Active Users:1157 Time:22/11/2024 06:54:48 PM
It seems you think I don't read any posts and you certainly haven't read this board much. Tom Send a noteboard - 14/11/2009 04:30:06 PM
It's been common knowledge that Sanderson will reveal Asmodean's killer. It's also been common knowledge that Graendal will be in the next book due to the fact that the time lines are not all caught up to the same point. The fact that Graendal is likely dead does not affect her ability to reveal herself as Asmodean's killer in a POV from Graendal in the next book. This has been settled for some time.
Political correctness is the pettiest form of casuistry.

ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius

Ummaka qinnassa nīk!

*MySmiley*
Reply to message
Another blow to the Graendaldunnit-theory - 14/11/2009 10:41:32 AM 1175 Views
I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that. - 14/11/2009 02:53:25 PM 620 Views
He has stated that they will put the mystery to rest in the final books... - 14/11/2009 04:02:53 PM 729 Views
I actually figured a way that this could come up quite naturally without Graendal - 14/11/2009 04:11:24 PM 737 Views
RJ said it will probably revealed in the killer's PoV - 14/11/2009 04:46:20 PM 573 Views
And Brandon said Harriet gave him the freedom to tell the story as he wishes. - 14/11/2009 06:05:40 PM 542 Views
We (you, me & RJ) agree that it would be best to reveal it in the killer's PoV - 14/11/2009 06:40:33 PM 550 Views
Wait...wait...this is funny. - 20/11/2009 02:05:26 AM 464 Views
I often explained it, because many don't seem to get it - 20/11/2009 12:17:21 PM 419 Views
So maybe Graendal didn't care enough about Asmodean, either. - 20/11/2009 02:07:02 PM 446 Views
Neither Graendal nor Slayer mention killing Asmo... - 20/11/2009 02:46:40 PM 593 Views
I'm sure you can see... - 20/11/2009 03:25:41 PM 542 Views
Well... - 20/11/2009 05:23:28 PM 450 Views
It seems you think I don't read any posts and you certainly haven't read this board much. - 14/11/2009 04:30:06 PM 521 Views
That's wrong - 14/11/2009 04:45:02 PM 639 Views
Not one word of what I wrote is wrong. - 15/11/2009 01:41:18 AM 531 Views
right here - 15/11/2009 03:04:57 AM 512 Views
BS just said that Graendal will be mentioned, not appear as a character in ToM. *NM* - 15/11/2009 09:58:53 AM 224 Views
I never said "appear as a character." *NM* - 15/11/2009 12:14:16 PM 210 Views
- 15/11/2009 12:44:07 PM 608 Views
Re: I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that. - 19/11/2009 12:07:25 AM 730 Views
Just once it would be nice to get a blow from Graendal. *NM* - 14/11/2009 03:50:41 PM 213 Views
Agreed. *NM* - 14/11/2009 04:46:33 PM 197 Views
Nope, that's not a blow against it at all - 14/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 450 Views
I don't agree with this interpretation at all - your grasping for straws... - 14/11/2009 07:34:58 PM 521 Views
Agreed *NM* - 15/11/2009 06:55:44 AM 208 Views
I disagree... - 15/11/2009 09:57:23 AM 557 Views
Only if you make the assumption that she was the most obvious to Sanderson. - 14/11/2009 07:37:39 PM 582 Views
Personally... - 15/11/2009 12:11:50 AM 571 Views
I think... - 15/11/2009 09:55:42 AM 452 Views
No. Try again. - 14/11/2009 11:35:59 PM 598 Views
Actually this is more against the Slayer theory - 15/11/2009 01:49:08 PM 513 Views
Nonsense... - 15/11/2009 02:06:04 PM 489 Views
Your tenacity is impressive. - 15/11/2009 03:14:50 PM 544 Views
Absolut statements in such discussions... - 15/11/2009 03:53:22 PM 471 Views
Re: Absolut statements in such discussions... - 15/11/2009 05:57:25 PM 427 Views
It's also possible that Lanfear gave Slayer the task. *NM* - 15/11/2009 07:55:17 PM 706 Views
Pa'ah did it. *NM* - 18/11/2009 01:02:09 AM 208 Views
It is not gone, I have a copy of it *NM* - 15/11/2009 06:19:11 PM 200 Views
I agree with Etzel. - 20/11/2009 02:59:44 AM 455 Views

Reply to Message