Active Users:312 Time:04/05/2024 08:27:22 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan Send a noteboard - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM

View original post
I agree. I also don't think a multiplier would work the way Rand's angreal did when he used it with the Choedan Kal against Asmodean. Asmodean and Rand both got exactly half of the CK, which doesn't make sense if it multiplied their strength. And then Rand was able to use his angreal at the same time, and it only added a small trickle. It didn't multiply the amount he was drawing through the CK. Unless angreal have some way of knowing your potential, rather than the amount of the OP you're drawing, I don't see how Rand only got a trickle more when also using the CK.

... Of course they "have some way of knowing". That being that there is no interaction between two different angreal whatsoever. Both are input.

They allow a channeler to safely hold more then they would normally(Likely by taking the strain themselves judging by the CK having melted. The OP is ACTUALLY moving through them after all), but They don't actually enhance a channelers base ability to hold the OP, and so don't stack with any other angreal they might be using at the time.

Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 Sidious - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 2147 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect darius_sedai - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1010 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1135 Views
Yet there are problems with either darius_sedai - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 825 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1087 Views
Would you consider... Duke - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 948 Views
random thought on Shielding darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1007 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1071 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 934 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 828 Views
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 885 Views
Not the crux of the debate... fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 970 Views
Not really though darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 739 Views
I always explained it as fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 977 Views
There's not much to go on since all the shields except Berowyn's are the same darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 09:55:14 PM 846 Views
That's precisely my point fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 987 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 808 Views
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1000 Views
what's dense here is that you keep putting in quotes that don't support your position darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 03:28:16 PM 1121 Views
Whoa.. fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1068 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1012 Views
Wonderful fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 987 Views
yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 06:46:23 PM 806 Views
Re: yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this Sidious - 23/01/2016 02:35:33 PM 1108 Views
Petty much *NM* darius_sedai - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 446 Views
Hmmm.... Sidious - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1055 Views
Let me clear this up darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1192 Views
Some more quotes fionwe1987 - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 958 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1245 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1017 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise Sidious - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1164 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 954 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 858 Views
Oh well then I agree with you Sidious - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1065 Views
thanks darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1223 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 789 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw darius_sedai - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 823 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 860 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 804 Views
Simple fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 926 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 713 Views
Huh? fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 927 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 501 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 481 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 829 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 849 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 924 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 908 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 848 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 996 Views
Funny, I just saw this post darius_sedai - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 717 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this fionwe1987 - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 790 Views
No it doesn't darius_sedai - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 687 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? Dunstan - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 585 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 804 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes