Active Users:1114 Time:15/11/2024 01:56:06 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 1262 Views
There are 21 levels, not 100. More later. *NM* - 20/12/2009 07:23:18 PM 441 Views
RJ has said a number of times that the 21 level scale - 20/12/2009 07:35:25 PM 662 Views
Few glaring errors... - 20/12/2009 09:04:55 PM 846 Views
Re: Few glaring errors... - 21/12/2009 07:52:18 AM 817 Views
You don't get it, do you... - 21/12/2009 08:19:00 AM 748 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 637 Views
That only strengthens my point. - 21/12/2009 06:23:39 PM 682 Views
No it does not. - 28/12/2009 02:45:42 AM 732 Views
What you are missing is that - 21/12/2009 06:46:04 PM 690 Views
I'm not missing it at all.. - 21/12/2009 06:58:04 PM 717 Views
Let's try matching that with the actual text - 22/12/2009 03:01:36 PM 693 Views
Not correct... - 22/12/2009 03:29:24 PM 785 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 682 Views
You're reading the evidence wrong. - 22/12/2009 06:27:17 PM 665 Views
RJ also pointed out that Alivia's skill set as a weapon came in handy - 22/12/2009 07:40:35 PM 621 Views
I thought a power law distribution is much more likely, TBH - 20/12/2009 09:39:21 PM 743 Views
Yes. It essentially refers to a skewed histogram - biased to the lower end of the range... - 20/12/2009 09:53:18 PM 782 Views
Corrections - 21/12/2009 01:48:43 AM 797 Views
No... - 21/12/2009 07:47:58 AM 686 Views
True, the application of this model is inconsistent *NM* - 21/12/2009 02:34:26 PM 568 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 669 Views
Perhaps... - 21/12/2009 07:52:13 AM 735 Views
I've always hated bell curves - 21/12/2009 03:56:26 PM 686 Views
The most logical answer is that the average AOL channeler was stronger than the current average... - 21/12/2009 06:36:07 PM 678 Views
and that in no way maps to any kind of Bell Curve - 22/12/2009 06:02:41 PM 561 Views
Why? - 22/12/2009 06:34:25 PM 690 Views
Can you provide the quote where RJ tells us the - 22/12/2009 07:45:04 PM 607 Views
Always go back to the evidence... - 22/12/2009 09:03:42 PM 763 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 677 Views
Name an item you dispute and I will provide the quote.... - 23/12/2009 05:19:49 PM 650 Views
it's addressed below - 23/12/2009 05:23:58 PM 662 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 698 Views
And in looking for quotes for another thread I came across this gem - 29/12/2009 09:54:34 PM 669 Views
Nice! It proves what I've been saying for ages... - 29/12/2009 10:13:41 PM 697 Views
Which is why I contend that they are about 80% of Lanfear - 29/12/2009 10:16:07 PM 658 Views
I wasn't trying to rip him a new one. - 22/12/2009 09:38:43 PM 589 Views
I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 22/12/2009 08:35:23 PM 706 Views
Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 09:21:07 PM 706 Views
Re: Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 11:32:21 PM 798 Views
I agree that it's practically impossible to determine strength - 23/12/2009 03:19:49 PM 696 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 410 Views
This is true, however... - 23/12/2009 04:55:48 PM 722 Views
Aviendha's gateway size doesn't decrease. She is just less energy efficient in creating it... - 23/12/2009 05:30:17 PM 959 Views
Aviendha is suffering from the second weave limitation - 23/12/2009 05:37:45 PM 755 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 604 Views
I'll give you that there is a stength limitation to Traveling - 23/12/2009 06:06:41 PM 641 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 374 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 669 Views
And there you have it...Thank you. - 23/12/2009 06:27:24 PM 652 Views
And linked with Romanda and Lelaine - 23/12/2009 06:34:42 PM 643 Views
Sorry. That's pure speculation on your part. *NM* - 23/12/2009 06:38:43 PM 384 Views
No more than yours is! - 23/12/2009 06:49:57 PM 685 Views
That entire passage is in the context of strength... - 23/12/2009 07:55:50 PM 590 Views
You need to re-read some of this stuff - 23/12/2009 11:01:15 PM 728 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 12:38:43 PM 663 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 06:37:50 PM 644 Views
Goodness - 31/12/2009 03:37:23 AM 688 Views
I'm working within the context of what we've been told by the author - 31/12/2009 03:43:31 AM 636 Views
Since you love Wiki so much - 31/12/2009 03:55:09 AM 645 Views
No you are not - 31/12/2009 03:58:28 AM 689 Views
Dude we're discussion works of fiction - 31/12/2009 04:08:12 AM 710 Views
Dumb Bell Distribution of Mongoloid Turings - 31/12/2009 04:36:50 AM 764 Views
Back to school AS, and you will be able to do this - 26/12/2009 12:34:39 PM 617 Views
The problem we're working with is that RJ says strength follows a Bell Curve distribution - 26/12/2009 03:29:26 PM 645 Views
And RJ knew his maths (and you don't) - 31/12/2009 03:22:09 AM 692 Views
I'm not the one who said OP strength followed a Bell Curve Distribution - 31/12/2009 03:34:55 AM 641 Views
You are the one who is MIS-USING his statement - 31/12/2009 03:44:26 AM 644 Views
- 31/12/2009 03:48:20 AM 949 Views
The pathos of Darius - 31/12/2009 04:26:15 AM 669 Views
Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 12:46:13 AM 588 Views
Re: Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 04:21:47 PM 653 Views

Reply to Message