Linda wrote a really good entry for this on her page.
RJ's 21 level scale was primarily used to keep track of the Aes Sedai pecking order. This wasn't actually meant to accurately depict Nynaeve's real strength compared to Lanfear. Outliers are not present in any way besides placeholding on that 21 level list - because it doesn't really mean anything concrete. It was made by RJ to primarily keep track of deference, not absolute strength.
Thus, because the 21 level list was primarily used for weaker character, it makes sense that RJ imposed this list on the overall bell curve distribution in theory, because the 21 level list was just a way of getting at a subset of the population and it was all relative, anyway, so you could take members of the population present in that list, and place them in the overall bell curve. Being at the topmost level on the 21 level list, in other words, did not mean that some random character out there was much stronger than you. It merely meant that you had not met that stronger person, thus they were not present in the list.
RJ's 21 level scale was primarily used to keep track of the Aes Sedai pecking order. This wasn't actually meant to accurately depict Nynaeve's real strength compared to Lanfear. Outliers are not present in any way besides placeholding on that 21 level list - because it doesn't really mean anything concrete. It was made by RJ to primarily keep track of deference, not absolute strength.
The scale is not a firm indicator of the outcomes of duels. Jordan used the list mainly for ranking the average to weaker channellers: "I have said that in my notes I have such a scale that I use to keep track of everyone, but its main use is for the lesser characters, in particular Aes Sedai, so that I can check on who should defer to whom, who should only listen a little more attentively to whom, and so forth."
- Robert Jordan on his blog
- Robert Jordan on his blog
Thus, because the 21 level list was primarily used for weaker character, it makes sense that RJ imposed this list on the overall bell curve distribution in theory, because the 21 level list was just a way of getting at a subset of the population and it was all relative, anyway, so you could take members of the population present in that list, and place them in the overall bell curve. Being at the topmost level on the 21 level list, in other words, did not mean that some random character out there was much stronger than you. It merely meant that you had not met that stronger person, thus they were not present in the list.
Exactly. The way Jordan phrases it, there are more Aes Sedai in the 21 level list than there would be if the 21 levels were evenly spread out over the whole strength scale (1-100 or 45-85784, makes no difference, they're randomly assigned values). Which is why I'm arguing that it makes no sense to have the 21 levels as the X-axis of the bell curve. Not only is it not a steady progression, its a bunch of discrete values, so a normal distribution over it is not possible.
It's apples and oranges. The bell curve is supposed to represent all possible reflections of strength, while the 21 level list was used as a means of keeping track who was stronger than who among the introduced characters. I have a ruler. I can use it to measure things between 0.1 inch and a foot. I cannot use it to measure anything above a foot, because that was not the purpose of its' design. The purpose of the 21 level list was made to keep track of a social hierarchy, not an absolute value measurable in the real world.
So, yes, strength falls along a bell curve. No, the 21 level list doesn't represent that bell curve. You can impose the 21 level list on the curve to get an idea over where particular members stood in the grand scheme of things, but the 21 level list does not conform in a 1 to 1 relationship absolute values of strength.
So, yes, strength falls along a bell curve. No, the 21 level list doesn't represent that bell curve. You can impose the 21 level list on the curve to get an idea over where particular members stood in the grand scheme of things, but the 21 level list does not conform in a 1 to 1 relationship absolute values of strength.
Exactly what I'm saying RPA. The way I see it, the Aes Sedai have a fairly small range of strength (because they exclude people below a certain strength scale, and also because they haven't had many strong channelers come to them), where quite a few of the 21 levels are represented because the AS seem a lot more prone to look at strength differences. The levels occupied by the Aes Sedai might differe by no more that 2-.2.5 units in a 1-100 scale, yet at the upper levels, the jumps might be around 5 units. Thus, LTT and Ishy at 100, Aginor at 99 and Demandred at 98 can all be considered more or less the same strength. No one up there really cares, because that one unit of strength doesn't matter at all. Frankly, I think if one takes into account skills and Talents, anyone from 70-100 should be able to challenge each other, and the battle wouldn't be a write off.
And I don't think strength means much anyway. You have multiple examples of "weaker" channelers with Talents that can outstrip certain things a stronger channeler can do, and stronger channelers that can't match the skills of weaker ones. Sex itself can determine how good you are at certain feats, so there are things that a Talent might make you truly exceptional at among the population as a whole (blocking gateways seems to be one of them).
Well, exactly. Which is why I'm so hesitant to place Aes Sedai so low on the strength scale. Previous lists out them from 8-25. Which means 37.5% of the population that cannot be Aes Sedai is ranging in strength from 1-8, which is fairly senseless.
Several good MAFOs from Dragonmount
10/06/2010 07:07:55 PM
- 2346 Views
Maria's answer to question 20 is ground-breaking!
10/06/2010 07:36:40 PM
- 1287 Views
No, it merely means that the Bell Curve does not refer to absolute strength...
10/06/2010 07:42:31 PM
- 1128 Views
See the question again man!
10/06/2010 07:48:57 PM
- 1105 Views
That contradicts your assertion that Moiraine is stronger than the average woman...
10/06/2010 07:50:11 PM
- 1194 Views
I need to re-evaluate nothing!
10/06/2010 07:46:20 PM
- 1128 Views

Think logically for a moment...
10/06/2010 07:49:10 PM
- 958 Views
Who said Egwene is twice as strong as Moiraine?
10/06/2010 07:52:27 PM
- 1252 Views
Aviendha did in FoH...
10/06/2010 07:54:32 PM
- 942 Views
Nope!
10/06/2010 07:55:55 PM
- 1115 Views
Your quotes are faulty
10/06/2010 07:57:18 PM
- 1121 Views
In what sense though?
10/06/2010 07:59:00 PM
- 1109 Views
Forkroot
10/06/2010 08:04:50 PM
- 1069 Views
Again... later that night?
10/06/2010 08:05:39 PM
- 923 Views
What do you mean?
10/06/2010 08:07:24 PM
- 1104 Views
See below...
10/06/2010 08:11:24 PM
- 982 Views
Re: See below...
10/06/2010 08:12:34 PM
- 1051 Views
I just did.
10/06/2010 08:16:09 PM
- 891 Views
Well then we disagree
10/06/2010 08:18:10 PM
- 1099 Views
BUT WHAT ABOUT LATER IN THE NIGHT!
10/06/2010 08:20:21 PM
- 924 Views
Ah, you mean later later ...
10/06/2010 08:29:59 PM
- 1030 Views
Forkroot wears off, you know?
10/06/2010 08:45:33 PM
- 1124 Views
Yes I know
10/06/2010 09:05:29 PM
- 1125 Views
I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:17:10 PM
- 1099 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:37:39 PM
- 1096 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 09:51:40 PM
- 1030 Views
Re: I've explained it before in this thread...
10/06/2010 10:05:37 PM
- 1070 Views
Are you sure you're feeling fine?
10/06/2010 10:18:44 PM
- 1121 Views
RJ writes that Amys cannot hold Egwene. BS writes that Barasene can. Who are you gonna believe?
10/06/2010 08:31:35 PM
- 939 Views
It wasn't BS... both were RJ!
10/06/2010 08:41:54 PM
- 1029 Views
In that case, there is no problem...
10/06/2010 08:45:05 PM
- 1169 Views
But that isn't what the text says...
10/06/2010 08:57:42 PM
- 895 Views
How can Egwene be strong enough to overcome Katerine and Silviana together then?
10/06/2010 09:07:36 PM
- 1138 Views
Yeah, both were RJ
10/06/2010 08:49:13 PM
- 1010 Views
Yeah yeah... RJ lied, Maria lied. Only you make sense. I'm finished with this debate.
10/06/2010 08:59:06 PM
- 1099 Views
10/06/2010 09:07:52 PM
- 1091 Views

Really?
10/06/2010 09:29:22 PM
- 958 Views
Re: Really?
10/06/2010 09:39:21 PM
- 1062 Views
Here's what is clear:
10/06/2010 09:02:41 PM
- 1001 Views
IMO it's easy to disprove
10/06/2010 09:22:23 PM
- 984 Views
Dude...
10/06/2010 09:27:34 PM
- 894 Views
At least we agree on one thing
10/06/2010 09:29:14 PM
- 1007 Views
yet 4 women can still hold Rand in LoC ... he can't break the Shield until it's down to 3
13/06/2010 12:47:43 PM
- 833 Views
Have to agree with Sidious on this point
11/06/2010 02:49:58 AM
- 932 Views
The rate forkroot wears off?
16/06/2010 12:36:38 PM
- 1050 Views
You missed that she isn't being given Forkroot at night at all!
16/06/2010 04:47:59 PM
- 950 Views
Maria's other answer adresses this...
10/06/2010 08:14:54 PM
- 839 Views
Then one Aes Sedai cannot shield her. But one did.
10/06/2010 08:16:41 PM
- 958 Views
You can be much weaker than someone, and hold them shielded, if they are already cut off...
10/06/2010 08:19:15 PM
- 942 Views
But, if you are much stronger, you can break that shield...
10/06/2010 08:22:25 PM
- 952 Views
Easy...
10/06/2010 08:24:59 PM
- 915 Views
What has that got to do with it?
10/06/2010 08:32:56 PM
- 1102 Views
Amys is not LESS than half of Egwene's strength. You cannot hold someone if you are LESS than half..
10/06/2010 08:47:41 PM
- 1012 Views
Amys is as strong as Moiraine, at the most one level lower. Barasine is weaker than Katarine, who...
10/06/2010 09:00:26 PM
- 1145 Views
I can agree with that.
10/06/2010 09:09:07 PM
- 901 Views
...
10/06/2010 09:12:21 PM
- 901 Views
Agreed, but...
10/06/2010 09:13:59 PM
- 1057 Views
Re: Agreed, but...
10/06/2010 09:16:30 PM
- 860 Views
Good point...
10/06/2010 09:18:53 PM
- 1066 Views
Or, you know, you can have the grace to question your antiquated strength list...
10/06/2010 09:22:51 PM
- 932 Views
I'd be perfectly happy to adjust my list if it made sense
10/06/2010 09:32:35 PM
- 876 Views
Uhhh?
10/06/2010 09:41:59 PM
- 877 Views
Re: Uhhh?
10/06/2010 09:48:58 PM
- 879 Views
DUDE!
10/06/2010 09:58:59 PM
- 909 Views
Rand seems to shield Egwene and Elayne TOGETHER, pretty easily...
10/06/2010 09:54:03 PM
- 1551 Views
That's fairly simple, actually...
10/06/2010 10:08:53 PM
- 1129 Views
Nope. Rand was also cut off from the Source when he broke a shield held by 3 Aes Sedai...
10/06/2010 11:18:41 PM
- 1086 Views
Because that channeler is much stronger? I'm not getting your confusion here. *NM*
10/06/2010 11:27:31 PM
- 525 Views
Your Aes Sedai are close to the average woman in strength, right...
10/06/2010 11:42:01 PM
- 1151 Views
No, here's the quote: I hate having to pull out my books with their yellowed pages...
10/06/2010 08:01:54 PM
- 922 Views
Why would she need surprise against two? That was against five of them...
10/06/2010 08:04:57 PM
- 938 Views
Very poor evidence
10/06/2010 08:11:26 PM
- 1058 Views
no she said Egwene is stronger than Amys and Melaine combined
11/06/2010 12:46:29 AM
- 1004 Views
The actual quote says Amys and Melaine combined...
11/06/2010 12:25:07 PM
- 1049 Views
Here's the problem with that...
11/06/2010 12:42:41 PM
- 913 Views
I think you are misreading her.
10/06/2010 07:47:06 PM
- 876 Views
Please explain what you mean by "channeler" and "power" distribution. *NM*
10/06/2010 09:23:36 PM
- 560 Views
Re: Please explain what you mean by "channeler" and "power" distribution.
10/06/2010 10:11:23 PM
- 1105 Views
Yes. You can't extrapolate a generalized macro level scale to micro level individuals.
11/06/2010 12:16:24 AM
- 941 Views
I don't agree
10/06/2010 07:49:41 PM
- 925 Views
BAH! Its infuriating how you have so many blinders... Eerily Aes Sedai of you.
10/06/2010 07:54:23 PM
- 1128 Views
Hmm...
10/06/2010 07:55:59 PM
- 864 Views
Because of the question to which she responded...
10/06/2010 07:57:55 PM
- 871 Views
Re: Because of the question to which she responded...
10/06/2010 08:06:16 PM
- 1028 Views
Without contradicting the latter...
10/06/2010 08:15:11 PM
- 910 Views
Ah well
10/06/2010 08:20:32 PM
- 904 Views
Great! Two of my OP strength ideas have been solidified!
10/06/2010 07:39:53 PM
- 1133 Views
Nope...
10/06/2010 07:46:31 PM
- 989 Views
Who said Cadsuane was 50?
10/06/2010 07:51:14 PM
- 1026 Views
So how can Egwene be twice as strong as Moiraine, if Moiraine is at 55?
10/06/2010 07:53:11 PM
- 891 Views
She cannot be because she isn't. Silviana can shield Egwene alone, for God's sake. So can Amys!
10/06/2010 07:56:26 PM
- 840 Views
Amys can't hold her properly
10/06/2010 07:59:47 PM
- 870 Views
What about later that night?
10/06/2010 08:02:16 PM
- 874 Views
No she didn't
16/06/2010 03:02:21 PM
- 994 Views
No she didn't what?
16/06/2010 04:46:05 PM
- 1037 Views
Re: No she didn't what?
17/06/2010 06:16:16 AM
- 882 Views
Why do you think it's a linear scale?
16/06/2010 05:25:56 AM
- 1004 Views
That's simple...
16/06/2010 06:36:44 AM
- 952 Views
Re: That's simple...
16/06/2010 12:27:07 PM
- 906 Views
Your concept is not mathematically right. So yeah, forget discussing it.
16/06/2010 04:41:13 PM
- 1092 Views
Dang, Cyndane isn't using Cabriana's body.
10/06/2010 08:25:20 PM
- 944 Views
The blue flash RAFO irritates me- I can't see how that will be relevant. The Min thing was new
10/06/2010 08:50:52 PM
- 1074 Views
RJ already RAFOed the incident with Thom's knives/daggers before
10/06/2010 08:57:52 PM
- 1156 Views
It isn't, unless she's implying the Creator helped him out or some other such thing
11/06/2010 12:56:49 AM
- 903 Views
Just to make things clear on the strength thing...
10/06/2010 09:08:02 PM
- 1185 Views
It is possible Maria was answering the first question and ignoring the second...
10/06/2010 09:29:59 PM
- 911 Views
That still proves my point...
10/06/2010 09:33:10 PM
- 1083 Views
Re: That still proves my point...
10/06/2010 09:45:39 PM
- 952 Views
Then why...
10/06/2010 10:00:00 PM
- 1034 Views
Re: Then why...
10/06/2010 10:07:56 PM
- 909 Views
God, what stupidity!
10/06/2010 10:10:32 PM
- 900 Views
Re: God, what stupidity!
10/06/2010 10:16:38 PM
- 1001 Views
It doesn't have to be 1-100.
10/06/2010 10:32:17 PM
- 948 Views
Re: It doesn't have to be 1-100.
10/06/2010 10:41:02 PM
- 1228 Views
That's a mathematical impossibility...
10/06/2010 11:26:23 PM
- 1067 Views
Just popping in. I think you're arguing over non-existent delineations.
11/06/2010 12:44:40 AM
- 990 Views
You're pretty much agreeing with me, you know?
11/06/2010 12:32:44 PM
- 961 Views
You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 12:25:05 AM
- 979 Views
Re: You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 03:22:53 AM
- 1092 Views
Re: You know, these things always end up pissing me off.
11/06/2010 12:29:37 PM
- 1017 Views
I agree
11/06/2010 01:14:36 PM
- 1131 Views
Re: I agree
12/06/2010 03:02:32 PM
- 915 Views
BS didn't answer with "Read and find out"
12/06/2010 03:28:05 PM
- 952 Views
We were speaking about Maria giving a RAFO on the topic, not Sanderson. *NM*
13/06/2010 12:05:17 AM
- 540 Views
Actually she said "No"...
*NM*
13/06/2010 01:06:18 AM
- 632 Views

I'll rephrase then. It was about Maria saying that she considered giving a RAFO on the question.
13/06/2010 01:44:19 AM
- 957 Views
Eh, practically useless.
14/06/2010 11:50:06 PM
- 906 Views
I agree. I think she is saving the good stuff for the encyclopedia. *NM*
15/06/2010 04:17:07 PM
- 505 Views
Yeah. I do think she's taking advantage of these poor saps, though.
17/06/2010 03:52:33 PM
- 1485 Views