Active Users:645 Time:03/08/2025 03:05:41 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 2406 Views
Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 08:49:41 AM 1420 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 03:09:51 PM 1282 Views
Re: Several reasons exist - 07/05/2011 04:29:39 PM 1303 Views
No - 07/05/2011 08:36:49 PM 1067 Views
Re: No - 07/05/2011 09:16:18 PM 1044 Views
Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:07:31 PM 1115 Views
Re: Or another question - 07/05/2011 04:24:21 PM 1224 Views
Which would be a shame. - 09/05/2011 08:17:23 PM 1068 Views
There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:08:53 PM 1282 Views
Re: There's no reason to pack heat for a meeting at SG - 07/05/2011 06:23:14 PM 1105 Views
Yeah, but - 07/05/2011 07:30:45 PM 1079 Views
They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 08:48:50 PM 1329 Views
Re: They probably left them all at home.. .and not by choice... - 07/05/2011 09:54:11 PM 1189 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 1524 Views
Re: Uh whatever! - 11/05/2011 10:02:40 AM 1247 Views
Meet malekithe. - 11/05/2011 08:06:01 PM 1124 Views
Meet Cannoli - 18/05/2011 07:47:46 AM 1475 Views
Re: Meet Cannoli - 19/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1380 Views
Whatever whatever! - 18/05/2011 07:43:31 AM 1262 Views
But the Dark One could control what the One Power did in Shayol Ghul - 11/05/2011 07:14:43 PM 1126 Views
it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 10:18:34 PM 1094 Views
Re: it could also be that he told them to, because he could. - 11/05/2011 11:50:27 PM 1067 Views
I was under impression they weren't very aware of the "destroying reality" part - 12/05/2011 06:06:56 AM 1013 Views
yep (on both) *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:37:59 AM 550 Views
I think they were at least in some part - 12/05/2011 04:15:26 PM 955 Views
RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 02:13:15 PM 1185 Views
Re: I don't think so - 08/05/2011 03:09:29 PM 1248 Views
Good points - 08/05/2011 03:13:57 PM 1076 Views
well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 06:11:32 AM 1122 Views
Re: well, given that we don't really KNOW how Cuendillar was made... - 09/05/2011 10:57:45 AM 1109 Views
I suppose that depends on what you want to get out of a fantasy book. *NM* - 09/05/2011 10:28:48 PM 593 Views
Do we really *know* that cuendiar is indestructble? - 10/05/2011 02:46:49 PM 1093 Views
We don't, although simplicity=/=weakness. Another scenario - 10/05/2011 07:08:57 PM 984 Views
Sort of - 11/05/2011 07:49:10 AM 1452 Views
Re: RJ stuffed up... - 08/05/2011 03:14:20 PM 1131 Views
Not plastic, more like electronics. - 11/05/2011 03:26:53 PM 1183 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 1119 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 02:10:13 AM 1107 Views
Re: my personal theory with other thoughts - 10/05/2011 08:07:50 AM 1043 Views
Some people would. - 11/05/2011 02:42:25 PM 1055 Views
Re: Some people would. - 11/05/2011 03:01:01 PM 991 Views
It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 03:45:45 PM 1144 Views
Re: It definitely wasn't common. - 11/05/2011 04:03:15 PM 962 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 1074 Views
makes sense *NM* - 12/05/2011 08:36:08 AM 581 Views
Er, though - - 16/05/2011 06:08:55 PM 1042 Views
Re: Er, though - - 17/05/2011 12:38:14 PM 955 Views
Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:09:36 PM 1159 Views
Re: Don't think so - 17/05/2011 01:15:53 PM 1006 Views
I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:45:03 PM 1085 Views
Re: I imagine they could - 17/05/2011 01:49:53 PM 1046 Views
That makes sense - 17/05/2011 02:16:05 PM 1078 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 03:46:04 PM 978 Views
Re: That makes sense - 17/05/2011 04:21:11 PM 997 Views
Re: That makes sense - 18/05/2011 01:18:43 PM 1036 Views
That scene was weird - 18/05/2011 02:37:44 PM 980 Views
Re: That scene was weird - 19/05/2011 10:41:59 AM 969 Views

Reply to Message