Active Users:108 Time:16/05/2022 09:50:44 AM
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM

Desperately Nynaeve reached for saidar. Fear streaked through her anger, but there was anger enough—and it ran into an invisible wall between her and the warm glow of the True Source.

This is from tFoH, in TAR. When Moghedien did land a shield on Nynaeve. As you can see, it is a wall.

Later in the same chapter:

Even as she did, saidar seemed to fill Moghedien like a flood. Liandrin’s probe died as the Source was shielded from her. Flows of Air picked her up and slammed her against the paneled wall hard enough to make her teeth rattle...

Suddenly she was tying off the shield, the knot growing ever more intricate, until Liandrin lost the twists and turns completely. And still it went on. “There,” Moghedien said finally in tones of satisfaction. “You will search a very long time to find anyone who can unravel that. But you will have no opportunity to search."

The knot is intricate, but Liandrin never once says anything about the shield itself being different. She just calls it "the shield" as if she knows it, just like she mentions Flows of Air.

If there was anything special about Moghedien's shield, neither Nynaeve nor Liandrin mention it.

And look at this description from tSR:

The knife-sharp shield that Egwene had used to still Amico Nagoyin sprang into being, more weapon than shield, lashed at Moghedien—and was blocked, woven Spirit straining against woven Spirit, just short of severing Moghedien from the Source forever. Again the Forsaken’s counterblow came, slashing like an axe, intended to cut Nynaeve off in the same way. Forever. Desperately Nynaeve blocked it.

Once again, nothing about the shield looks different to Nynaeve. You argue that maybe the difference is only obvious once the shield is in place, but 1)when it was placed later, Nynaeve calls it a wall and 2)Why would Moghedien need to use exactly as much strength as Nynaeve, then? If he shield is more flexible and different, more like Berowyn's, wouldn't it also take less of the OP. Instead, it is an exact match for Nynaeve's.

So the only evidence we have from an AoLer shielding an Aes Sedai is from Moghedien. And there is absolutely nothing different about her shield. Neither in how it is made, nor how it feels to women who are shielded. It certainly doesn't expand one bit for Nynaeve.

As for Lanfear's shield, it was different in that it allowed a tiny trickle of the OP, but she also makes it clear the pain thing is nothing special:

He was never very good at breaking through a shield; you must be willing to accept pain, and he never could.

The tense she uses, and the "never" all point to the pain being a regular aspect of breaking a shield.

View original post
What evidence do you have that shielding was not a result of Aes Sedai searching for effective ways to stop males from destroying the world? We know Aes Sedai did a lot of research around how linking worked as part of stopping mad males, or at least controlling them. Given that Tower law requires a male to be brought to Tar Valon and put on trial, shielding would have been a massively important skill for early Reds to have mastered.

Wait, ou're claiming they forgot shielding and reinvented it in the 300 years after the Tower's founding? That is certainly not true:
Or were many of these “false Aes Sedai” actually Aes Sedai who resisted going along with the amalgamation of independent groups into one whole? Certainly there is evidence that many of these women were “forced to kneel to the Amyrlin Seat and the White Tower,” at least some were stilled, and a large number joined the Tower and were thereafter accepted as Aes Sedai.

This is before the White Tower was even completed.

The fact that it also worked on women would have been incidental and what would prompt Aes Sedai to find more effective weaves to block other women. Aside from knowing that there was a lot of politicking in the early days of the Tower and probably more than a few conflicts ending in dead pre-Tower Aes Sedai, there is nothing to suggest Aes Sedai hunted down, shielded and brought to trial women who falsely claimed the Aes Sedai title and even if they did this happened within a very short timeframe so it seems far less likely that women would have spent a lot of time figuring out more effective ways to shield other women. Especially since they were already in large groups and linking was an option.

You forget that the Breaking was also filled with groups of Aes Sedai hunting down the remnants of the Shadow, which certainly included women. There is absolutely no evidence that Shielding was a skill that was ever lost, during the Breaking. And it makes good sense that it wasn't. Shielding and Severing are major tools for any woman against both the Shadow and mad male channelers. They were probably among the weaves to survive the Breaking intact.
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 1832 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 881 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 989 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 679 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 921 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 814 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 877 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 935 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 813 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 701 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 753 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 826 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 610 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 812 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 707 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 841 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 685 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 864 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 978 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 929 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 873 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 853 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 680 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 921 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 362 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 865 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1054 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 820 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1120 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 887 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 978 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 813 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 886 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1059 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 649 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 695 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 724 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 684 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 801 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 586 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 768 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 410 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 389 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 715 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 725 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 804 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 779 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 729 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 872 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 586 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 669 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 580 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 456 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 689 Views

Reply to Message