Active Users:468 Time:14/12/2025 10:52:09 PM
Yes it's also been mentioned before in earlier books BlackAdder Send a noteboard - 19/11/2009 12:51:51 AM
phrases like "the strongest Aes Sedai wielding the most powerful sa'angreal..."

if the angreal are only reservoirs, then the AS strength wouldn't matter.
Reply to message
Sanderson's understanding of angreal is totally wrong... - 12/11/2009 11:10:57 AM 1789 Views
You should include quotes - 12/11/2009 11:42:20 AM 956 Views
The angreal magnifies the power of the individual holding it, not that of the entire circle. - 12/11/2009 11:57:20 AM 1023 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 939 Views
Sure, I agree... - 12/11/2009 12:45:33 PM 885 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 924 Views
Please elaborate... - 12/11/2009 02:42:17 PM 908 Views
On the basis that we dont agree on the use of sa'angreals on a group. - 12/11/2009 03:02:29 PM 885 Views
OK, I'll humour you. This once. - 12/11/2009 05:18:57 PM 911 Views
How generous of you. - 12/11/2009 07:51:54 PM 994 Views
Scrap that - 12/11/2009 08:32:36 PM 880 Views
Rand Balefires a whole castle - 12/11/2009 01:10:05 PM 1061 Views
There is no basis for that conclusion... - 12/11/2009 02:02:37 PM 935 Views
I could have sprayed - 12/11/2009 02:28:41 PM 896 Views
Ever notice the "sa" in sa'angreal? - 12/11/2009 03:09:30 PM 1042 Views
It stands for Super Amazing. *NM* - 12/11/2009 04:10:02 PM 412 Views
I was under the assumption it was super awesome but oh well. *NM* - 13/11/2009 06:08:36 AM 465 Views
There's never been any indication that sa'angreal work through a different mechanism to angreal... - 12/11/2009 04:51:13 PM 997 Views
It has always been a viable theory, and Sanderson seems convincing...EDIT: RJ's take - 12/11/2009 08:21:17 PM 981 Views
Wrong place *ignore* - 12/11/2009 08:45:32 PM 872 Views
Do you still stick by the exponential theory? - 12/11/2009 08:52:31 PM 831 Views
I do *NM* - 12/11/2009 09:05:56 PM 372 Views
Good, 'cos it's bloody good. *NM* - 12/11/2009 10:56:30 PM 394 Views
Re: Wrong place *ignore* - 27/12/2009 06:14:51 PM 881 Views
Re: Ever notice the "sa" in sa'angreal? - 12/11/2009 07:48:37 PM 920 Views
You are missing two important points - 12/11/2009 05:09:35 PM 1103 Views
I completely agree with you Shannow - 12/11/2009 07:01:29 PM 859 Views
Sidious' "One Power Dynamics" - 12/11/2009 08:10:41 PM 1370 Views
Oh, also - 12/11/2009 08:15:56 PM 908 Views
As long as you reference him, I doubt he'd mind. *NM* - 12/11/2009 08:36:59 PM 405 Views
there's a slight problem with your theory - 12/11/2009 08:19:25 PM 799 Views
Probably - 12/11/2009 09:05:31 PM 1252 Views
Agreed, with one point - 12/11/2009 09:25:09 PM 834 Views
Some ways the fixed amount theory could work... - 13/11/2009 12:33:04 AM 874 Views
Re: Some ways the fixed amount theory could work... - 13/11/2009 07:00:15 PM 776 Views
Re: Sanderson's understanding of angreal is totally wrong... - 13/11/2009 07:11:34 PM 875 Views
Yes it's also been mentioned before in earlier books - 19/11/2009 12:51:51 AM 790 Views
Re: Yes it's also been mentioned before in earlier books - 27/12/2009 06:37:47 PM 812 Views

Reply to Message