Active Users:451 Time:28/12/2024 10:52:40 AM
No it does not. fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 28/12/2009 02:45:42 AM
I'm being generous. Because if Egwene plus Lelaine and Romanda cannot match a male Forsaken, then they should be EVEN LOWER on the strength scale than I am arguing.

The truth is that AT MOST Egwene plus Lelaine and Romanda can match a male Forsaken. Egwene was far from certain that they could. In fact, her actual words were something along the lines of "She doubts that herself, Lelaine and Romanda (the three strongest Aes Sedai in the camp) could match a male Forsaken.

And where is it stated that this was a strength issue? Moiraine estimated that Egwene and Aviendha, well before they reached peak strength, could match one of the female Forsaken like Graendal. How does that fit in with your model?
And how do you blindly assume Egwene is discussing strength? It certainly seems that she and Avi together felt they could challenge Lanfear, and they were about to try. Her superior skill meant that they got their asses handed to them. Why can't Egwene's statement mean that even with the great strength advantage she would get by linking with L and R, she still wouldn't be skilled enough to beat a male Forsaken?
As we see, of course, Verin, Shalon and Kumira could beat back Graendal, who is insanely strong and skilled. Egwene underestimates herself, by your model or mine.
Now, on Darius's list, Egwene plus Romanda on their OWN would exceed Lanfear. since Egwene is on 80 and Romanda is on 50 it means that together they are at 130, which is far greater than Lanfear who is at 100. Even after a 10% linking loss they are still stronger than Lanfear. And that's without even adding Lelaine into the mix.

I'd place Egwene at 70, but either way, you're ignoring skill.
Even with Egwene at 50 and L and R at 25, they still reach strength 90, and also have a precision advantage. Even by your model, they should easily be able to hand most of the male Forsaken their asses. Yet Egwene is doubtful. The reason is she doubts her skill, not her strength.
So, if Lanfear is comparable to a male Forsaken, then Darius's model falls apart completely. ESPECIALLY if Egwene plus Lelaine Plus Romanda combined are still weaker than a male Forsaken.

So I am being generous by giving those three women the benefit of the doubt when reading Egwene's statement. And even by doing this, Darius's model is disproven.

No it isn't. All you've done is poke wider holes into your own model.
The simple point is that if Egwene, Lelaine and Romanda together would be hard pressed to match a male Forsaken, then how can Egwene and Romanda (without Lelaine) exceed Lanfear?

They can match any forsaken as far as strength goes. Skill is another matter.
They cannot, and that is one of the many indications that Darius has placed modern Aes Sedai far too high up on the ladder. And this has a domino effect on his placings, because if you drop the likes of Moiraine and Lelaine, then you have to drop Egwene as well. Which is the correct thing to do, because Egwene is not close to 80% of Lanfear's strength. It is laughable to suggest it.

She is in fact around 50% of Lanfear's strength. THAT is the model that fits the evidence best.

No it doesn't at all. If she's strength 50, then the average woman is as strong as her, which is the most ridiculous statement I've seen.
Reply to message
I've been playing with some numbers since we've been having all of these OP strength debates - 20/12/2009 06:34:05 PM 1280 Views
There are 21 levels, not 100. More later. *NM* - 20/12/2009 07:23:18 PM 452 Views
RJ has said a number of times that the 21 level scale - 20/12/2009 07:35:25 PM 681 Views
Few glaring errors... - 20/12/2009 09:04:55 PM 865 Views
Re: Few glaring errors... - 21/12/2009 07:52:18 AM 835 Views
You don't get it, do you... - 21/12/2009 08:19:00 AM 765 Views
Didn't you claim that Eggy+Rom+Lel cannot match a male forsaken? Now they can match Lanfear? - 21/12/2009 04:14:32 PM 653 Views
That only strengthens my point. - 21/12/2009 06:23:39 PM 702 Views
No it does not. - 28/12/2009 02:45:42 AM 749 Views
What you are missing is that - 21/12/2009 06:46:04 PM 709 Views
I'm not missing it at all.. - 21/12/2009 06:58:04 PM 735 Views
Let's try matching that with the actual text - 22/12/2009 03:01:36 PM 707 Views
Not correct... - 22/12/2009 03:29:24 PM 800 Views
Believe as you like, I'm not here to convince you to otherwise, I'm stating how I read the evidence - 22/12/2009 06:01:24 PM 700 Views
You're reading the evidence wrong. - 22/12/2009 06:27:17 PM 687 Views
RJ also pointed out that Alivia's skill set as a weapon came in handy - 22/12/2009 07:40:35 PM 639 Views
I thought a power law distribution is much more likely, TBH - 20/12/2009 09:39:21 PM 763 Views
Yes. It essentially refers to a skewed histogram - biased to the lower end of the range... - 20/12/2009 09:53:18 PM 797 Views
Corrections - 21/12/2009 01:48:43 AM 814 Views
No... - 21/12/2009 07:47:58 AM 704 Views
True, the application of this model is inconsistent *NM* - 21/12/2009 02:34:26 PM 580 Views
yet RJ has said flat out that OP strength is on an Bell Curve. Meaning the majority of channelers - 21/12/2009 07:36:22 AM 688 Views
Perhaps... - 21/12/2009 07:52:13 AM 753 Views
I've always hated bell curves - 21/12/2009 03:56:26 PM 700 Views
The most logical answer is that the average AOL channeler was stronger than the current average... - 21/12/2009 06:36:07 PM 690 Views
and that in no way maps to any kind of Bell Curve - 22/12/2009 06:02:41 PM 576 Views
Why? - 22/12/2009 06:34:25 PM 708 Views
Can you provide the quote where RJ tells us the - 22/12/2009 07:45:04 PM 622 Views
Always go back to the evidence... - 22/12/2009 09:03:42 PM 783 Views
I'll respond when you can actually provide a few actual quotes to support any of this - 23/12/2009 03:20:44 PM 694 Views
Name an item you dispute and I will provide the quote.... - 23/12/2009 05:19:49 PM 667 Views
it's addressed below - 23/12/2009 05:23:58 PM 677 Views
I've been looking into this a bit... and you really do overstate things to suit your arguments - 24/12/2009 06:15:44 PM 716 Views
And in looking for quotes for another thread I came across this gem - 29/12/2009 09:54:34 PM 687 Views
Nice! It proves what I've been saying for ages... - 29/12/2009 10:13:41 PM 714 Views
Which is why I contend that they are about 80% of Lanfear - 29/12/2009 10:16:07 PM 681 Views
I wasn't trying to rip him a new one. - 22/12/2009 09:38:43 PM 612 Views
I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 22/12/2009 08:35:23 PM 724 Views
Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 09:21:07 PM 719 Views
Re: Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 11:32:21 PM 825 Views
I agree that it's practically impossible to determine strength - 23/12/2009 03:19:49 PM 711 Views
How convenient. And by the way, it is NOT tied to a Talent. Anyone who is strong enough, can Travel. *NM* - 23/12/2009 04:36:24 PM 419 Views
This is true, however... - 23/12/2009 04:55:48 PM 740 Views
Aviendha's gateway size doesn't decrease. She is just less energy efficient in creating it... - 23/12/2009 05:30:17 PM 982 Views
Aviendha is suffering from the second weave limitation - 23/12/2009 05:37:45 PM 769 Views
Conceded. My faulty memory is to blame in this case. But it doesn't change the rule... - 23/12/2009 06:01:33 PM 622 Views
I'll give you that there is a stength limitation to Traveling - 23/12/2009 06:06:41 PM 659 Views
Why do the characters in the books judge each other's strength on gateway size then? *NM* - 23/12/2009 06:08:17 PM 387 Views
Re: Why do the characters in the books judge each other's strength on gateway size then? - 23/12/2009 06:20:18 PM 681 Views
And there you have it...Thank you. - 23/12/2009 06:27:24 PM 667 Views
And linked with Romanda and Lelaine - 23/12/2009 06:34:42 PM 661 Views
Sorry. That's pure speculation on your part. *NM* - 23/12/2009 06:38:43 PM 394 Views
No more than yours is! - 23/12/2009 06:49:57 PM 698 Views
That entire passage is in the context of strength... - 23/12/2009 07:55:50 PM 606 Views
You need to re-read some of this stuff - 23/12/2009 11:01:15 PM 744 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 12:38:43 PM 679 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 06:37:50 PM 664 Views
Goodness - 31/12/2009 03:37:23 AM 703 Views
I'm working within the context of what we've been told by the author - 31/12/2009 03:43:31 AM 653 Views
Since you love Wiki so much - 31/12/2009 03:55:09 AM 665 Views
No you are not - 31/12/2009 03:58:28 AM 705 Views
Dude we're discussion works of fiction - 31/12/2009 04:08:12 AM 731 Views
Dumb Bell Distribution of Mongoloid Turings - 31/12/2009 04:36:50 AM 787 Views
Back to school AS, and you will be able to do this - 26/12/2009 12:34:39 PM 633 Views
The problem we're working with is that RJ says strength follows a Bell Curve distribution - 26/12/2009 03:29:26 PM 658 Views
And RJ knew his maths (and you don't) - 31/12/2009 03:22:09 AM 703 Views
I'm not the one who said OP strength followed a Bell Curve Distribution - 31/12/2009 03:34:55 AM 658 Views
You are the one who is MIS-USING his statement - 31/12/2009 03:44:26 AM 669 Views
- 31/12/2009 03:48:20 AM 962 Views
The pathos of Darius - 31/12/2009 04:26:15 AM 687 Views
Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 12:46:13 AM 610 Views
Re: Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 04:21:47 PM 671 Views

Reply to Message