Active Users:448 Time:18/09/2025 05:16:02 AM
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM

View original post

Okay but when Nynaeve shielded Logain she also described how her shield started to bend and almost break. Somehow Berowin has practiced her shielding so that it doesn't actually tear under any circumstances. This leaves the door open for better forms of shielding as I described in my post to Darius. If you can sever a person just by sharpening the edges then there is a lot of potential for tweaking.


I have no argument with Berowin's shield being different. It IS different. My argument is with the idea that the Forsaken use something like her shield. If so, it is remarkable that oth Nynaeve and Rand described shields woven by Moghedien and Lanfear as "walls" when trying to push against them.

The other side of this is that shielding a person while they are channeling isn't exactly the same as holding a shield on them. Do we think Berowin would have been able to cut off Nynaeve had she been channeling as much as she could?

We KNOW that landing a shield on a person channeling is a chancey thing. Nynaeve has told us that, and several of her scenes have demonstrated it. Which is why I'm skeptical that just because we've seen Aes Sedai land shields at some point, and not at others, we should ignore the evidence that their shields are similar to the Forsaken's.


We also have Suroth saying that Liandrin is "blocked in some way" and that may point to a different type of shield....? It's all reaching but there may be a science to shielding beyond "weave and throw".

Well Liandrin was blocked in some way. Suroth, as a non-channeler, doesn't necessarily have to use the word shield. In fact, we know the Forsaken use the word "buffer" for a shield, and we know the Seanchan call shields "blocks":
“I have borne the bracelet long, and I could tell if the marath’damane had done more than block Jini.”

This is the Sul'dam Rand and Aviendha encounter in tFoH. She calls Aviendha's shield a block, so it seems reasonable to assume another Sul'dam/damane used similar terminology to descirbe Liandrin's shield to Suroth.

Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2890 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1326 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1468 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 1174 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1577 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1281 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1322 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1416 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1253 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 1192 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1216 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1307 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 1065 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1317 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 1198 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1289 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 1126 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1304 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 1478 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1383 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1338 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1317 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 1136 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 1548 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 698 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1519 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1559 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1315 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1646 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1318 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1631 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1295 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1197 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1515 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1551 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 1120 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 1171 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1176 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 1124 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1246 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 1050 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1301 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 688 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 652 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 1149 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 1205 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1252 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1221 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 1182 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1318 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 1061 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 1097 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 999 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 979 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 1149 Views

Reply to Message