Active Users:636 Time:23/12/2024 06:40:44 AM
Re: That isn't needed... DomA Send a noteboard - 19/09/2010 10:06:21 PM
The way the Oath is phrased, all you need is the intention that the weapon will not be used to kill men. And Aes Sedai have been getting over other Oaths often enough.


But they believe this one, the oldest, cannot be cheated. It's also the one oath Aes Sedai respect both in letter and spirit.

Unlike the other, it doesn't even have the "DF" loophole.

Verin and Alanna could make exploding stones because each of those they needed to channel to make, and they had the Shadowspawn armies right in front of them. They knew none of those stones would kill humans (they could kill DF with the OP, but they couldn't make weapons for the men operating the catapults to kill any), and they left none behind as they made them one by one and launched each.

No Aes Sedai could be so self-delusional to convince herself that if she makes a weapon for others, there's no possibility that weapon will ever be used against humans. What if there are dreadlords or DF among the Shadospawn? What if the weapon gets stolen? What if one of the soldier is a DF and turn it against people? No Aes Sedai could make abstraction of all the possibilities and channel to make such a weapon. Elayne would not do it, on principle alone.

Aes Sedai are limited to make weapons they operate themselves, and that leave nothing behind afterward which could betray the Oath.

That's the one oath which seems "full proof" in its goal of preventing the Aes Sedai from making weaponry for any war, and that's probably because it was introduced so early the Aes Sedai still knew how to properly design Oaths on a binder back then. Not only that, but the people themselves probably still knew enough to see the loopholes if there were any... It's the most restraining of the three Oaths, by a long shot. The second about not using the OP as a weapon is already less well designed, and the third and latest is largely a sham and PR stunt. The first Oath wasn't. It was genuine.





This message last edited by DomA on 19/09/2010 at 10:09:19 PM
Reply to message
Elayne+Aludra+Setalle= ter'angreal Dragons? - 18/09/2010 04:38:11 AM 1497 Views
Re: Elayne+Aludra+Setalle= ter'angreal Dragons? - 18/09/2010 06:40:13 AM 583 Views
I agree. She couldn't make them if she was oath bound. *NM* - 18/09/2010 06:53:24 AM 195 Views
Re: I agree. She couldn't make them if she was oath bound. - 18/09/2010 01:43:50 PM 578 Views
Nope - 18/09/2010 02:06:55 PM 461 Views
Read the Oaths again... - 18/09/2010 03:25:52 PM 581 Views
Are they magical weapons that only kill Trollocs, then? - 18/09/2010 03:46:52 PM 493 Views
That isn't needed... - 18/09/2010 03:48:35 PM 542 Views
Re: That isn't needed... - 19/09/2010 10:06:21 PM 579 Views
No. It would defeat their thematic purpose. *NM* - 18/09/2010 06:51:19 PM 199 Views
Re: No. It would defeat their thematic purpose. - 18/09/2010 07:15:02 PM 503 Views

Reply to Message