Active Users:735 Time:19/03/2026 05:22:11 PM
Re: There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. Logain Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 07:53:19 PM
The only thing that is discussed is how far back the effects of balefire go. There's no definitive discussion on ANYthing else.

Notice something about Sanderson's comments. He said, 'let's say that the CK makes Rand 100x more powerful'. He's not saying it DOES - that's just his supposition. That's beautiful Aes Sedai misdirection.

---


But it does eliminate Graendal.

Graendal cannot reveal herself as Asmodean's killer directly (because she is balefired) or indirectly (by Asmodean reappearing). But we know that someone will reveal themselves as Asmodean's killer.

Ergo, somebody else killed Asmodean, not Graendal.
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1949 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 884 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 952 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 940 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 939 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 916 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 820 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 801 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 834 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 831 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 829 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 770 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 825 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 801 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 865 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 855 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 792 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 857 Views
Re: There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 07:53:19 PM 761 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 900 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 765 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 732 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 790 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 766 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 824 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 843 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 752 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 833 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 799 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 811 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 817 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 818 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 753 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 796 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 779 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 377 Views

Reply to Message