Active Users:584 Time:02/05/2026 06:21:20 PM
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM

View original post

Okay but when Nynaeve shielded Logain she also described how her shield started to bend and almost break. Somehow Berowin has practiced her shielding so that it doesn't actually tear under any circumstances. This leaves the door open for better forms of shielding as I described in my post to Darius. If you can sever a person just by sharpening the edges then there is a lot of potential for tweaking.


I have no argument with Berowin's shield being different. It IS different. My argument is with the idea that the Forsaken use something like her shield. If so, it is remarkable that oth Nynaeve and Rand described shields woven by Moghedien and Lanfear as "walls" when trying to push against them.

The other side of this is that shielding a person while they are channeling isn't exactly the same as holding a shield on them. Do we think Berowin would have been able to cut off Nynaeve had she been channeling as much as she could?

We KNOW that landing a shield on a person channeling is a chancey thing. Nynaeve has told us that, and several of her scenes have demonstrated it. Which is why I'm skeptical that just because we've seen Aes Sedai land shields at some point, and not at others, we should ignore the evidence that their shields are similar to the Forsaken's.


We also have Suroth saying that Liandrin is "blocked in some way" and that may point to a different type of shield....? It's all reaching but there may be a science to shielding beyond "weave and throw".

Well Liandrin was blocked in some way. Suroth, as a non-channeler, doesn't necessarily have to use the word shield. In fact, we know the Forsaken use the word "buffer" for a shield, and we know the Seanchan call shields "blocks":
“I have borne the bracelet long, and I could tell if the marath’damane had done more than block Jini.”

This is the Sul'dam Rand and Aviendha encounter in tFoH. She calls Aviendha's shield a block, so it seems reasonable to assume another Sul'dam/damane used similar terminology to descirbe Liandrin's shield to Suroth.

Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 3330 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1519 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1641 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 1371 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1764 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1436 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1496 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1588 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1432 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 1365 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1393 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1473 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 1241 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1494 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 1361 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1457 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 1308 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1458 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 1659 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1511 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1485 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1515 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 1299 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 1706 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 763 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1719 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1745 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1495 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1832 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1466 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1778 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1464 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1372 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1713 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1725 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 1302 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 1361 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1365 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 1287 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1420 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 1219 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1487 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 782 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 733 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 1300 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 1357 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1424 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1383 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 1364 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1487 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 1220 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 1238 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 1138 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 1154 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 1297 Views

Reply to Message