Active Users:820 Time:02/11/2025 06:26:08 PM
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 1866 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 816 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 880 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 428 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 842 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 838 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 929 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 906 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 837 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 724 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 728 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 756 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 757 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 755 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 708 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 799 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 757 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 773 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 746 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 715 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 776 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 756 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 763 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 848 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 789 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 789 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 723 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 773 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 796 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 673 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 653 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 703 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 770 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 402 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 804 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 383 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 686 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 733 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 379 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 767 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 688 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 761 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 718 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 722 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 358 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 316 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 741 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 727 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 686 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 721 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 378 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 693 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 340 Views

Reply to Message