Active Users:640 Time:03/08/2025 02:11:50 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
That has more to do with the nature of both weaves RugbyPlayingAshaman Send a noteboard - 26/10/2010 05:07:48 PM
If balefire is an extremely powerful weapon that channels a concentrated beam of anti-reality, than it makes sense that it would penetrate a defense that works by creating a physical barrier. Rand was thinking of fireballs, lightning bolts, arrows and other physical attacks. We have no indication that a Shield or another weave that blended physical/metaphysical effects couldn't penetrate it.
"Those who think they have no time for bodily exercise will sooner or later have to find time for illness."
Reply to message
Prologue: A Question on Gateways Night Walker - 25/10/2010 07:33:23 PM 1576 Views
I was wondering this myself *NM* Sidious - 25/10/2010 08:23:57 PM 428 Views
I'm thinking it got overlooked... *NM* Night Walker - 25/10/2010 08:35:31 PM 392 Views
I'm inclined to agree, but there are other possibilities Sidious - 25/10/2010 08:48:01 PM 952 Views
Seems pretty obvious to me that she released it (and was holding it) before the BF hit it darius_sedai - 26/10/2010 04:40:04 AM 837 Views
Balefire's reversal of actions taken only works on living things that can perform said actions. TaskmasterJack - 25/10/2010 09:36:46 PM 1012 Views
Agreed. I think Graendal's weave is only undone if the BF hits her, not the gateway *NM* newyorkersedai - 25/10/2010 10:48:07 PM 355 Views
*nods* *NM* RugbyPlayingAshaman - 26/10/2010 05:08:20 PM 360 Views
thats not true Apsalar Shadowdancer - 26/10/2010 01:18:16 AM 884 Views
It is true. Objects do not have threads that can be affected by balefire. TaskmasterJack - 26/10/2010 01:56:48 AM 913 Views
Re: It is true. Objects do not have threads that can be affected by balefire. car'a'aman - 26/10/2010 04:55:20 AM 855 Views
This will sound bad to say and I realize it sounds more petulant than it is... TaskmasterJack - 27/10/2010 02:31:33 AM 985 Views
here is the quote from the sceen, it is not confusing, you were just to lazy to read it. Apsalar Shadowdancer - 26/10/2010 07:24:19 AM 842 Views
I don't agree Skeeve the Great - 26/10/2010 12:08:41 PM 945 Views
so you think it made the hole in the boat back in time to allow the water into the boat Apsalar Shadowdancer - 26/10/2010 06:25:37 PM 931 Views
Re: Balefire TaskmasterJack - 27/10/2010 03:02:39 AM 1016 Views
we will just have to agree to disagree then. Apsalar Shadowdancer - 27/10/2010 03:51:41 AM 899 Views
sceen=scene, yes? And I didn't mean confusing to me. I meant to others. It's always been clear to me TaskmasterJack - 27/10/2010 02:51:41 AM 1017 Views
A weave should be destroyed Sidious - 26/10/2010 10:19:13 AM 786 Views
Re: A weave should be destroyed Skeeve the Great - 26/10/2010 12:03:16 PM 853 Views
That has more to do with the nature of both weaves RugbyPlayingAshaman - 26/10/2010 05:07:48 PM 740 Views
I agree darius_sedai - 26/10/2010 05:32:57 PM 765 Views
Thank you for reminding us of the scene, but it doesn't sell me completely. TaskmasterJack - 27/10/2010 02:28:00 AM 1007 Views
*nods* RugbyPlayingAshaman - 26/10/2010 05:05:12 PM 819 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes