Active Users:1102 Time:23/12/2024 04:17:52 PM
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 1663 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 639 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 717 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 339 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 619 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 651 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 756 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 705 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 662 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 574 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 557 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 580 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 585 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 585 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 539 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 621 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 575 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 589 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 566 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 544 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 605 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 582 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 581 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 670 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 647 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 624 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 512 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 581 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 619 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 490 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 490 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 538 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 601 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 312 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 625 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 302 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 515 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 565 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 288 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 564 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 508 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 594 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 551 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 548 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 267 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 245 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 554 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 551 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 505 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 534 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 294 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 513 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 240 Views

Reply to Message