Active Users:834 Time:01/02/2026 06:25:04 AM
Re: your interpretation is wrong Logain Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM
The only thing this confirms is that balefire can only remove a thread up to a few days/maybe a week. And that Asomodean died long enough ago that if his killer were balefired he wouldn't come back to life.

This in no way comments about whether Graendal was the killer or not - you can tell very much by Sanderson's reaction. He wasn't going to let this question lead him down that road.


Can Graendal reveal herself as Asmodean's killer in the next two books?

Answer: NO, because she got balefired and we will not see her anymore.

Therefore, someone else will reveal themselves as Asmodean's killer.
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1916 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 860 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 934 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 461 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 912 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 909 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 976 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 956 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 894 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 792 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 781 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 806 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 803 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 809 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 750 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 841 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 798 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 827 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 799 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 768 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 817 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 818 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 834 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 893 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 865 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 834 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 765 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 833 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 876 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 733 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 706 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 767 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 818 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 421 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 858 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 407 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 737 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 784 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 407 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 820 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 732 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 805 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 774 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 777 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 380 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 342 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 796 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 794 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 727 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 773 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 407 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 756 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 366 Views

Reply to Message