Active Users:2361 Time:23/01/2025 05:08:03 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka Send a noteboard - 05/01/2010 07:15:41 PM
RJ states in several places that *objects* don't have a power to perform actions in themselves and that balefire erases the life thread of a person back in time so the action in that time never happened.


Yes, but that doesn't mean that objects don't have threads that can also (like human threads) be burned back in time. Datakim below provides a quote from BS that states that EVERYTHING has a thread.

We already knew that, anyway. In ACoS, when Moghedien balefired Nynaeve's boat, Lan said that suddenly Nynaeve went from being 50 paces ahead of him to being 50 paces behind him. The only way that could have happened is if Moggy's balefire burned the boat back in time, however long it took the boat to travel those 100 paces.

Given these two conditions, destruction of the angreal would have no more effect than had Rand balefired Graendal's hand (which she must have used to touch the emissary to effect the compulsion).


I don't see that we have nearly enough evidence to state that with certaintly, since we know for fact that objects are burned back in time. The question is, if an object is burned back in time, does it negate what the object did, or was used for, in that time? I still think the answer to that question is "yes".

Rise and fall, turn the Wheel,
'cause all life is
is really just a circle.

-BHT&tM
Reply to message
Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka - 05/01/2010 05:44:12 PM 2323 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) randfandom - 05/01/2010 06:46:19 PM 1081 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:15:41 PM 952 Views
Nynaeve's boat... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 07:23:57 PM 909 Views
Balefire is REALLY confusing. Datakim - 05/01/2010 07:41:05 PM 789 Views
Good point ... Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:52:04 PM 765 Views
I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Fanatic-Templar - 05/01/2010 08:45:52 PM 4497 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Shishka - 05/01/2010 09:23:06 PM 747 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Fanatic-Templar - 05/01/2010 10:30:42 PM 766 Views
Wasn't there a quote somewhere BlackAdder - 06/01/2010 02:05:32 AM 684 Views
Probably a bit of retconning there by Brandon Lord Haart - 06/01/2010 03:34:55 PM 717 Views
BS is definitely wrong here BlackAdder - 06/01/2010 02:01:23 AM 731 Views
Re: BS is definitely wrong here Lord Haart - 06/01/2010 03:36:06 PM 706 Views
There is another way... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 07:00:31 PM 754 Views
Re: There is another way... Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:35:05 PM 786 Views
Re: There is another way... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 11:05:26 PM 705 Views
Nope randfandom - 06/01/2010 04:36:56 AM 788 Views
USe Occam's Razor yourself... fionwe1987 - 06/01/2010 05:53:22 AM 905 Views
and why didn't she invert any of the weaves? darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 05:55:54 AM 730 Views
Exactly! *NM* fionwe1987 - 06/01/2010 05:27:52 PM 391 Views
Maybe you cannot invert compulsion? Datakim - 06/01/2010 06:56:35 PM 765 Views
so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted? seems a little darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 11:31:09 PM 670 Views
Re: so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted? Datakim - 07/01/2010 12:02:00 AM 625 Views
I am inclined to agree with Datakim here. Fanatic-Templar - 07/01/2010 02:04:42 AM 931 Views
Why aren't inverted weaves standard practice? BlackAdder - 07/01/2010 01:24:09 AM 779 Views
Balefire is so confusing Datakim - 05/01/2010 07:03:29 PM 790 Views
Re: Balefire is so confusing Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:52:57 PM 761 Views
She's dead as a bloody doornail. Or whatever that saying is... *NM* lilltempest - 05/01/2010 07:20:36 PM 383 Views
Clearly dead Etzel - 05/01/2010 07:29:11 PM 934 Views
Re: Clearly dead Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:21:16 PM 801 Views
Re: Clearly dead Datakim - 05/01/2010 08:41:15 PM 758 Views
I think... Etzel - 05/01/2010 09:05:48 PM 758 Views
No way. Gher - 05/01/2010 07:31:12 PM 820 Views
Re: No way. Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:31:54 PM 705 Views
Re: No way. Gher - 05/01/2010 10:16:03 PM 734 Views
Graendal's as dead as BS/RJ makes her. *NM* Great Lord of Chaos - 06/01/2010 02:40:46 AM 375 Views
She's dead as dead gets. everynametaken - 06/01/2010 01:43:34 AM 679 Views
Dead is my bet Sidious - 06/01/2010 11:48:46 AM 700 Views
She's dead *NM* Simon - 06/01/2010 11:58:34 AM 351 Views
Dead. *NM* AgentOrange - 06/01/2010 03:58:19 PM 360 Views
I think she's alive. RugbyPlayingAshaman - 06/01/2010 06:12:50 PM 720 Views
Compulsion is rather useless isn't it? Syraelle - 06/01/2010 07:44:42 PM 796 Views
It may take an exceptional Delver/Healer Gher - 06/01/2010 08:49:37 PM 768 Views
perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves! darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 11:06:49 PM 701 Views
Re: perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves! RugbyPlayingAshaman - 07/01/2010 03:42:17 PM 742 Views
What if.. Tweak - 06/01/2010 10:41:44 PM 673 Views
I'll roll my eyes, and snort if she's alive Wotmaniac Reborn - 08/01/2010 04:21:20 AM 694 Views
Well... Heiko - 10/01/2010 03:24:39 AM 897 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes