Active Users:1514 Time:21/10/2025 10:01:50 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Huh? fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM

View original post
a Channeler is, as you put it above, a living thinking being yet an angreal is an object. What Egwene did was far beyond simply burning herself out by drawing too much power. She shattered the limits of Vora's sa'angreal and destroyed hundreds of channelers as well as another massively powerful sa'angreal etc etc. What you are suggesting amounts to Egwene could have linked with others and been buffered from the negative effects, which in turn means Vora's sa'angreal, if used in a link, is basically a limitless supply of saidar equal to the CK simply because it has no buffer.

No, within a link you can only draw Vora's Wand to its strength limit, which seems to equal Sakarnen. The only way to exceed that is to not have a buffer, ie be a single channeler using it. At that point, you can overdraw, just like you could overdraw if there were no angreal in the picture.
I'd be inclined to agree with this point if Egwene had simply burned out or died but she drew in a massive amount more power than was conceivable.

As can any channeler! Lews Therin didn't simply burn out or die. First, he too drew in massive amounts of the OP, enough to erect a 10km high active volcano! And he wasn't even using an angreal!

See, what Egwene did was first draw in all that Vora's wand can safely allow. Lacking a buffer, she then exceeded this by a little to defeat Taim. Then, she saw that the Sharans were rallying, and the world was just about to receive Bore 2.0, so she drew in even more. I contend that even without Vora's Wand, she would have drawn in a pretty massive amount. Vora's Wand just made the amount that much more impressive (maybe in the CK range, given what she says).


That being said, we can lay that down, in part, to BSand's (and our) limited understanding of how these objects really work. I really hated that plot device, especially because the Aes Sedai are so damn cautious about everything involving the Power, yet somehow Vora's sa'angreal manages to be more powerful than Callandor and flawed yet is still sitting around in the WT

I don't have a problem with either fact. Just with Egwene regularly using it while she was tired despite apparently knowing there is no buffer! That makes no sense. Why wouldn't she mention it? Why wouldn't she join in a circle to prevent accidental overdrawing in those other times?
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 Sidious - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2944 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect darius_sedai - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1352 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1494 Views
Yet there are problems with either darius_sedai - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 1207 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1602 Views
Would you consider... Duke - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1302 Views
random thought on Shielding darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1346 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1432 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1302 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 1218 Views
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1238 Views
Not the crux of the debate... fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1334 Views
Not really though darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 1088 Views
I always explained it as fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1351 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 1222 Views
That's precisely my point fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1303 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 1161 Views
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1330 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 1503 Views
Whoa.. fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1403 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1357 Views
Wonderful fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1340 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 1154 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 1570 Views
Petty much *NM* darius_sedai - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 711 Views
Hmmm.... Sidious - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1552 Views
Let me clear this up darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1584 Views
Some more quotes fionwe1987 - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1348 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1682 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1335 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise Sidious - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1643 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1328 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1228 Views
Oh well then I agree with you Sidious - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1537 Views
thanks darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1582 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 1150 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw darius_sedai - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 1206 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1210 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 1146 Views
Simple fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1267 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 1072 Views
Huh? fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1332 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 698 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 661 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 1173 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 1224 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1279 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1241 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 1218 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1342 Views
Funny, I just saw this post darius_sedai - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 1086 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this fionwe1987 - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 1116 Views
No it doesn't darius_sedai - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 1016 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? Dunstan - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 1007 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 1165 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes