Active Users:1202 Time:22/11/2024 04:41:49 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai Send a noteboard - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM

View original post
View original post
I think we just see it differently ... I'm not really sure RJ had this clearly mapped out. Especially since it seems like there weren't even side notes on the subject

Well, okay, but I don't see any viable alternative explanation. If you seriously think a buffer-less sa'angreal can allow for unlimited magnification of the OP, Callandor and Vora's wand are obviously more powerful than the CK, which means Lanfear was wrong about Callandor, as are the Glossaries, the BWB, and the Companion!

But it's the only logical conclusion when we consider angreal as a "pool of additive power" ... for me it's easier to understand how a magnifier model could create burnout levels of power when a buffer is missing because there is essentially no cap on access to the power here. Compared to an additive model it just doesn't make sense to me that a lack of a buffer allows access to additional power beyond what the angreal was designed for.

Domani Drag Queen in the White Tower ... Aran'gar watch out!
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 Sidious - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2291 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect darius_sedai - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1078 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1218 Views
Yet there are problems with either darius_sedai - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 912 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1161 Views
Would you consider... Duke - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1026 Views
random thought on Shielding darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1089 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1149 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1002 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 914 Views
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 969 Views
Not the crux of the debate... fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1037 Views
Not really though darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 823 Views
I always explained it as fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1050 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 934 Views
That's precisely my point fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1066 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 875 Views
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1079 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 1202 Views
Whoa.. fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1150 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1091 Views
Wonderful fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1066 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 884 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 1189 Views
Petty much *NM* darius_sedai - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 488 Views
Hmmm.... Sidious - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1125 Views
Let me clear this up darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1268 Views
Some more quotes fionwe1987 - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1041 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1316 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1097 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise Sidious - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1253 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1034 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 944 Views
Oh well then I agree with you Sidious - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1129 Views
thanks darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1308 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 869 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw darius_sedai - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 890 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 937 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 879 Views
Simple fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1008 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 780 Views
Huh? fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1000 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 539 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 514 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 898 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 914 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1008 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 991 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 920 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1067 Views
Funny, I just saw this post darius_sedai - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 799 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this fionwe1987 - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 865 Views
No it doesn't darius_sedai - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 760 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? Dunstan - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 676 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 890 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes