Active Users:1431 Time:29/10/2025 02:46:23 PM
Following Rand's example guttering flame Send a noteboard - 18/11/2009 07:39:07 PM
Should all the Sa'angreal be destroyed? Rand makes the judgment that the KC are too powerful for mere mortals but surely all Sa'angreal are too powerful as well if on a smaller scale?

The rod Egwene used is supposed to enable a single woman to topple the walls of one of the Great Cities like Tar Valon. Can any mortal overcome the hubris involved?
Reply to message
Following Rand's example - 18/11/2009 07:39:07 PM 975 Views
You can't crack the earth like an egg with the other sa'angreal *NM* - 18/11/2009 08:13:23 PM 226 Views
But you can crack irreplaceable Ogien artwork like one of the Big Cities *NM* - 18/11/2009 08:47:15 PM 230 Views
this is sort of like the "should all nukes be destroyed" question *NM* - 18/11/2009 09:00:41 PM 222 Views
If even the Creator's chosen can't be trusted with one of them - 18/11/2009 09:16:46 PM 585 Views
Re: If even the Creator's chosen can't be trusted with one of them - 18/11/2009 10:00:07 PM 591 Views
It's not quite that question - 19/11/2009 12:15:33 AM 594 Views
I'm not sure I get what you're trying to say. - 19/11/2009 01:02:24 AM 528 Views
Very funny. - 18/11/2009 09:51:08 PM 646 Views
So destroying a city is nothing????????? - 18/11/2009 10:34:42 PM 564 Views
Leveling Walls is not destroying a city. - 18/11/2009 10:44:11 PM 548 Views
I love sa'angreal, so no. - 19/11/2009 12:27:09 AM 599 Views
Nuclear... - 19/11/2009 12:52:55 AM 538 Views
Developing a nuclear bomb is different from creating a nuclear reactor. - 19/11/2009 02:46:34 PM 823 Views
So then what you're saying is that Rand was wrong to destroy his sa'angreal - 19/11/2009 07:34:19 AM 536 Views
Yes. - 19/11/2009 02:43:48 PM 539 Views
yes, obviously. and all channeling should be ended for the same reason. - 19/11/2009 03:54:06 AM 582 Views
The problem with the CK is not that its a sa'angreal - 19/11/2009 01:01:24 PM 561 Views
Re: The problem with the CK is not that its a sa'angreal - 19/11/2009 03:14:58 PM 614 Views

Reply to Message