Active Users:1184 Time:22/11/2024 02:34:48 PM
Re: Wrong rAndy aL Send a noteboard - 25/12/2010 09:51:54 AM
Shadowspawn are corrupted versions of real living creatures - humans/trollocs, wolves/darkhounds, etc. They breed and create their own offspring, hence the word spawn.


Draghkar? Jumara? Any number of nameless creatures in the blight? Only some shadowspawn fit that description...

A case can be made as to why gholams might be immune to gateway death, but that would require them being an exception to a rule that no artificial life-forms (constructs) can travel. Rand only says that shadowspawn are affected, but RJ extended that to all constructs.
This message last edited by rAndy aL on 25/12/2010 at 09:53:11 AM
Reply to message
An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 04:52:54 AM 2026 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 10:23:23 AM 1239 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 03:41:10 PM 1078 Views
I dissagree - 24/12/2010 07:09:41 PM 1050 Views
Yes, RJ confirmed that Shadowspawn can't survive gateways. *NM* - 24/12/2010 07:39:02 PM 455 Views
And then BS confirmed that gholam are "more perfected" Shadowspawn which can. *NM* - 24/12/2010 08:35:34 PM 459 Views
Read the post I responded too. I know that. - 26/12/2010 11:58:40 AM 941 Views
Why would them not being able to survive a gateway be a problem? - 26/01/2011 05:36:09 AM 776 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 11:29:33 AM 982 Views
What he said. No error. *NM* - 24/12/2010 01:01:23 PM 436 Views
"They had not known where-or if-the gholam would attack him" - 25/12/2010 12:27:02 AM 880 Views
Re: "They had not known where-or if-the gholam would attack him" - 25/12/2010 02:05:07 AM 888 Views
They prepared a place, and it just happened to be within walking distance of the attack? - 25/12/2010 09:44:34 AM 859 Views
Please re-read the chapter. It expalins a lot. - 25/12/2010 04:05:50 PM 925 Views
Your quote shows what happened. - 26/12/2010 05:33:44 AM 837 Views
Likely picked from a handful of pre-determined locations based on where and when the attack occurred - 31/12/2010 08:47:20 PM 906 Views
Perhaps, but I don't think so. - 01/01/2011 01:19:12 AM 733 Views
That would be an error if it hadn't been Skimming (the platform and what not) they were using. - 25/12/2010 02:29:39 AM 819 Views
It is an error because they opened a skimming gateway to the house (from the skimming place) - 25/12/2010 09:47:08 AM 815 Views
Gateways - 25/12/2010 12:20:13 PM 812 Views
Re: Gateways - 26/12/2010 02:20:14 AM 803 Views
Re: Gateways - 26/12/2010 03:53:05 AM 742 Views
Re: Gateways - 26/12/2010 05:16:48 AM 949 Views
I'm confused now as to what you're arguing. They knew the location of the house. - 26/12/2010 08:54:17 PM 800 Views
You need to know more than just where you are going - 27/12/2010 06:59:21 AM 825 Views
Please find me a supporting quote in one of the books. - 27/12/2010 12:48:45 PM 838 Views
Re: Please find me a supporting quote in one of the books. - 27/12/2010 03:11:26 PM 740 Views
Skimming - 27/12/2010 06:24:12 PM 804 Views
Well, from Encyclopaedia WOT, and aCoS - 28/12/2010 01:02:42 AM 919 Views
Not that hard if you think about it - 30/01/2011 09:39:34 PM 869 Views
get over it - 25/12/2010 06:20:14 PM 756 Views
ok? *NM* - 26/12/2010 02:21:24 AM 463 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 12:22:38 PM 957 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 06:22:54 PM 738 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 24/12/2010 06:31:38 PM 740 Views
Very good point. Thank you for clearing that up! *NM* - 24/12/2010 09:50:47 PM 402 Views
Wrong - 24/12/2010 10:03:26 PM 915 Views
Re: Wrong - 24/12/2010 11:49:12 PM 835 Views
Re: Wrong - 25/12/2010 02:59:55 AM 807 Views
Re: Wrong - 25/12/2010 09:51:54 AM 743 Views
Re: Wrong - 27/12/2010 06:34:39 PM 836 Views
Re: An annoying gateway error. - 31/12/2010 08:44:17 PM 853 Views

Reply to Message