And why would Sammael tell a lie that they could disprove without his help? All they would have had to do is induce Rand to swear and prove him wrong, which would be fatal to his hopes to use them to get control over Rand for his purposes. If he did think it might work on Rand, he would never have given them the Rod for the same reason Graendal preemptively refuses to train Someryn. At the least he would have hedged it with BS proscriptions and conditions like he told them for the "nar'baha." He could have told them something like "the feedback/backlash will kill anyone nearby" or something similar to dissuade them from trying it. He would not have chanced Rand ending up in the control of others who had ways of getting in touch with him.
Aes Sedai haven't shown much interest in experimenting with ter'angreal.
Why would they have made different binders for men and women in the AoL?
Sammael promised something else that would control Rand, giving them no real reason to try the Oath Rod on him. Also, given his trick with the Traveling boxes I doubt he thought they'd ever have a chance to get to Rand.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
Could the Oath Rod have been used on tainted men in the AoL?
- 01/10/2010 07:32:02 AM
896 Views
the oath rod requires comprehension to make it work
- 01/10/2010 08:18:58 AM
619 Views
Remind me some time to show you how to post something so long no one will read it. 
- 01/10/2010 09:46:46 AM
501 Views
- 01/10/2010 09:46:46 AM
501 Views
They could just be forced to take an oath to never touch the OP again.
- 03/10/2010 01:23:27 AM
513 Views
Re: They could just be forced to take an oath to never touch the OP again.
- 03/10/2010 02:12:43 AM
510 Views
Re: They could just be forced to take an oath to never touch the OP again.
- 05/10/2010 04:53:46 AM
479 Views
My bet is it would just kill them quicker.
- 01/10/2010 09:49:25 AM
601 Views
that was two oaths in contradiction though, i think that's different
- 01/10/2010 10:06:08 AM
479 Views
Right, because they had the physical capacity to resist channeling, at least for a while.
- 01/10/2010 10:42:00 AM
461 Views
Did ANY of you recall that IT DOES NOT WORK ON MEN?
- 01/10/2010 11:43:34 AM
562 Views
*NM*
just cause Sammael said that, doesn't make it true *NM*
- 02/10/2010 09:44:17 PM
197 Views
Do you REALLY think that with all the Tower's experiments on linking, they never tried it on men?
- 02/10/2010 10:11:11 PM
483 Views
yes
- 04/10/2010 02:16:52 AM
539 Views
Re: yes
- 04/10/2010 05:06:34 AM
481 Views
there are several ter'angreal that work for both men and women
- 05/10/2010 04:28:01 AM
488 Views
Re: there are several ter'angreal that work for both men and women
- 05/10/2010 04:36:04 PM
473 Views
Surely there must have been male oath rods *NM*
- 03/10/2010 10:37:57 AM
256 Views
Doubtful
- 07/10/2010 12:40:52 AM
491 Views
No. Balthamel was threatened with binding in the AoL. There was a binder of some kind *NM*
- 07/10/2010 01:35:23 AM
247 Views