Active Users:770 Time:18/03/2026 09:40:59 AM
Is this the real stilling? Etzel Send a noteboard - 04/10/2009 09:06:32 AM
I think in these examples you cited the channelers lost their ability to channel, because someone else violently broke a weave (especially a shield) by them, while they were channeling. This obviously doesn't seem to be the "officially" precise stilling weave, but rather like a forced explosion of the ability to channel (in this respect rather similar to burning out). However, this form of stilling someone seems quite risky, because it requires that your opponent channels, and it probably might kill him.

I only dimly remember this, but doesn't Siuan even indicate that she was stilled by a circle of AS in a process that took some time. So, apparently the real stilling is a bit more complicated, because it's basically a very delicate "surgically" removal of the ability to channel.

Since Rand & Co. likely don't know how this exactly works (or e.g. Cadsuane doesn't want to give it away), it would explain why they don't do it.
Reply to message
Still the Darkfriends. - 03/10/2009 05:25:29 PM 2276 Views
ya this does work - 03/10/2009 06:32:22 PM 846 Views
Totally Agree. *NM* - 03/10/2009 06:38:27 PM 425 Views
Makes sense, but... - 03/10/2009 07:04:27 PM 1010 Views
Nynaeve does. Egwene did it solo in tDR. Rand did 3 at once in LoC, but men don't seem to know how - 03/10/2009 07:16:03 PM 1232 Views
Is this the real stilling? - 04/10/2009 09:06:32 AM 1362 Views
It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 02:55:35 PM 961 Views
Re: It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 06:46:58 PM 1518 Views
Re: It's real stilling - 04/10/2009 06:53:52 PM 994 Views
I think Egwene took longer because it was the first time. *NM* - 04/10/2009 07:20:26 PM 398 Views
Not in my opinion - 05/10/2009 05:00:30 AM 1244 Views
How does that respond to what I said? - 05/10/2009 05:15:57 AM 814 Views
Re: How does that respond to what I said? - 05/10/2009 09:07:16 PM 866 Views
Doesn't make sense.... - 06/10/2009 12:20:21 AM 795 Views
Re: Doesn't make sense.... - 06/10/2009 07:30:04 AM 894 Views
I disagree. - 04/10/2009 10:03:56 PM 891 Views
Re: I disagree. - 05/10/2009 04:58:04 AM 923 Views
Then... - 05/10/2009 05:12:45 AM 817 Views
Re: Then... - 05/10/2009 09:09:04 PM 830 Views
Re: Then... - 06/10/2009 12:25:22 AM 920 Views
Re: Then... - 06/10/2009 07:51:48 AM 836 Views
I'd like you to clear this up... - 06/10/2009 02:18:01 AM 889 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 06/10/2009 07:50:33 AM 1041 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 07/10/2009 02:28:34 AM 945 Views
Re: I'd like you to clear this up... - 07/10/2009 08:20:34 AM 879 Views
Well, you may, but I remain unconvinced . - 08/10/2009 12:22:31 AM 1008 Views
I think it's too risky - 03/10/2009 07:21:51 PM 961 Views
Of course, they should still be guarded with restricted access. - 03/10/2009 09:02:21 PM 1026 Views
Re: I think it's too risky - 05/10/2009 04:51:17 AM 864 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 04:51:58 AM 1074 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 02:06:51 PM 925 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 05:45:16 PM 1685 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 04/10/2009 07:20:58 PM 942 Views
To Clarify... - 05/10/2009 12:30:28 AM 1029 Views
Re: Still the Darkfriends. - 05/10/2009 02:54:40 PM 1550 Views
Remember Shadar Logoth - 04/10/2009 02:49:06 PM 833 Views
Re: Remember Shadar Logoth - 05/10/2009 06:05:54 AM 942 Views
From Rand's viewpoint - 05/10/2009 01:10:18 PM 1644 Views

Reply to Message