Active Users:2324 Time:01/05/2026 11:02:01 AM
Re: Nope. charlene Send a noteboard - 26/12/2010 03:22:38 PM
"He has to be there, or else something bad will happen" clearly implies that Perrin's presence must be required. Rand was not at all affected by Perrin on Dragonmount. To begin with, Perrin was in T'A'R while Rand was in the real world, so that's a huge barrier.

If Perrin had actually touched Rand, or had reached out to him mentally, that would be one thing, but it seems clear that he was there as an observer so we could see something amazing happen (and so that Perrin would know to trust Rand).


When Perrin and Rand are together, the fireflies hold off the darkness in Min's viewings. When Rand was on DM, Perrin saw darkness, descirbed as oure evil, consuming him. The dark aura had almost completly covered Rand but then Perrin came closer and shouted out to him, willing him not to give in. This was enough to hold the darkness at bay and give Rand enough time to have his epiphany, shown by the sudden tiny beam of light in the middle of the maelstrom which then grew and shook off the dark. If Perrin hadn't been there to give his support the DO's evil would have completely taken Rand over.

C xx
Reply to message
Second time Perrin must be there for Rand vs Two times Aes Sedai may hurt him - 22/12/2010 10:29:49 PM 2082 Views
I see a stampede of Egwene apologists on the way *NM* - 23/12/2010 01:03:56 AM 590 Views
I just want to point out.. - 23/12/2010 01:18:29 AM 1190 Views
Re: I just want to point out.. - 23/12/2010 06:51:05 AM 1043 Views
- 28/12/2010 01:16:20 PM 841 Views
I'm still of the opinion that Rand is headed towards the same disaster LTT did - 04/01/2011 06:42:51 PM 938 Views
I think they're both partially right... - 05/01/2011 11:16:21 AM 849 Views
Er no - 23/12/2010 12:22:04 PM 1110 Views
The viewing says "women who can channel" - 23/12/2010 04:13:29 PM 981 Views
The second one isn't connected. - 23/12/2010 05:16:30 PM 1223 Views
nail on the head *NM* - 24/12/2010 01:27:41 AM 446 Views
Re: The second one isn't connected. - 24/12/2010 05:29:16 AM 1075 Views
Re: The second one isn't connected. - 24/12/2010 11:32:59 AM 915 Views
Re: The second one isn't connected. - 24/12/2010 06:06:04 PM 930 Views
Nope. - 24/12/2010 07:44:37 PM 914 Views
Re: Nope. - 24/12/2010 08:16:25 PM 941 Views
Re: Nope. - 26/12/2010 03:22:38 PM 1018 Views
I agree. - 18/01/2011 06:21:43 PM 872 Views
+1 - 19/01/2011 01:46:39 AM 950 Views

Reply to Message