Active Users:646 Time:03/05/2026 09:23:46 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 1988 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 925 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 981 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 484 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 969 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 984 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 1033 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 1009 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 947 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 852 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 826 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 864 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 861 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 861 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 805 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 901 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 853 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 883 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 866 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 829 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 871 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 873 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 888 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 954 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 931 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 885 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 823 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 893 Views
Re: There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 07:53:19 PM 785 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 926 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 798 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 767 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 827 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 883 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 441 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 921 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 427 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 797 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 857 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 426 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 876 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 794 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 859 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 828 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 843 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 406 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 363 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 844 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 851 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 787 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 828 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 431 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 817 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 393 Views

Reply to Message