Callandor will be used for something else.
Reply to message
"Three shall be one" ... - 12/07/2010 05:14:43 PM 1229 Views
I like most of your conclusions - 12/07/2010 06:46:24 PM 586 Views
Re: I like most of your conclusions - 12/07/2010 07:00:25 PM 618 Views
Re: "Three shall be one" ... - 12/07/2010 07:52:28 PM 726 Views
Re: "Three shall be one" ... - 12/07/2010 10:24:29 PM 597 Views
Re: "Three shall be one" ... - 12/07/2010 11:22:01 PM 466 Views
There are rules about channeling - 16/07/2010 10:47:36 PM 462 Views
Option 6 - 12/07/2010 09:46:10 PM 507 Views
Heheh... "His blade of light" *NM* - 12/07/2010 10:57:43 PM 249 Views
Rand says to DO, "My Shwartz is bigger than yours!" *NM* - 13/07/2010 02:13:56 AM 208 Views
Another crazy idea - 12/07/2010 10:30:32 PM 481 Views
Yeah, he's already bonded to 4 people, so why not a couple more? - 12/07/2010 10:39:25 PM 489 Views
Re: Another crazy idea - 12/07/2010 11:10:00 PM 498 Views
Indeed - 13/07/2010 02:16:40 AM 490 Views
I like your style, but you discounted one possibility way too easily - 13/07/2010 01:27:31 AM 496 Views
Re: "Three shall be one" ... - 13/07/2010 04:06:09 AM 744 Views
Interesting ideas - 14/07/2010 06:35:21 PM 503 Views
I have the same comments/questions as entyti .. - 14/07/2010 07:07:53 PM 497 Views
It's a super vague Prophecy... - 13/07/2010 09:07:36 AM 647 Views
Re: "Three shall be one" ... - 14/07/2010 08:03:36 PM 468 Views
Why Egwene and Nynaeve? - 16/07/2010 10:48:24 PM 482 Views

Reply to Message