Active Users:385 Time:01/05/2025 07:57:27 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
I do *NM* Sidious Send a noteboard - 12/11/2009 09:05:56 PM
Because for me thats still the best explanation I've seen on how they work.
Seems to explain how the smaller the angreal the more benefit it offers to the stronger channeler, while something like the CK varies by next to nothing for those strong enough to channel it.

Thats what I was trying to get at with my 'X' + multiplier suggestion, but yours works better mathematically.
Wheel of Time board admin
Fan of Lanfear
Reply to message
Sanderson's understanding of angreal is totally wrong... Shannow - 12/11/2009 11:10:57 AM 1675 Views
You should include quotes TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 11:42:20 AM 861 Views
The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle. Shannow - 12/11/2009 11:57:20 AM 919 Views
Re: The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle. Watcher - 12/11/2009 12:37:46 PM 848 Views
Sure, I agree... Shannow - 12/11/2009 12:45:33 PM 786 Views
Re: The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle. TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 02:27:41 PM 821 Views
Please elaborate... Shannow - 12/11/2009 02:42:17 PM 813 Views
On the basis that we dont agree on the use of sa'angreals on a group. TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 03:02:29 PM 772 Views
OK, I'll humour you. This once. Shannow - 12/11/2009 05:18:57 PM 801 Views
How generous of you. TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 07:51:54 PM 878 Views
Scrap that TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 08:32:36 PM 789 Views
Rand Balefires a whole castle Insomdeon - 12/11/2009 01:10:05 PM 959 Views
There is no basis for that conclusion... Shannow - 12/11/2009 02:02:37 PM 829 Views
I could have sprayed TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 02:28:41 PM 788 Views
Ever notice the "sa" in sa'angreal? fionwe1987 - 12/11/2009 03:09:30 PM 930 Views
It stands for Super Amazing. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 12/11/2009 04:10:02 PM 363 Views
I was under the assumption it was super awesome but oh well. *NM* Blaine - 13/11/2009 06:08:36 AM 398 Views
There's never been any indication that sa'angreal work through a different mechanism to angreal... Shannow - 12/11/2009 04:51:13 PM 868 Views
It has always been a viable theory, and Sanderson seems convincing...EDIT: RJ's take fionwe1987 - 12/11/2009 08:21:17 PM 853 Views
Wrong place *ignore* Sidious - 12/11/2009 08:45:32 PM 753 Views
Do you still stick by the exponential theory? TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 08:52:31 PM 732 Views
I do *NM* Sidious - 12/11/2009 09:05:56 PM 323 Views
Good, 'cos it's bloody good. *NM* TheCrownless - 12/11/2009 10:56:30 PM 345 Views
Re: Wrong place *ignore* taura-tierno - 27/12/2009 06:14:51 PM 767 Views
sa'angreal and angreal are only different in terms of the magnitude of their effects *NM* Marshall - 12/11/2009 06:56:43 PM 360 Views
Re: Ever notice the "sa" in sa'angreal? TheUltimateReality - 12/11/2009 07:48:37 PM 824 Views
You are missing two important points PatAtt - 12/11/2009 05:09:35 PM 961 Views
Response to both points... Shannow - 12/11/2009 05:57:11 PM 850 Views
In fact, I've just read the actual report, and Sanderson didn't say anything near what you quoted. Shannow - 12/11/2009 06:06:39 PM 737 Views
Re: Look at how similar descriptions of angreal and Sa'angreal affects are in the books. Tedtheman - 12/11/2009 07:34:16 PM 789 Views
I completely agree with you Shannow Marshall - 12/11/2009 07:01:29 PM 764 Views
Sidious' "One Power Dynamics" Corwin - 12/11/2009 08:10:41 PM 1241 Views
Oh, also Corwin - 12/11/2009 08:15:56 PM 811 Views
As long as you reference him, I doubt he'd mind. *NM* Marshall - 12/11/2009 08:36:59 PM 353 Views
there's a slight problem with your theory Jim - 12/11/2009 08:19:25 PM 700 Views
Probably Sidious - 12/11/2009 09:05:31 PM 1135 Views
Agreed, with one point Marshall - 12/11/2009 09:25:09 PM 737 Views
Some ways the fixed amount theory could work... fionwe1987 - 13/11/2009 12:33:04 AM 749 Views
There is an argument for a minimum strength argument in the Great Hunt Ryan - 13/11/2009 03:26:11 AM 776 Views
Re: Some ways the fixed amount theory could work... Tedtheman - 13/11/2009 07:00:15 PM 647 Views
Re: Sanderson's understanding of angreal is totally wrong... Tedtheman - 13/11/2009 07:11:34 PM 756 Views
Yes it's also been mentioned before in earlier books BlackAdder - 19/11/2009 12:51:51 AM 693 Views
Re: Yes it's also been mentioned before in earlier books taura-tierno - 27/12/2009 06:37:47 PM 713 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Formatting
Smiley Codes