Active Users:995 Time:02/02/2026 09:42:56 PM
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! benxtaron Send a noteboard - 05/12/2010 08:32:50 AM
The oath against using the OP as a weapon should have prevented Elaida or any captive Aes Sedai from showing the Seanchan Travelling.

Elaida KNEW what they would do with Travelling, that they would use it to KILL and there is NO WAY they could have possibly made her believe they were going to use it for benign purposes. You can give a hundred excuses for it, but an Aes Sedai who is still bound by the Three Oaths can NOT channel ANY weave that she thinks could be used to kill someone UNLESS in the last defense of her life. Elaida's life was not in danger. Maybe torture as a damane, yes, but they werent about to kill her so she should not have been able to circumvent the Oath.

Teaching dangerous weaves to other Aes Sedai is NOT the same, as the teacher can truthfully believe that the Novice or Accepted she is teaching will not use it to kill unless she also is threatened in her life. The same rule doesnt apply to the Seanchan. Non BA Aes Sedai should not be able to teach the Seanchan dangerous weaves.

We know for a FACT that Aes Sedai captured already have proven that they COULD NOT form weaves to kill. ie they could not hurl fireballs or earth tremors or whatever, and the Seanchan even commented that they were useless for battle. The same principle should hold for Elaida, her most of all. of the captured Aes Sedai.

I feel like this was written so we could see Elaida again, and to get the Seanchan to use Travelling of course, but there should have been some other way it was done. Maybe in front of Elaida refusing to teach it, an Accepted who saw it done is forced to show it. It just shouldnt have been an Aes Sedai to do it.


This is the woman who drove the Aes Sedai into the ground; who is selfish, arrogant, brash, and the closest thing to evil that isn't connected to the DO. She has used the power before for unwarranted violence, so I doubt she has enough morales to care about her actions.
Reply to message
Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 04/12/2010 06:38:22 AM 2149 Views
The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 06:54:20 AM 1062 Views
Re: The weave will not directly result in death - 04/12/2010 07:08:50 AM 962 Views
Wrong for two reasons - 04/12/2010 09:10:03 AM 1125 Views
Only two? Usually he's wrong for eight reasons. *NM* - 04/12/2010 09:47:37 AM 501 Views
Go jump in a lake - 05/12/2010 08:32:18 AM 852 Views
I wanted to be polite and mentioned just the major ones *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:44:25 AM 459 Views
Thank you, Voscaia Sedai *NM* - 04/12/2010 08:51:58 PM 407 Views
Re: Wrong for two reasons - 05/12/2010 08:39:02 AM 871 Views
you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:01:27 AM 744 Views
Re: you're forgetting she was collared. - 05/12/2010 09:08:30 AM 840 Views
uhm, no that's not all you're saying. - 05/12/2010 09:14:47 AM 851 Views
Yeah I am - 05/12/2010 09:17:48 AM 780 Views
no. dude i gave you a direct quote from your own statement. that is not what you said - 05/12/2010 09:20:14 AM 908 Views
Go dude yourself brother. - 05/12/2010 09:27:33 AM 770 Views
wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:33:41 AM 863 Views
Re: wow i just...wow. - 05/12/2010 09:45:47 AM 851 Views
yes well you genuinely seem to be having a problem comprehending your own statements. - 05/12/2010 09:51:18 AM 719 Views
Well you genuinely seem to be retarded. - 05/12/2010 09:59:19 AM 785 Views
I judge this based off your own reactions to other's statements - 05/12/2010 10:05:58 AM 885 Views
I judge you based on your own statements towards me - 05/12/2010 10:16:18 AM 805 Views
if all you did was disagree with me, we would not be having this discussion. - 05/12/2010 10:25:36 AM 753 Views
This is why I replied the way I did *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:51:54 AM 372 Views
go read the boooks more closely - 05/12/2010 02:34:11 PM 1169 Views
Plain wrong. The weave doesn't kill in itself. - 04/12/2010 02:34:00 PM 961 Views
Wrong - 05/12/2010 08:40:40 AM 774 Views
This - 04/12/2010 12:35:04 PM 791 Views
Seconded "This"^ *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:09:17 PM 375 Views
Thirded "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 10:47:56 AM 414 Views
Re: Fourthed "This"^ *NM* - 05/12/2010 08:08:15 PM 376 Views
yep, he was just trolling I guess *NM* - 05/12/2010 01:58:32 PM 380 Views
the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 04/12/2010 02:55:13 PM 800 Views
Re: the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death - 05/12/2010 08:43:48 AM 851 Views
just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:07:08 AM 796 Views
Re: just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able. - 05/12/2010 09:11:28 AM 823 Views
well that would explain how santa is able to make his rounds in one night! *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:13:43 AM 321 Views
Yup, I guess that was what Elaida was thinking *NM* - 05/12/2010 09:15:21 AM 389 Views
It's actually come up in the books themselves - 04/12/2010 03:00:03 PM 946 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 04/12/2010 03:30:57 PM 834 Views
Elaida could teach them balefire and not break the Oaths. *NM* - 04/12/2010 07:24:55 PM 368 Views
Re: Elaida, oh no you didn't! - 05/12/2010 08:32:50 AM 990 Views
There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 11:37:09 AM 746 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 05/12/2010 01:51:06 PM 1109 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it - 06/12/2010 01:43:45 PM 741 Views
I disagree - 06/12/2010 02:29:46 PM 819 Views

Reply to Message