Active Users:409 Time:17/06/2025 12:34:40 AM
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 2376 Views
Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 08:49:41 AM 1396 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 03:09:51 PM 1257 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 04:29:39 PM 1281 Views
No - 07/05/2011 08:36:49 PM 1042 Views
Re: No - 07/05/2011 09:16:18 PM 1019 Views
Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:07:31 PM 1089 Views
Re: Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:24:21 PM 1195 Views
Which would be a shame. - 09/05/2011 08:17:23 PM 1042 Views
There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:08:53 PM 1259 Views
Re: There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:23:14 PM 1079 Views
Yeah, but - 07/05/2011 07:30:45 PM 1055 Views
They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 08:48:50 PM 1303 Views
Re: They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 09:54:11 PM 1163 Views
Re: They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 08/05/2011 05:48:01 PM 1065 Views
Uh whatever! - 11/05/2011 07:35:54 AM 1494 Views
Re: Uh whatever! - 11/05/2011 10:02:40 AM 1224 Views
Meet malekithe. - 11/05/2011 08:06:01 PM 1100 Views
Meet Cannoli - 18/05/2011 07:47:46 AM 1442 Views
Re: Meet Cannoli - 19/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1349 Views
Whatever whatever! - 18/05/2011 07:43:31 AM 1231 Views
But the Dark One could control what the One Power did in Shayol Ghul - 11/05/2011 07:14:43 PM 1101 Views
it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 10:18:34 PM 1065 Views
Re: it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 11:50:27 PM 1046 Views
I was under impression they weren't very aware of the "destroying reality" part - 12/05/2011 06:06:56 AM 990 Views
yep (on both) *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:37:59 AM 537 Views
I think they were at least in some part - 12/05/2011 04:15:26 PM 934 Views
RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 02:13:15 PM 1161 Views
Re: I don't think so - 08/05/2011 03:09:29 PM 1224 Views
Good points - 08/05/2011 03:13:57 PM 1049 Views
well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 06:11:32 AM 1097 Views
Re: well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 10:57:45 AM 1085 Views
I suppose that depends on what you want to get out of a fantasy book. *NM* - 09/05/2011 10:28:48 PM 578 Views
Do we really *know* that cuendiar is indestructble? - 10/05/2011 02:46:49 PM 1066 Views
We don't, although simplicity=/=weakness. Another scenario - 10/05/2011 07:08:57 PM 957 Views
Sort of - 11/05/2011 07:49:10 AM 1419 Views
Re: RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 03:14:20 PM 1110 Views
Not plastic, more like electronics. - 11/05/2011 03:26:53 PM 1157 Views
I missed this post, it's very well thought! *NM* - 19/05/2011 11:26:00 AM 603 Views
my personal theory with other thoughts - 09/05/2011 08:10:34 PM 1095 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 02:10:13 AM 1081 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 08:07:50 AM 1019 Views
Some people would. - 11/05/2011 02:42:25 PM 1034 Views
Re: Some people would. - 11/05/2011 03:01:01 PM 964 Views
It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 03:45:45 PM 1120 Views
Re: It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 04:03:15 PM 940 Views
and if you had prophesy??? *NM* - 04/06/2011 03:10:40 AM 626 Views
My personal theory is that angreal and sa'angreal require Circles of male and female channelers - 11/05/2011 07:24:34 PM 1050 Views
makes sense *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:36:08 AM 568 Views
Er, though - - 16/05/2011 06:08:55 PM 1020 Views
Re: Er, though - - 17/05/2011 12:38:14 PM 932 Views
Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:09:36 PM 1131 Views
Re: Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:15:53 PM 981 Views
I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1061 Views
Re: I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:49:53 PM 1021 Views
That makes sense - 17/05/2011 02:16:05 PM 1055 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 03:46:04 PM 956 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 04:21:11 PM 975 Views
Re: That makes sense - 18/05/2011 01:18:43 PM 1013 Views
That scene was weird - 18/05/2011 02:37:44 PM 955 Views
Re: That scene was weird - 19/05/2011 10:41:59 AM 945 Views

Reply to Message