Active Users:2545 Time:18/06/2026 02:31:30 PM
It eliminates for the following Logain Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM
The answer states that it wouldn't matter if Rand balefired Graendal, because Asmodean died too long ago.

Basically, your claim is still unsupported by Brandon Sanderson's answers, and at most, these answers still revolve around calculating the effects of balefire on the Pattern rather than saying who is or who isn't Asmodean's killer.


According to Brandon, at the most, Rand could burn somebody out of the pattern a full week back. That's using the Choedan Kal, etc. Because Asmodean died more than a week ago (it was something like 6 months ago in Randland time) then Graendal could not have been Asmo's killer.

If it is true that Graendal died by balefire, then she did not kill Asmodean, end of story.
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 2017 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 949 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 1002 Views
Yes, Brandon did. I edited my original message to add in another quote from Brandon...see above *NM* - 11/11/2009 05:33:27 PM 499 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 993 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 1009 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 1056 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 1034 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 974 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 876 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 848 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 891 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 885 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 889 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 826 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 923 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 870 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 904 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 884 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 853 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 895 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 901 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 911 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 983 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 959 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 905 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 845 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 915 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 952 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 822 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 793 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 847 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 910 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 454 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 950 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 444 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 822 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 883 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 442 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 902 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 821 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 887 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 849 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 865 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 420 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 378 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 870 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 872 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 811 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 854 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 443 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 837 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 408 Views

Reply to Message