Active Users:1178 Time:22/11/2024 10:52:24 AM
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious Send a noteboard - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM

View original post
View original post
I'm having trouble understanding your interpretation of the "Nynaeve would do better still" argument.

We have two options:

1)Angreal are multipliers: So Elayne's strength gets multiplied by X, and this happens to be twice Nynaeve's strength. For Nynaeve herself, of course, multiplying her strength by X would mean access to even more of the OP.

2) Angreal are additive: there's a lot going for this, especially based on what we know about Seeds now. If so, Elayne's level+X is twice Nynaeve's strength. Obviously, Nynaeve herself would do better if X were added to her greater strength.

In neither scenario do we have to assume that angreal somehow work differently based on your strength. They either add or multiply, and they do so evenly for all channelers.


Multiplier model makes the bracelet vastly too powerful for Rand to have had any chance on the docks. For it to have made Moiraine stronger than her previous level it would have needed to multiplied her new strength by at least 6x (possibly more), but that would have made Lanfear like 5x Rands strength on the docks which seems like a lot even with the fat man angreal. Especially since she had the bracelet before he drew through his angreal.

Additive model has flaws as well,as I mentioned in my earlier post that it doesn't fully explain how the Turtle could make Elayne 2x Nynaeve and still be a "weak" angreal, in fact it would likely be stronger than the bracelet given what we know it will make Moiraine stronger than level 13 but seems unlikely that she would be much beyond that from the way it's phrased.

Perhaps there are both multipliers and additive angreal.


A multiplier is the only reasonable explanation if Nynaeve can get more out of the turtle than Elayne can.

I've considered Fionwe's statement for a while now. It's possible that Nynaeve getting more out of the turtle is merely because she is stronger, so 2x will get her more. It could also mean that stronger people can gain more, and thus a higher multiplier. We don't know. BS answered how these things work but as usual he second guessed himself about five times in his own answer and we all know he knows &&&& all about the Power. I mean, he's written the books and then he answers a question on sa'angreal and isn't even sure how much they benefit channelers. He's a moron.

So according to me there are two potential theories...

Lanfear 100 + turtle (2x ) = 200
Moiraine 80 + turtle (2x ) = 160

Lanfear 100 + turtle (3x ) = 300
Moiraine 80 + turtle (2x ) = 160

Of course, there is a chance that it is additive AND a strong channeler can get more out of it. Maybe Elayne can get 120 out of the turtle as an additive and Nynaeve can somehow pull 140 out of it. That would technically satisfy many criteria and explain Moiraine being at 66 and then stronger than before. Her angreal could move add perhaps 90 strength and make her 91, and if Lanfear used it, it would add 150 strength and make her 250.

Elayne describes the amount of saidar entering her as a torrent compared to what she is used to. She says she's twice as strong as Nynaeve and then in the same breath says that the angreal is not strong. She's not even impressed. It once again makes me think that this is further proof that all channelers don't differ by much, and that Lanfear differs from other women by a factor of 2x at the most. If Nynaeve was truly as strong as big groups of women, then twice her power would make Elayne into a living army, but it seems not to. It's strong hint that true strength lies in big mixed circles or perhaps with a good sa'angreal, which is why Demandred used both for the Last Battle.

The thing though is, how could Rand think that he could shield seven women holding the Power with his angreal? We know that using the bell curve they could all be close to half his effective strength. Sure, he can channel more than 100 saidin in raw power, but does this affect shielding? I've always believed that raw power is perhaps one area where shielding is different which is why women struggle to hold men. The 150 saidin connection is thicker to cut and also allows a bigger pull on the Source that strains women trying to hold them.

If the fat man allows him to shield them all then I think he and Lanfear were fighting at many times their potentials. If a 'not strong' angreal makes Elayne more than twice as strong and one of the strongest male sa'angreal ever allows Rand to hold as little as 10x a man's power, then the gap inside is very small.

To be honest, if you look at all of this, I don't think the system has been well thought out. It's clear that there are no detailed notes on this - Brandon even said so. It's likely a waste of time to invest in this topic because I think it's a rough and undeveloped part of the Power in the books. We can add it to our list of nerdy gripes about the series.

Wheel of Time board admin
Fan of Lanfear
This message last edited by Sidious on 16/01/2016 at 05:29:28 AM
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2289 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1077 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1216 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 910 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1159 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1025 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1086 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1147 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1000 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 912 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 967 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1035 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 820 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1048 Views
There's not much to go on since all the shields except Berowyn's are the same - 21/01/2016 09:55:14 PM 932 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1064 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 872 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1077 Views
what's dense here is that you keep putting in quotes that don't support your position - 22/01/2016 03:28:16 PM 1201 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1148 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1090 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1064 Views
yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 22/01/2016 06:46:23 PM 882 Views
Re: yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 23/01/2016 02:35:33 PM 1187 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 487 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1125 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1266 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1039 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1314 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1095 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1251 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1032 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1129 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1306 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 868 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 889 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 935 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 876 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1006 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 778 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 998 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 539 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 514 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 896 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 912 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1005 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 989 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 917 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1065 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 798 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 863 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 757 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 674 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 887 Views

Reply to Message