Active Users:338 Time:17/06/2025 12:10:12 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 1779 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 734 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 811 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 378 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 739 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 742 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 856 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 809 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 754 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 641 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 658 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 678 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 678 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 685 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 641 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 722 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 670 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 680 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 670 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 644 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 703 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 672 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 682 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 761 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 719 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 718 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 638 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 677 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 719 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 580 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 580 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 635 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 690 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 357 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 725 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 341 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 612 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 663 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 333 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 674 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 604 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 691 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 637 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 653 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 309 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 288 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 653 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 647 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 598 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 637 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 336 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 610 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 283 Views

Reply to Message