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
2466 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 08:01:04 AM
1378 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 05:49:52 PM
1406 Views
That still would not make sense
- 25/06/2015 09:22:48 PM
1441 Views
It would
- 01/07/2015 07:17:09 PM
1430 Views
However many ways they meant "dexterity," ALL are precluded by saying, "pure strength"
- 02/07/2015 12:09:11 AM
1556 Views
Re: Strength in the OP: the Encyclopedia chapter is out!
- 25/06/2015 05:23:32 PM
1661 Views
I suspect...
- 25/06/2015 05:47:59 PM
1447 Views
Yeah, a comprehensive scale restricted to AS would not be comprehensive
- 25/06/2015 09:22:36 PM
1469 Views
Re: Yeah, a comprehensive scale restricted to AS would not be comprehensive
- 25/06/2015 09:56:22 PM
1406 Views
Sorilea can GRASP the Source reliably; there is no indication she can USE it
- 27/06/2015 08:19:19 PM
1464 Views
Re: Sorilea can GRASP the Source reliably; there is no indication she can USE it
- 29/06/2015 07:58:55 PM
1327 Views
Since she looks her age I suspect reaching it is almost entirely due to natural longevity
- 29/06/2015 09:16:21 PM
1279 Views
Not when you consider Morgase
- 30/06/2015 09:02:35 PM
1339 Views
Morghase did use her ability to effect, when unencumbered by Tower nonsense
- 01/07/2015 07:22:47 PM
1684 Views
Re: Morghase did use her ability to effect, when unencumbered by Tower nonsense
- 01/07/2015 10:32:13 PM
1470 Views
Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 02/07/2015 12:21:55 AM
1496 Views
Re: Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 08/07/2015 03:26:43 AM
1348 Views
Re: Sorilea has been at it far longer than Morgase
- 09/07/2015 02:25:58 AM
1459 Views
RJ did say...
- 09/07/2015 07:13:01 AM
1277 Views
True, but that only makes slowings imprecise nature harder to gauge
- 10/07/2015 02:51:45 AM
1766 Views
Morgase spent nearly 2 years in the Tower
- 09/07/2015 03:22:06 PM
1653 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
1554 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
1397 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
1385 Views
theory, lesser strength increases the likely hood of a very specific sometimes untapped talent?
- 30/06/2015 12:25:45 AM
1368 Views
Developed skills are distinct from innate Talents (in Randland, literally) but I would still say no
- 30/06/2015 01:21:25 PM
1359 Views


