Active Users:180 Time:18/05/2024 10:10:06 PM
Re: Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 01/09/2010 06:30:37 PM

I always thought the reason Rand did not go and do an inspection was because he was afraid that LTT would go berserk and try to kill Taim or something. This would have been twice as true after Rand lost control of saidin to LTT during the trolloc attack. If that had happened in the BT, the consequences would have been pretty bad.

This isn't in the books, though. Rand simply did not trust Logain, and did nothing with his warning because he wanted to show him who was boss. It was complete idiocy.

Though that does not excuse the fact that Rand did absolutely nothing. He could have sent other people to snoop into BT and covertly look into Taim and what he was doing.

Exactly.
Reply to message
Will Rand have cause to be mad at Egwene if... - 01/09/2010 02:24:24 AM 1442 Views
everyone always has cause to be mad at Egwene *NM* - 01/09/2010 02:51:32 AM 450 Views
Agreed. I've been mad at her for years. *NM* - 01/09/2010 03:05:04 PM 343 Views
Well... - 01/09/2010 04:05:02 AM 903 Views
Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd - 01/09/2010 08:19:27 AM 871 Views
Re: Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd - 01/09/2010 02:16:06 PM 850 Views
Re: Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd - 01/09/2010 04:41:36 PM 617 Views
One of the weaker elements of the series - 01/09/2010 05:27:12 PM 687 Views
Re: Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd - 01/09/2010 06:30:37 PM 674 Views
That's EXACTLY why Egwene would do it. - 01/09/2010 06:45:25 PM 688 Views
Re: Blaming Rand for Aes Sedai misfortunes is absurd - 03/09/2010 02:39:38 AM 641 Views
There's just as much evidence for the same sort of motivation for Logain - 04/09/2010 03:50:22 AM 637 Views
hmmm.... I'll probably kick myself for responding to this - 05/09/2010 04:31:34 PM 624 Views
Re: hmmm.... I'll probably kick myself for responding to this - 14/09/2010 05:16:58 AM 595 Views
I agree. *NM* - 01/09/2010 02:24:59 PM 381 Views

Reply to Message