Active Users:1010 Time:19/12/2024 06:37:48 AM
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 1129 Views
Numbers - 01/12/2010 04:09:02 PM 651 Views
Re: / Theory - Decline in the number of chanellers - 01/12/2010 07:55:42 PM 1014 Views
Re: / Theory - Decline in the number of chanellers - 01/12/2010 09:14:48 PM 876 Views
Thank god for that - 01/12/2010 09:35:22 PM 662 Views
Partly correct. - 02/12/2010 04:40:13 PM 723 Views
Why do we have stronger channelers now? - 02/12/2010 04:50:18 PM 571 Views
you'd think the Seanchan would have even lower numbers of channellers - 02/12/2010 05:13:36 PM 639 Views
Maybe over time - 02/12/2010 07:24:08 PM 494 Views
The consolidation only ended (relatively) recently though - 03/12/2010 02:49:22 AM 613 Views
yes and no - 04/12/2010 02:20:13 PM 608 Views
Re: yes and no - 04/12/2010 03:06:10 PM 560 Views
Not so, common folk don't trust Wilders either... - 04/12/2010 03:16:40 PM 709 Views
Re: Not so, common folk don't trust Wilders either... - 05/12/2010 04:17:40 PM 551 Views
Don't mistake Wilders with women like Sharina - 05/12/2010 04:27:45 PM 573 Views
Re: Don't mistake Wilders with women like Sharina - 06/12/2010 04:23:52 PM 495 Views
none of the others could actively channel. - 06/12/2010 04:34:31 PM 729 Views

Reply to Message