While there is nothing in the books to indicate that there is no difference between the way angreal and sa'angreal work, there's also no indication that they work the same way. Considering that BS has RJ's notes, and therefore a huge pile of info we don't, I can't see how you could think that his thoughts are wrong. Not to mention the fact that I would think that the WT raid would have at least been outlined by RJ, likely including Egwene's theft of the sa'angreal, which would mean that RJ would have thought that she would have gotten some benefit from it.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
Sanderson's understanding of angreal is totally wrong...
- 12/11/2009 11:10:57 AM
1794 Views
You should include quotes
- 12/11/2009 11:42:20 AM
963 Views
The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle.
- 12/11/2009 11:57:20 AM
1028 Views
Re: The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle.
- 12/11/2009 12:37:46 PM
942 Views
Re: The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle.
- 12/11/2009 02:27:41 PM
929 Views
Please elaborate...
- 12/11/2009 02:42:17 PM
913 Views
On the basis that we dont agree on the use of sa'angreals on a group.
- 12/11/2009 03:02:29 PM
891 Views
OK, I'll humour you. This once.
- 12/11/2009 05:18:57 PM
917 Views
Rand Balefires a whole castle
- 12/11/2009 01:10:05 PM
1067 Views
Ever notice the "sa" in sa'angreal?
- 12/11/2009 03:09:30 PM
1051 Views
It stands for Super Amazing. *NM*
- 12/11/2009 04:10:02 PM
414 Views
I was under the assumption it was super awesome but oh well. *NM*
- 13/11/2009 06:08:36 AM
468 Views
There's never been any indication that sa'angreal work through a different mechanism to angreal...
- 12/11/2009 04:51:13 PM
1004 Views
It has always been a viable theory, and Sanderson seems convincing...EDIT: RJ's take
- 12/11/2009 08:21:17 PM
990 Views
Wrong place *ignore*
- 12/11/2009 08:45:32 PM
878 Views
Do you still stick by the exponential theory?
- 12/11/2009 08:52:31 PM
836 Views
sa'angreal and angreal are only different in terms of the magnitude of their effects *NM*
- 12/11/2009 06:56:43 PM
411 Views
You are missing two important points
- 12/11/2009 05:09:35 PM
1109 Views
Response to both points...
- 12/11/2009 05:57:11 PM
972 Views
In fact, I've just read the actual report, and Sanderson didn't say anything near what you quoted.
- 12/11/2009 06:06:39 PM
841 Views
Re: Look at how similar descriptions of angreal and Sa'angreal affects are in the books.
- 12/11/2009 07:34:16 PM
917 Views
there's a slight problem with your theory
- 12/11/2009 08:19:25 PM
805 Views
Probably
- 12/11/2009 09:05:31 PM
1260 Views
Some ways the fixed amount theory could work...
- 13/11/2009 12:33:04 AM
878 Views
There is an argument for a minimum strength argument in the Great Hunt
- 13/11/2009 03:26:11 AM
891 Views

*NM*