Active Users:729 Time:19/03/2026 05:19:41 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 1948 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 883 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 951 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 469 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 938 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 937 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 1004 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 981 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 915 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 819 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 801 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 832 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 830 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 828 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 768 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 863 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 824 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 856 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 827 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 800 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 835 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 842 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 864 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 920 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 892 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 854 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 791 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 856 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 899 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 763 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 731 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 788 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 844 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 432 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 887 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 414 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 764 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 823 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 416 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 842 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 750 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 831 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 797 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 810 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 391 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 350 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 816 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 817 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 752 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 795 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 419 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 778 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 377 Views

Reply to Message