View original post
Then the quoted section basically says, "if comparing SOLELY strength, ignoring ALL else, the strongest man was as strong as the strongest woman." We know that is false because the male scale has levels above the female scales highest, and the rest of the entrys context consistently shows that comparison is not apples to oranges: Strength x is strength x, for male AND female, though a woman will have more skill than they would have as a man with all skills developed to the same degree.
Then the quoted section basically says, "if comparing SOLELY strength, ignoring ALL else, the strongest man was as strong as the strongest woman." We know that is false because the male scale has levels above the female scales highest, and the rest of the entrys context consistently shows that comparison is not apples to oranges: Strength x is strength x, for male AND female, though a woman will have more skill than they would have as a man with all skills developed to the same degree.
The dexterity advantage is women only, and is inherent. The section is basically saying that if you ognore knowledge, practice, and other acquired characteristics, and stick to inherent stuff alone, the strongest man and strongest woman are the same.
Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 24/06/2015 09:56:33 PM
2363 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 08:01:04 AM
1269 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 05:49:52 PM
1323 Views
That still would not make sense
- 25/06/2015 09:22:48 PM
1348 Views
It would
- 01/07/2015 07:17:09 PM
1338 Views
However many ways they meant "dexterity," ALL are precluded by saying, "pure strength"
- 02/07/2015 12:09:11 AM
1476 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 05:23:32 PM
1556 Views
I suspect...
- 25/06/2015 05:47:59 PM
1358 Views
Yeah, a comprehensive scale restricted to AS would not be comprehensive
- 25/06/2015 09:22:36 PM
1370 Views
Re: Yeah, a comprehensive scale restricted to AS would not be comprehensive
- 25/06/2015 09:56:22 PM
1312 Views
Sorilea can GRASP the Source reliably; there is no indication she can USE it
- 27/06/2015 08:19:19 PM
1372 Views
Re: Sorilea can GRASP the Source reliably; there is no indication she can USE it
- 29/06/2015 07:58:55 PM
1237 Views
Since she looks her age I suspect reaching it is almost entirely due to natural longevity
- 29/06/2015 09:16:21 PM
1191 Views
Not when you consider Morgase
- 30/06/2015 09:02:35 PM
1245 Views
Morghase did use her ability to effect, when unencumbered by Tower nonsense
- 01/07/2015 07:22:47 PM
1592 Views
Re: Morghase did use her ability to effect, when unencumbered by Tower nonsense
- 01/07/2015 10:32:13 PM
1365 Views
Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 02/07/2015 12:21:55 AM
1401 Views
Re: Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 08/07/2015 03:26:43 AM
1259 Views
Re: Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 09/07/2015 02:25:58 AM
1352 Views
RJ did say...
- 09/07/2015 07:13:01 AM
1182 Views
True, but that only makes slowings imprecise nature harder to gauge
- 10/07/2015 02:51:45 AM
1671 Views
Morgase spent nearly 2 years in the Tower
- 09/07/2015 03:22:06 PM
1562 Views
And countless hours of frustrated focus to--fleetingly--grasp the source ONCE (i.e. less than twice)
- 10/07/2015 02:51:53 AM
1445 Views
But the scale was only applicable for Aes Sedai; they are the only ones to whom strength matters
- 25/06/2015 11:10:45 PM
1294 Views
It MATTERS to everyone; just because it is irrelevant to a hierarchy does not make it absolutely so
- 27/06/2015 08:44:07 PM
1293 Views
theory, lesser strength increases the likely hood of a very specific sometimes untapped talent?
- 30/06/2015 12:25:45 AM
1259 Views
Developed skills are distinct from innate Talents (in Randland, literally) but I would still say no
- 30/06/2015 01:21:25 PM
1245 Views


