Active Users:2454 Time:14/09/2026 05:36:47 AM
Re: I disagree Datakim Send a noteboard - 06/01/2010 06:41:08 PM

I think there are two factors in Balefire:

1 - Strength (how far back in time the Pattern is burnt out)

2 - Area (how much the balefire affects - this includes the range of the BF)


This is actually what I am arguing for. That a channeler can choose how wide the balefire stream is, and how strong it is. So Rand could choose a wide but weak stream to burn a large group back only a second. Or a single focused intense stream to burn just a single target back many hours.

But I am also suggesting that these two are not linked. So if he had enough power, he could also create a wide stream that burned everyone back an hour. Or he could create a focused stream that burned you back a second. It would be up to him.

The fact that entire cities were burned in the AoL in one go seems to support this. The AoLers who did not have unlimited power used a wide but weak stream. That still would have destroyed the city effectively, but without burning everyone back for more than just a few seconds maybe?


I see no reason to believe that Rand moderated his use of the CK. After all, he is taking out one of the top Forsaken, and before this, he spreads the knowledge of Balefire to his Asha'man (Narishma), suggesting that while he knows it is dangerous, he doesn't really realise why or how much it is.


Uhh?
At this point in the series, Rand has almost completely merged with LTT. And LTT was there when Balefire was invented. It is very likely that rather than not realising the danger, Rand actually knows better than anyone else alive (other than the forsaken) how balefire works, what it does and how much the pattern can take.

Read the scene where Cadsuane tries to order him to stop and he draws upon LTT to smack her down as the ignorant child that she is.

Given that, and given that he knows that the timespan he burned Rahvin back was sufficient since Moridin told him that Rahvin was gone. And given that he has not had his breakdown yet and does not want to destroy the pattern, why would he burn Graendal back any more than he did Rahvin? I see no reason why he would.

I think what we saw was a wide balefire stream that had been attuned so that while it touched everyone, those that it touched were not burned back all that long. No more than Rahvin and probably less. He might even have used as little as what Moiraine used when he took out Bel'al.

Yes, it did damage, but nowhere near enough to seriously endanger the pattern. And I doubt Rand had to draw upon all the power the CK had to offer to do this. I think he could have even used Callandor to accomplish this had he wished. Heck, a circle of 13 might have done the trick.


Now, Brandon has commented on how far back in time balefire can take things - we know that at most, it couldn't have taken Graendal back more than a week or so (Brandon said a day or two IIRC), but we know that the balefire was strong enough to remove the Compulsion placed on Ramshalan (probably 20-60 minutes earlier). Note that this minimum is roughly equal to or greater than the amount of time that Rand restored in TFoH with Rahvin.

With Rahvin, Rand used at most 1 metre squared of balefire (likely less, but we'll be generous). We also know that Natrin's Barrow is a large estate, so assuming that Rand's target area was 1km squared is not unreasonable.

1km squared = 1 million metres. This strongly suggests that he is definitely drawing deeply on the Choedan Kal.


I agree that he could not have created a stream wide enough to encompass the entire palace unaided. But I am arguing that he did not come close to drawing fully on the CK.

Even just 1% of the max power of CK would probably have been enough to take out the palace. That 1% would still be many many times more than Rands unaided strength though. But 1% is not drawing deeply.

Why would Rand, who did not want to destroy the pattern yet, use 100% of what the CK has to offer if he KNEW from LTT and what happened to Rahvin that 1% would be enough. And actually that 1% would be better/safer. No reason I can think of that he would have.


2 - We never hear how far back the population was taken. For all we know, the balefire streams were broad but far weaker than Rand's, only taking them back seconds or perhaps even less.


But if it is possible to create a stream that is broad and wide, but weak at the same time. Why would Rand have create a stream that was wide AND strong. He would know it was not required and would only cause unnecessary damage to the pattern. Damage that he, at this point in the book, did not want to cause yet.
Reply to message
Rand the psycho? - 06/01/2010 02:53:30 AM 1902 Views
I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:07:33 AM 1341 Views
On Balefire - 06/01/2010 04:43:18 AM 1303 Views
Good point - 06/01/2010 05:04:26 AM 1338 Views
On the nature of BaleFire - 06/01/2010 03:32:25 PM 1242 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:59:12 AM 1155 Views
Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:10:33 AM 1229 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:20:02 AM 1137 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:58:00 AM 1130 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 11:46:13 AM 1101 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 03:55:01 PM 1095 Views
I disagree - 06/01/2010 05:42:44 PM 1059 Views
Re: I disagree - 06/01/2010 06:41:08 PM 1094 Views
Re: I disagree - 07/01/2010 04:42:40 AM 1075 Views
I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 07:30:56 AM 1186 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 03:32:24 PM 1110 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 09:52:47 PM 1199 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 11:19:56 PM 1145 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:21:50 AM 1176 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:56:26 AM 1104 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 01:46:16 AM 1168 Views
I agree with Templar - 09/01/2010 04:36:20 PM 1080 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 07:57:54 AM 1198 Views
Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 02:36:42 PM 1194 Views
Re: Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 04:16:12 PM 1153 Views
But... - 06/01/2010 04:34:02 PM 1225 Views
Re: But... - 06/01/2010 06:14:25 PM 1042 Views
Doesn't Balefire remove your thread from the Pattern permanently? - 06/01/2010 02:55:38 PM 1227 Views
No, RJ stated balefired people can be reborn. *NM* - 06/01/2010 03:26:00 PM 579 Views
But not in this turning of the Wheel. So they'd miss out on MANY lifetimes. - 06/01/2010 05:46:04 PM 1099 Views
What? - 06/01/2010 06:20:56 PM 1100 Views
Where did you get that? - 06/01/2010 07:09:38 PM 1061 Views
No, balefire just kills you backwards in time. It is not super-death. *NM* - 06/01/2010 09:58:18 PM 587 Views
LOL ... super-death! - 06/01/2010 11:59:31 PM 1042 Views
Hah! *NM* - 07/01/2010 12:06:07 AM 579 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:20 AM 1081 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:33 AM 1025 Views
Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 06:51:15 PM 1184 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 07:16:14 PM 1153 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 08:58:40 PM 1129 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 10:47:11 PM 1123 Views
let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:26:43 PM 1138 Views
Re: let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:40:56 PM 1113 Views
actually that quote supports my thoughts - 06/01/2010 11:50:40 PM 1237 Views
Re: actually that quote supports my thoughts - 07/01/2010 12:10:07 AM 1073 Views
Meh. I just think advocating mass-murder is the opposite direction RJ meant for this to take. - 07/01/2010 12:00:44 AM 1209 Views
Sigh. What mass murder? - 07/01/2010 12:15:01 AM 1057 Views
you are kidding right? - 07/01/2010 12:19:58 AM 1114 Views
In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:14:32 PM 1090 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:57:43 PM 1106 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:13:21 PM 1119 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:52:24 PM 1053 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 08:56:43 PM 1133 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:26:01 PM 1099 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:30:45 PM 1015 Views
Personally I'm kind of sick of Rand being the only person killing FS! - 07/01/2010 09:42:57 PM 1167 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:56:02 PM 1142 Views
OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 07/01/2010 10:30:19 PM 1157 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 01:53:25 PM 1068 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 02:56:41 PM 1105 Views
What might work... - 08/01/2010 12:35:17 PM 1000 Views
Re: What might work... - 08/01/2010 11:38:09 PM 1030 Views
Yes. Anakin Skywalker all over again - 06/01/2010 11:01:02 PM 1208 Views
Meh - 06/01/2010 11:30:24 PM 1050 Views
The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:33:32 PM 1036 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:50:37 PM 1127 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:55:03 PM 1099 Views
I do have to guiltily say, though, that if Rand had balefired the Seanchan and THEN became good... - 07/01/2010 12:03:20 AM 1090 Views
*laughs behind hand* - 07/01/2010 12:05:54 AM 1165 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 07/01/2010 12:23:11 AM 1027 Views
I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 12:52:25 AM 1066 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 01:24:32 AM 1148 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 03:33:52 PM 1050 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 04:28:18 PM 1217 Views
right cause all Generals are so well versed in medical conditions - 07/01/2010 09:44:09 PM 1161 Views
Nice way to avoid the argument. - 07/01/2010 10:00:17 PM 1096 Views
I'm just done talking in circles. You seem to think that because people - 07/01/2010 11:53:05 PM 1138 Views
I concede - 07/01/2010 01:09:11 AM 1054 Views
You weren't wrong overall, but there were some serious flaws in your reasoning. - 07/01/2010 02:43:17 AM 1168 Views
Tee hee. - 07/01/2010 05:28:52 AM 1123 Views
Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 06:23:09 AM 1113 Views
Re: Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 03:23:59 PM 1053 Views
I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 12:00:02 AM 1123 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 05:56:16 PM 1307 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 18/01/2010 01:00:23 PM 1426 Views
Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 11/01/2010 04:47:10 PM 1003 Views
Re: Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 18/01/2010 12:49:26 PM 1044 Views

Reply to Message