Active Users:554 Time:06/07/2024 04:55:14 AM
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 1920 Views
The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 06:54:20 AM 837 Views
Re: The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 07:08:50 AM 753 Views
Wrong for two reasons - 04/12/2010 09:10:03 AM 906 Views
Only two? Usually he's wrong for eight reasons. *NM* - 04/12/2010 09:47:37 AM 409 Views
Go jump in a lake - 05/12/2010 08:32:18 AM 639 Views
I wanted to be polite and mentioned just the major ones *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:44:25 AM 368 Views
Thank you, Voscaia Sedai *NM* - 04/12/2010 08:51:58 PM 310 Views
Re: Wrong for two reasons - 05/12/2010 08:39:02 AM 659 Views
you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:01:27 AM 544 Views
Re: you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:08:30 AM 633 Views
uhm, no that's not all you're saying. - 05/12/2010 09:14:47 AM 636 Views
Yeah I am - 05/12/2010 09:17:48 AM 567 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 701 Views
Go dude yourself brother. - 05/12/2010 09:27:33 AM 561 Views
wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:33:41 AM 649 Views
Re: wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:45:47 AM 644 Views
yes well you genuinely seem to be having a problem comprehending your own statements. - 05/12/2010 09:51:18 AM 518 Views
Well you genuinely seem to be retarded. - 05/12/2010 09:59:19 AM 560 Views
I judge this based off your own reactions to other's statements - 05/12/2010 10:05:58 AM 660 Views
I judge you based on your own statements towards me - 05/12/2010 10:16:18 AM 597 Views
if all you did was disagree with me, we would not be having this discussion. - 05/12/2010 10:25:36 AM 495 Views
This is why I replied the way I did *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:51:54 AM 281 Views
go read the boooks more closely - 05/12/2010 02:34:11 PM 933 Views
Plain wrong. The weave doesn't kill in itself. - 04/12/2010 02:34:00 PM 736 Views
Wrong - 05/12/2010 08:40:40 AM 565 Views
This - 04/12/2010 12:35:04 PM 587 Views
Seconded "This"^ *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:09:17 PM 265 Views
Thirded "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:47:56 AM 324 Views
Re: Fourthed "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 08:08:15 PM 279 Views
yep, he was just trolling I guess *NM* - 05/12/2010 01:58:32 PM 277 Views
the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 04/12/2010 02:55:13 PM 581 Views
Re: the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 05/12/2010 08:43:48 AM 663 Views
just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:07:08 AM 608 Views
Re: just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:11:28 AM 614 Views
well that would explain how santa is able to make his rounds in one night! *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:13:43 AM 236 Views
Yup, I guess that was what Elaida was thinking *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:15:21 AM 287 Views
It's actually come up in the books themselves - 04/12/2010 03:00:03 PM 712 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 04/12/2010 03:30:57 PM 613 Views
Elaida could teach them balefire and not break the Oaths. *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:24:55 PM 264 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 05/12/2010 08:32:50 AM 722 Views
There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 11:37:09 AM 564 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 01:51:06 PM 912 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 06/12/2010 01:43:45 PM 544 Views
I disagree - 06/12/2010 02:29:46 PM 586 Views

Reply to Message