Active Users:377 Time:16/05/2024 05:12:38 PM
Well the most obvious thing is that RJ was quoted on the subject any number of times - Edit 1

Before modification by darius_sedai at 28/10/2012 11:38:23 PM

Please stop the entirely pointless discussion on this. The curve is the same.


I'd actually like to know about this, and I haven't paid that much attention to strength before, I just sort of assumed people were in general stronger in the Age of Legends, since everything was so nice then. So I don't see the discussion as pointless.

However, once I start thinking about it, I don't really see how we can say anything at all about distribution of strength in the Age of Legends, since the 13 people from then that we've seen were all at the very top.

If it's obvious, as both sides claim, what is the proof?


And never said a thing about the average strength being lower. Even when discussing the bell curve, strength distribution etc. in fact he pointed out how little strength mattered in the AoL because most things were done in circles and almost anyone with the ability was trained and in the majority of cases became AS. Strength in the AoL was "prized" but not a requirement to be named AS ... That was about the training. In short even a weak AoL Channeler could accomplish much more than a modern AS because they were better trained, perhaps this creates an illusion of greater strength, but as the Forsaken have said dozens of times, modern AS seem like half trained children.

Individual strength only began to really matter when the WoP began and AS began to use the OP to kill one another. When the Forsaken no lnger trusted each other enough to link individual strength and training and perhaps a good angreal began to matter more. Thus the most significant Forsaken were the individuals who were probably the most self sufficient ... None of the women seemed overly concerned with Lanfear's strength and they all had at least a degree of respect for Moghedien's abilities despite her being weaker.

Return to message