There is an argument for a minimum strength argument in the Great Hunt
Ryan Send a noteboard - 13/11/2009 03:26:11 AM
Verin is discussing the two sa'angreal with Ingtar in Cairhien. Here is the relevent quote.
"What? Oh, there is no need for that, I think. The two must be used in unison to handle enough of the One Power to Break the World - that was the way in the Age of Legends; a man and a woman working together were always ten times as strong as they were apart - and what Aes Sedai today would aid a man in channeling?
One by itself is powerful enough, but I can think of few women strong enough to survive the flow through the one on Tremalking. The Amyrlin, of course. Moiraine, and Elaida. Perhaps one or two others. And three still in training. As for Logain, it would have taken all his strength simply to keep from being burned to a cinder, with nothing left for doing anything. No, Ingtar, I don't think you need worry. At least, not until the real Dragon Reborn proclaims himself, and then we will all have enough to worry about as it is. Let us worry now about what we shall do when we are inside Barthanes's manor."
One by itself is powerful enough, but I can think of few women strong enough to survive the flow through the one on Tremalking. The Amyrlin, of course. Moiraine, and Elaida. Perhaps one or two others. And three still in training. As for Logain, it would have taken all his strength simply to keep from being burned to a cinder, with nothing left for doing anything. No, Ingtar, I don't think you need worry. At least, not until the real Dragon Reborn proclaims himself, and then we will all have enough to worry about as it is. Let us worry now about what we shall do when we are inside Barthanes's manor."
The past is just that, the past. You can only truly live by looking to the future!
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
964 Views
The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle.
- 12/11/2009 11:57:20 AM
1029 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
943 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
930 Views
Please elaborate...
- 12/11/2009 02:42:17 PM
914 Views
On the basis that we dont agree on the use of sa'angreals on a group.
- 12/11/2009 03:02:29 PM
892 Views
OK, I'll humour you. This once.
- 12/11/2009 05:18:57 PM
918 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
1005 Views
It has always been a viable theory, and Sanderson seems convincing...EDIT: RJ's take
- 12/11/2009 08:21:17 PM
991 Views
Wrong place *ignore*
- 12/11/2009 08:45:32 PM
879 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
1111 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
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
879 Views
There is an argument for a minimum strength argument in the Great Hunt
- 13/11/2009 03:26:11 AM
892 Views

*NM*