Active Users:364 Time:01/05/2025 02:33:23 AM
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 2480 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect darius_sedai - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1163 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1311 Views
Yet there are problems with either darius_sedai - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 1016 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either Sidious - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1270 Views
Would you consider... Duke - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1118 Views
random thought on Shielding darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1151 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1244 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1095 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 1012 Views
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1057 Views
Not the crux of the debate... fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1112 Views
Not really though darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 917 Views
I always explained it as fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1142 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 1032 Views
That's precisely my point fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1121 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 961 Views
There's actual evidence: fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1131 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 1294 Views
Whoa.. fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1212 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1177 Views
Wonderful fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1162 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 977 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 1257 Views
Petty much *NM* darius_sedai - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 547 Views
Hmmm.... Sidious - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1219 Views
Let me clear this up darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1359 Views
Some more quotes fionwe1987 - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1139 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise darius_sedai - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1419 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1155 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise Sidious - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1334 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise fionwe1987 - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1125 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1036 Views
Oh well then I agree with you Sidious - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1212 Views
thanks darius_sedai - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1403 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 961 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw darius_sedai - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 985 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? fionwe1987 - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1029 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 984 Views
Simple fionwe1987 - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1100 Views
Not at all darius_sedai - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 868 Views
Huh? fionwe1987 - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1107 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* darius_sedai - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 581 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 541 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 989 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 1001 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1100 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this fionwe1987 - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1058 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this darius_sedai - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 1010 Views
Uhhh... fionwe1987 - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1151 Views
Funny, I just saw this post darius_sedai - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 898 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this fionwe1987 - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 928 Views
No it doesn't darius_sedai - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 845 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? Dunstan - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 790 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... Dunstan - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 991 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes