Active Users:246 Time:28/03/2024 01:42:18 PM
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM

View original post
I think we just see it differently ... I'm not really sure RJ had this clearly mapped out. Especially since it seems like there weren't even side notes on the subject

Well, okay, but I don't see any viable alternative explanation. If you seriously think a buffer-less sa'angreal can allow for unlimited magnification of the OP, Callandor and Vora's wand are obviously more powerful than the CK, which means Lanfear was wrong about Callandor, as are the Glossaries, the BWB, and the Companion!
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2122 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 998 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1122 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 812 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1069 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 934 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 993 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1056 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 920 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 816 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 870 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 956 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 726 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 961 Views
There's not much to go on since all the shields except Berowyn's are the same - 21/01/2016 09:55:14 PM 831 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 973 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 793 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 984 Views
what's dense here is that you keep putting in quotes that don't support your position - 22/01/2016 03:28:16 PM 1106 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1052 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1001 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 976 Views
yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 22/01/2016 06:46:23 PM 794 Views
Re: yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 23/01/2016 02:35:33 PM 1090 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 438 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1039 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1180 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 940 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1233 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1005 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1143 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 939 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1043 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1198 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 777 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 810 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 847 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 791 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 913 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 701 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 916 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 495 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 474 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 819 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 837 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 911 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 894 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 838 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 985 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 704 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 778 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 674 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 574 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 791 Views

Reply to Message