Active Users:441 Time:04/04/2025 10:28:10 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM

Both sides have some quotes against them, but neither says an angreal multiplies or adds more for a stronger channeler. That has absolutely no evidence for it.


View original post
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.

I agree. I also don't think a multiplier would work the way Rand's angreal did when he used it with the Choedan Kal against Asmodean. Asmodean and Rand both got exactly half of the CK, which doesn't make sense if it multiplied their strength. And then Rand was able to use his angreal at the same time, and it only added a small trickle. It didn't multiply the amount he was drawing through the CK. Unless angreal have some way of knowing your potential, rather than the amount of the OP you're drawing, I don't see how Rand only got a trickle more when also using the CK.
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.

I think the simplest explanation was that Elayne was wrong. Or, most angreal are "weak", and stronger ones are incredibly rare.
Perhaps there are both multipliers and additive angreal.

Seems to complicated to me to be the true answer here.
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 Sidious - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2446 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect darius_sedai - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1140 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1290 Views
Yet there are problems with either darius_sedai - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 986 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1242 Views
Would you consider... Duke - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1101 Views
random thought on Shielding darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1129 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1227 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1072 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 989 Views
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1037 Views
Not the crux of the debate... fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1084 Views
Not really though darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 897 Views
I always explained it as fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1119 Views
There's not much to go on since all the shields except Berowyn's are the same darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 09:55:14 PM 1011 Views
That's precisely my point fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1105 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 941 Views
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1115 Views
what's dense here is that you keep putting in quotes that don't support your position darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 03:28:16 PM 1273 Views
Whoa.. fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1184 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1159 Views
Wonderful fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1139 Views
yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 06:46:23 PM 957 Views
Re: yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this Sidious - 23/01/2016 02:35:33 PM 1237 Views
Petty much *NM* darius_sedai - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 526 Views
Hmmm.... Sidious - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1202 Views
Let me clear this up darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1337 Views
Some more quotes fionwe1987 - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1117 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1387 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1137 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise Sidious - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1313 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1102 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1015 Views
Oh well then I agree with you Sidious - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1196 Views
thanks darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1379 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 942 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw darius_sedai - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 963 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1003 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 965 Views
Simple fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1085 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 846 Views
Huh? fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1074 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 569 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 534 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 967 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 979 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1080 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1033 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 985 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1133 Views
Funny, I just saw this post darius_sedai - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 871 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this fionwe1987 - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 905 Views
No it doesn't darius_sedai - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 823 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? Dunstan - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 771 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 969 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes