Active Users:626 Time:23/02/2025 04:21:59 PM
Is this the real stilling? Etzel Send a noteboard - 04/10/2009 09:06:32 AM
I think in these examples you cited the channelers lost their ability to channel, because someone else violently broke a weave (especially a shield) by them, while they were channeling. This obviously doesn't seem to be the "officially" precise stilling weave, but rather like a forced explosion of the ability to channel (in this respect rather similar to burning out). However, this form of stilling someone seems quite risky, because it requires that your opponent channels, and it probably might kill him.

I only dimly remember this, but doesn't Siuan even indicate that she was stilled by a circle of AS in a process that took some time. So, apparently the real stilling is a bit more complicated, because it's basically a very delicate "surgically" removal of the ability to channel.

Since Rand & Co. likely don't know how this exactly works (or e.g. Cadsuane doesn't want to give it away), it would explain why they don't do it.
Reply to message
Still the Darkfriends. - 03/10/2009 05:25:29 PM 2047 Views
ya this does work - 03/10/2009 06:32:22 PM 646 Views
Totally Agree. *NM* - 03/10/2009 06:38:27 PM 334 Views
Makes sense, but... - 03/10/2009 07:04:27 PM 793 Views
Nynaeve does. Egwene did it solo in tDR. Rand did 3 at once in LoC, but men don't seem to know how - 03/10/2009 07:16:03 PM 1034 Views
Is this the real stilling? - 04/10/2009 09:06:32 AM 1153 Views
It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 02:55:35 PM 757 Views
Re: It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 06:46:58 PM 1315 Views
Re: It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 06:53:52 PM 769 Views
I think Egwene took longer because it was the first time. *NM* - 04/10/2009 07:20:26 PM 298 Views
Not in my opinion - 05/10/2009 05:00:30 AM 1059 Views
How does that respond to what I said? - 05/10/2009 05:15:57 AM 639 Views
Re: How does that respond to what I said? - 05/10/2009 09:07:16 PM 664 Views
Doesn't make sense.... - 06/10/2009 12:20:21 AM 606 Views
Re: Doesn't make sense.... - 06/10/2009 07:30:04 AM 668 Views
I disagree. - 04/10/2009 10:03:56 PM 716 Views
Re: I disagree. - 05/10/2009 04:58:04 AM 731 Views
Then... - 05/10/2009 05:12:45 AM 631 Views
Re: Then... - 05/10/2009 09:09:04 PM 644 Views
Re: Then... - 06/10/2009 12:25:22 AM 705 Views
Re: Then... - 06/10/2009 07:51:48 AM 647 Views
I'd like you to clear this up... - 06/10/2009 02:18:01 AM 686 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 06/10/2009 07:50:33 AM 846 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 07/10/2009 02:28:34 AM 732 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 07/10/2009 08:20:34 AM 678 Views
Well, you may, but I remain unconvinced . - 08/10/2009 12:22:31 AM 773 Views
I think it's too risky - 03/10/2009 07:21:51 PM 754 Views
Of course, they should still be guarded with restricted access. - 03/10/2009 09:02:21 PM 816 Views
Re: I think it's too risky - 05/10/2009 04:51:17 AM 644 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 04:51:58 AM 866 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 02:06:51 PM 714 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 05:45:16 PM 1385 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 07:20:58 PM 732 Views
To Clarify... - 05/10/2009 12:30:28 AM 809 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 05/10/2009 02:54:40 PM 1341 Views
Remember Shadar Logoth - 04/10/2009 02:49:06 PM 643 Views
Re: Remember Shadar Logoth - 05/10/2009 06:05:54 AM 753 Views
From Rand's viewpoint - 05/10/2009 01:10:18 PM 1425 Views

Reply to Message