Active Users:727 Time:15/11/2024 04:15:33 PM
Thank god for that redqueen Send a noteboard - 01/12/2010 09:35:22 PM
1400 out of how many millions they should find? If there are 10 million people in the wetlands, there should be at least 300,000 channelers. The Towers combined, along with the Kin and various rare wilders and the extrapolated numbers from their recruiting do not suggest nearly that amount. While you are right that they are not recruiting to their full potential, the numbers that should be occurring naturally are still too small. At one time, their passive approach to recruiting and restrictive age limits was sufficient to get the numbers they needed, but the channeling population has since declined, so the numbers and strength that wandered into their nets are no longer matching what they did in the past.


There's no point trying to understand the genetics, or evolution, of channeling. It doesn't make any sense. Even with a 75% fatality rate among untrained sparkers - 87.5% if you consider tainted saidin fatal - channelers should far and away out-compete non-channelers. They live centuries, and the Power makes you orders of magnitude more efficient at everything. They ought to be winning every fight, leading every tribe, and having far and away the most children. I have seen no convincing reason why channelers have not ended up ruling every society and nation they live in, except that they are too few, or too disorganised.

But lets be grateful that for some reason there really aren't three hundred thousand channelers in Randland. The place would be a blasted nuclear wasteland in half a century, with all the wars that keep being fought. Maybe that's why the Breaking of the World was so cataclysmic - after centuries and centuries of peace and much technological advancement, populations were much higher than they have ever been since, channelers included.
Reply to message
/ Theory - Decline in the number of chanellers - 01/12/2010 02:24:23 PM 1122 Views
Numbers - 01/12/2010 04:09:02 PM 642 Views
Re: / Theory - Decline in the number of chanellers - 01/12/2010 07:55:42 PM 1004 Views
Re: / Theory - Decline in the number of chanellers - 01/12/2010 09:14:48 PM 871 Views
Thank god for that - 01/12/2010 09:35:22 PM 651 Views
Partly correct. - 02/12/2010 04:40:13 PM 711 Views
Why do we have stronger channelers now? - 02/12/2010 04:50:18 PM 564 Views
you'd think the Seanchan would have even lower numbers of channellers - 02/12/2010 05:13:36 PM 628 Views
Maybe over time - 02/12/2010 07:24:08 PM 483 Views
The consolidation only ended (relatively) recently though - 03/12/2010 02:49:22 AM 604 Views
yes and no - 04/12/2010 02:20:13 PM 595 Views
Re: yes and no - 04/12/2010 03:06:10 PM 552 Views
Not so, common folk don't trust Wilders either... - 04/12/2010 03:16:40 PM 696 Views
Re: Not so, common folk don't trust Wilders either... - 05/12/2010 04:17:40 PM 540 Views
Don't mistake Wilders with women like Sharina - 05/12/2010 04:27:45 PM 566 Views
Re: Don't mistake Wilders with women like Sharina - 06/12/2010 04:23:52 PM 482 Views
none of the others could actively channel. - 06/12/2010 04:34:31 PM 719 Views

Reply to Message