Active Users:630 Time:02/08/2025 10:56:44 PM
They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... DomA Send a noteboard - 07/05/2011 08:48:50 PM
To me it makes sense that every Channeler would have numerous angreal if possible.


Only fairly weak channellers would really need personal angreal, and it sounds like having one was a sign of weakness as most of them are disguised to pass unnoticed as brooches or rings and such, or decorative items you could keep on display and pick up if you need them at home, or carry in a purse. Among the Forsaken, flaunting an angreal is probably the same as admitting you're in fear of the others. The Chosen even mocked (privately or not) those who sought to acquire the big stuff like Callandor. They all wish they had stuff like this, but they won't admit it to the others.

The AOL seemed to favour cooperative efforts (mixed gender ones incl.) over the use of angreal. There's one obvious reason for this: the OP is very addictive. Using angreal regularly isn't a good thing. Another reason was probably that there was no lack of Aes Sedai to join circles back then.

The more powerful stuff, that your average AS never needs except on duty for his or her local Hall, were probably in storage at those local Halls, with even more powerful stuff in the keeping of the Guild's central administration, or at facilities like research centers, factories etc.

As for the Forsaken not coming to SG with a whole arsenal, it seems to me the answer is pretty obvious. They probably all had a collection in a hidden place somewhere, but RJ described the DO as the ultimate paranoid control freak... He totally forbids the use of the OP near the Pit of Doom, killing anyone touching the Source without questions asked... You'd have to be a complete moron to go there with anything ressembling a OP object, especially anything like a OP magnifier...
Reply to message
How come every Forsaken wasn’t loaded with angreal when they were sealed in the Bore? - 07/05/2011 02:35:18 AM 2403 Views
Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 08:49:41 AM 1418 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 03:09:51 PM 1280 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 04:29:39 PM 1302 Views
No - 07/05/2011 08:36:49 PM 1065 Views
Re: No - 07/05/2011 09:16:18 PM 1042 Views
Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:07:31 PM 1112 Views
Re: Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:24:21 PM 1221 Views
Which would be a shame. - 09/05/2011 08:17:23 PM 1065 Views
There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:08:53 PM 1280 Views
Re: There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:23:14 PM 1103 Views
Yeah, but - 07/05/2011 07:30:45 PM 1077 Views
They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 08:48:50 PM 1328 Views
Re: They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 09:54:11 PM 1187 Views
Re: They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 08/05/2011 05:48:01 PM 1088 Views
Uh whatever! - 11/05/2011 07:35:54 AM 1521 Views
Re: Uh whatever! - 11/05/2011 10:02:40 AM 1244 Views
Meet malekithe. - 11/05/2011 08:06:01 PM 1122 Views
Meet Cannoli - 18/05/2011 07:47:46 AM 1472 Views
Re: Meet Cannoli - 19/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1377 Views
Whatever whatever! - 18/05/2011 07:43:31 AM 1259 Views
But the Dark One could control what the One Power did in Shayol Ghul - 11/05/2011 07:14:43 PM 1124 Views
it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 10:18:34 PM 1091 Views
Re: it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 11:50:27 PM 1066 Views
I was under impression they weren't very aware of the "destroying reality" part - 12/05/2011 06:06:56 AM 1011 Views
yep (on both) *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:37:59 AM 549 Views
I think they were at least in some part - 12/05/2011 04:15:26 PM 953 Views
RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 02:13:15 PM 1182 Views
Re: I don't think so - 08/05/2011 03:09:29 PM 1245 Views
Good points - 08/05/2011 03:13:57 PM 1073 Views
well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 06:11:32 AM 1119 Views
Re: well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 10:57:45 AM 1106 Views
I suppose that depends on what you want to get out of a fantasy book. *NM* - 09/05/2011 10:28:48 PM 592 Views
Do we really *know* that cuendiar is indestructble? - 10/05/2011 02:46:49 PM 1090 Views
We don't, although simplicity=/=weakness. Another scenario - 10/05/2011 07:08:57 PM 981 Views
Sort of - 11/05/2011 07:49:10 AM 1449 Views
Re: RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 03:14:20 PM 1129 Views
Not plastic, more like electronics. - 11/05/2011 03:26:53 PM 1181 Views
I missed this post, it's very well thought! *NM* - 19/05/2011 11:26:00 AM 618 Views
my personal theory with other thoughts - 09/05/2011 08:10:34 PM 1116 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 02:10:13 AM 1103 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 08:07:50 AM 1040 Views
Some people would. - 11/05/2011 02:42:25 PM 1053 Views
Re: Some people would. - 11/05/2011 03:01:01 PM 988 Views
It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 03:45:45 PM 1141 Views
Re: It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 04:03:15 PM 960 Views
and if you had prophesy??? *NM* - 04/06/2011 03:10:40 AM 642 Views
My personal theory is that angreal and sa'angreal require Circles of male and female channelers - 11/05/2011 07:24:34 PM 1072 Views
makes sense *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:36:08 AM 581 Views
Er, though - - 16/05/2011 06:08:55 PM 1040 Views
Re: Er, though - - 17/05/2011 12:38:14 PM 953 Views
Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:09:36 PM 1157 Views
Re: Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:15:53 PM 1004 Views
I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1083 Views
Re: I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:49:53 PM 1043 Views
That makes sense - 17/05/2011 02:16:05 PM 1076 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 03:46:04 PM 975 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 04:21:11 PM 995 Views
Re: That makes sense - 18/05/2011 01:18:43 PM 1035 Views
That scene was weird - 18/05/2011 02:37:44 PM 977 Views
Re: That scene was weird - 19/05/2011 10:41:59 AM 967 Views

Reply to Message