Active Users:466 Time:04/04/2025 10:44:57 PM
I don't say it's impossible... Etzel Send a noteboard - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM
I just say it makes no sense.. ;)
At least in my opinion.

BS obviously means that the other plotlines, which are behind Rand's and Egwene's, will be brought to the same point in ToM, namely Perrin, Mat, Elayne, likely Aviendha, Lan, Loial, Fain, etc.

However, Graendal was tied to Rand's plotline, which isn't behind in the timeline, but was pretty much concluded in TGS for now. As far as we know, Graendal has no relevance in the plotlines of the others, because she had to concentrate on Rand to fulfill Moridin's orders (Graendal even says in TGS that she doesn't care about the other two ta'veren). Since ToM will - according to BS - anyway be a less focused book than TGS (probably because there are more plotlines), it makes no sense for BS to confuse the readers even more about the timeline by giving a likely redundant PoV from Graendal before her death (and AFAIK, something like this was never done in the series). As BS indicated, other characters will just mention Graendal in ToM.
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1737 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 709 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 783 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 370 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 697 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 722 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 833 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 788 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 734 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 620 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 635 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 654 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 652 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 662 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 620 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 701 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 646 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 661 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 642 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 622 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 680 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 653 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 658 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 743 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 691 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 699 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 617 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 657 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 693 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 558 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 558 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 612 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 670 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 343 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 690 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 330 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 590 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 638 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 321 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 647 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 578 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 671 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 615 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 622 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 299 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 279 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 633 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 623 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 576 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 607 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 323 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 587 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 272 Views

Reply to Message