Active Users:1101 Time:22/11/2024 11:59:18 PM
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! benxtaron Send a noteboard - 05/12/2010 08:32:50 AM
The oath against using the OP as a weapon should have prevented Elaida or any captive Aes Sedai from showing the Seanchan Travelling.

Elaida KNEW what they would do with Travelling, that they would use it to KILL and there is NO WAY they could have possibly made her believe they were going to use it for benign purposes. You can give a hundred excuses for it, but an Aes Sedai who is still bound by the Three Oaths can NOT channel ANY weave that she thinks could be used to kill someone UNLESS in the last defense of her life. Elaida's life was not in danger. Maybe torture as a damane, yes, but they werent about to kill her so she should not have been able to circumvent the Oath.

Teaching dangerous weaves to other Aes Sedai is NOT the same, as the teacher can truthfully believe that the Novice or Accepted she is teaching will not use it to kill unless she also is threatened in her life. The same rule doesnt apply to the Seanchan. Non BA Aes Sedai should not be able to teach the Seanchan dangerous weaves.

We know for a FACT that Aes Sedai captured already have proven that they COULD NOT form weaves to kill. ie they could not hurl fireballs or earth tremors or whatever, and the Seanchan even commented that they were useless for battle. The same principle should hold for Elaida, her most of all. of the captured Aes Sedai.

I feel like this was written so we could see Elaida again, and to get the Seanchan to use Travelling of course, but there should have been some other way it was done. Maybe in front of Elaida refusing to teach it, an Accepted who saw it done is forced to show it. It just shouldnt have been an Aes Sedai to do it.


This is the woman who drove the Aes Sedai into the ground; who is selfish, arrogant, brash, and the closest thing to evil that isn't connected to the DO. She has used the power before for unwarranted violence, so I doubt she has enough morales to care about her actions.
Reply to message
Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 04/12/2010 06:38:22 AM 1956 Views
The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 06:54:20 AM 875 Views
Re: The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 07:08:50 AM 787 Views
Wrong for two reasons - 04/12/2010 09:10:03 AM 945 Views
Only two? Usually he's wrong for eight reasons. *NM* - 04/12/2010 09:47:37 AM 426 Views
Go jump in a lake - 05/12/2010 08:32:18 AM 671 Views
I wanted to be polite and mentioned just the major ones *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:44:25 AM 386 Views
Thank you, Voscaia Sedai *NM* - 04/12/2010 08:51:58 PM 335 Views
Re: Wrong for two reasons - 05/12/2010 08:39:02 AM 691 Views
you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:01:27 AM 579 Views
Re: you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:08:30 AM 667 Views
uhm, no that's not all you're saying. - 05/12/2010 09:14:47 AM 667 Views
Yeah I am - 05/12/2010 09:17:48 AM 600 Views
no. dude i gave you a direct quote from your own statement. that is not what you said - 05/12/2010 09:20:14 AM 737 Views
Go dude yourself brother. - 05/12/2010 09:27:33 AM 597 Views
wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:33:41 AM 687 Views
Re: wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:45:47 AM 672 Views
yes well you genuinely seem to be having a problem comprehending your own statements. - 05/12/2010 09:51:18 AM 555 Views
Well you genuinely seem to be retarded. - 05/12/2010 09:59:19 AM 602 Views
I judge this based off your own reactions to other's statements - 05/12/2010 10:05:58 AM 703 Views
I judge you based on your own statements towards me - 05/12/2010 10:16:18 AM 631 Views
if all you did was disagree with me, we would not be having this discussion. - 05/12/2010 10:25:36 AM 544 Views
This is why I replied the way I did *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:51:54 AM 299 Views
go read the boooks more closely - 05/12/2010 02:34:11 PM 970 Views
Plain wrong. The weave doesn't kill in itself. - 04/12/2010 02:34:00 PM 769 Views
Wrong - 05/12/2010 08:40:40 AM 598 Views
This - 04/12/2010 12:35:04 PM 620 Views
Seconded "This"^ *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:09:17 PM 287 Views
Thirded "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:47:56 AM 340 Views
Re: Fourthed "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 08:08:15 PM 295 Views
yep, he was just trolling I guess *NM* - 05/12/2010 01:58:32 PM 294 Views
the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 04/12/2010 02:55:13 PM 607 Views
Re: the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 05/12/2010 08:43:48 AM 690 Views
just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:07:08 AM 637 Views
Re: just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:11:28 AM 646 Views
well that would explain how santa is able to make his rounds in one night! *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:13:43 AM 249 Views
Yup, I guess that was what Elaida was thinking *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:15:21 AM 303 Views
It's actually come up in the books themselves - 04/12/2010 03:00:03 PM 747 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 04/12/2010 03:30:57 PM 648 Views
Elaida could teach them balefire and not break the Oaths. *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:24:55 PM 285 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 05/12/2010 08:32:50 AM 779 Views
There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 11:37:09 AM 599 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 01:51:06 PM 951 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 06/12/2010 01:43:45 PM 584 Views
I disagree - 06/12/2010 02:29:46 PM 621 Views

Reply to Message