Active Users:338 Time:26/12/2024 08:46:52 AM
Re: Both options can be valid, but here's why you MUST have the ward... Watcher Send a noteboard - 16/11/2009 12:08:30 PM
I don't think that its impossible to ward a place against traveling on the basis that you can't get out yourself. There is a simple way around that. Leave areas that allow for travelling, very small very wel guarded ares so that a gateway that is not expected is blasted the moment it forms. The Rebel AS had a roped off traveling ground for differnet reasons but if say it was an AoL camp that could be the area open to traveling.

I agree that it would be difficulty to have Aes Sedai on every corrider and in every floor or basement that a gateway might open in. They would be spread too thin to react if a gateway did open.

One way around this would be a detection ward. As was mentioned before think of the wards Sammael wove around Illain and SL for Rand. Excepte instead of setting them to detect channeling have them set to detect a weave forming for a gateway.

Now you would need a group of AS to be effectivly sentries. Their job would be to monitor that ward and the moment they started to feel a gateway begin to form they could strke back or interfear with it.

The advantage of the ward would be that they would not need to be in front or even near where the gateway was forming. The ward would give them all the info they needed to counter channel. Sammael did not need to see Rand to be able to strike at him once the ward picked up his channeling.

One last point, if an enemy force is preparing a strike, might not a defender want to let the gateway form before blasting through it. If it works you get to attack your enemies forces just as easily as he can attack you. Again think of how Elayne & co were able to fight the Seanchan in Ebou Dar even though they were many miles away, but they were channeling through an open gateway.
Reply to message
How to disrupt gateways that are made into a battle zone... - 16/11/2009 08:48:36 AM 770 Views
there could be other defensive methods as well - 16/11/2009 09:06:56 AM 485 Views
Excellent suggestions... - 16/11/2009 09:08:59 AM 513 Views
That depends on whether moving gateways are possible. - 19/11/2009 02:01:40 AM 431 Views
I might as well present my argument in full - 16/11/2009 09:52:34 AM 581 Views
Both options can be valid, but here's why you MUST have the ward... - 16/11/2009 10:10:55 AM 748 Views
Re: Both options can be valid, but here's why you MUST have the ward... - 16/11/2009 12:08:30 PM 461 Views
Another idea - 16/11/2009 02:59:39 PM 500 Views
You're talking about manipulating the Pattern? - 17/11/2009 01:54:32 PM 394 Views
The problem with that... - 16/11/2009 05:11:16 PM 414 Views
Peter Hamilton's "Pandora Star" - 16/11/2009 03:36:39 PM 569 Views
I think there's some evidence in favor of the wards idea you are all missing. - 16/11/2009 05:29:22 PM 430 Views
I disagree - 16/11/2009 07:15:53 PM 432 Views
Except - 16/11/2009 07:24:56 PM 387 Views
It's definitely possible that there can be a ward to detect a gateway opening. - 17/11/2009 03:22:33 PM 405 Views
How bout a compromise? - 16/11/2009 06:37:40 PM 488 Views
We know that, for e.g., Sammael could detect the location of a Gateway - 16/11/2009 08:21:57 PM 392 Views
Ahh, I see that Sidious has already suggested this. *NM* - 16/11/2009 08:30:55 PM 175 Views
I believe that you cannot make a ward completely preventing Traveling. - 17/11/2009 01:52:24 PM 390 Views

Reply to Message