Active Users:3564 Time:23/01/2025 03:01:56 AM
Re: your interpretation is wrong Logain Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM
The only thing this confirms is that balefire can only remove a thread up to a few days/maybe a week. And that Asomodean died long enough ago that if his killer were balefired he wouldn't come back to life.

This in no way comments about whether Graendal was the killer or not - you can tell very much by Sanderson's reaction. He wasn't going to let this question lead him down that road.


Can Graendal reveal herself as Asmodean's killer in the next two books?

Answer: NO, because she got balefired and we will not see her anymore.

Therefore, someone else will reveal themselves as Asmodean's killer.
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1684 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 660 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 734 Views
Yes, Brandon did. I edited my original message to add in another quote from Brandon...see above *NM* - 11/11/2009 05:33:27 PM 347 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 646 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 673 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 780 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 738 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 679 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 590 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 581 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 603 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 608 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 613 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 567 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 645 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 597 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 612 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 591 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 568 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 631 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 604 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 608 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 694 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 660 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 643 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 568 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 603 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 648 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 514 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 513 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 558 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 622 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 321 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 648 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 310 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 539 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 586 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 299 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 590 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 527 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 615 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 572 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 572 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 278 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 254 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 576 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 574 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 531 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 555 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 302 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 541 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 250 Views

Reply to Message