Active Users:783 Time:05/08/2025 05:01:11 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka Send a noteboard - 05/01/2010 07:15:41 PM
RJ states in several places that *objects* don't have a power to perform actions in themselves and that balefire erases the life thread of a person back in time so the action in that time never happened.


Yes, but that doesn't mean that objects don't have threads that can also (like human threads) be burned back in time. Datakim below provides a quote from BS that states that EVERYTHING has a thread.

We already knew that, anyway. In ACoS, when Moghedien balefired Nynaeve's boat, Lan said that suddenly Nynaeve went from being 50 paces ahead of him to being 50 paces behind him. The only way that could have happened is if Moggy's balefire burned the boat back in time, however long it took the boat to travel those 100 paces.

Given these two conditions, destruction of the angreal would have no more effect than had Rand balefired Graendal's hand (which she must have used to touch the emissary to effect the compulsion).


I don't see that we have nearly enough evidence to state that with certaintly, since we know for fact that objects are burned back in time. The question is, if an object is burned back in time, does it negate what the object did, or was used for, in that time? I still think the answer to that question is "yes".

Rise and fall, turn the Wheel,
'cause all life is
is really just a circle.

-BHT&tM
Reply to message
Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka - 05/01/2010 05:44:12 PM 2423 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) randfandom - 05/01/2010 06:46:19 PM 1174 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?) Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:15:41 PM 1040 Views
Nynaeve's boat... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 07:23:57 PM 1006 Views
Balefire is REALLY confusing. Datakim - 05/01/2010 07:41:05 PM 886 Views
Good point ... Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:52:04 PM 855 Views
I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Fanatic-Templar - 05/01/2010 08:45:52 PM 4581 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Shishka - 05/01/2010 09:23:06 PM 842 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads. Fanatic-Templar - 05/01/2010 10:30:42 PM 858 Views
Wasn't there a quote somewhere BlackAdder - 06/01/2010 02:05:32 AM 777 Views
Probably a bit of retconning there by Brandon Lord Haart - 06/01/2010 03:34:55 PM 808 Views
BS is definitely wrong here BlackAdder - 06/01/2010 02:01:23 AM 823 Views
Re: BS is definitely wrong here Lord Haart - 06/01/2010 03:36:06 PM 796 Views
There is another way... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 07:00:31 PM 845 Views
Re: There is another way... Shishka - 05/01/2010 07:35:05 PM 881 Views
Re: There is another way... fionwe1987 - 05/01/2010 11:05:26 PM 791 Views
Nope randfandom - 06/01/2010 04:36:56 AM 876 Views
USe Occam's Razor yourself... fionwe1987 - 06/01/2010 05:53:22 AM 997 Views
and why didn't she invert any of the weaves? darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 05:55:54 AM 823 Views
Exactly! *NM* fionwe1987 - 06/01/2010 05:27:52 PM 432 Views
Maybe you cannot invert compulsion? Datakim - 06/01/2010 06:56:35 PM 846 Views
so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted? seems a little darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 11:31:09 PM 760 Views
Re: so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted? Datakim - 07/01/2010 12:02:00 AM 709 Views
I am inclined to agree with Datakim here. Fanatic-Templar - 07/01/2010 02:04:42 AM 1021 Views
Why aren't inverted weaves standard practice? BlackAdder - 07/01/2010 01:24:09 AM 860 Views
Balefire is so confusing Datakim - 05/01/2010 07:03:29 PM 877 Views
Re: Balefire is so confusing Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:52:57 PM 857 Views
She's dead as a bloody doornail. Or whatever that saying is... *NM* lilltempest - 05/01/2010 07:20:36 PM 430 Views
Clearly dead Etzel - 05/01/2010 07:29:11 PM 1019 Views
Re: Clearly dead Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:21:16 PM 890 Views
Re: Clearly dead Datakim - 05/01/2010 08:41:15 PM 836 Views
I think... Etzel - 05/01/2010 09:05:48 PM 849 Views
No way. Gher - 05/01/2010 07:31:12 PM 919 Views
Re: No way. Shishka - 05/01/2010 08:31:54 PM 786 Views
Re: No way. Gher - 05/01/2010 10:16:03 PM 833 Views
Graendal's as dead as BS/RJ makes her. *NM* Great Lord of Chaos - 06/01/2010 02:40:46 AM 417 Views
She's dead as dead gets. everynametaken - 06/01/2010 01:43:34 AM 769 Views
Dead is my bet Sidious - 06/01/2010 11:48:46 AM 793 Views
She's dead *NM* Simon - 06/01/2010 11:58:34 AM 399 Views
Dead. *NM* AgentOrange - 06/01/2010 03:58:19 PM 405 Views
I think she's alive. RugbyPlayingAshaman - 06/01/2010 06:12:50 PM 805 Views
Compulsion is rather useless isn't it? Syraelle - 06/01/2010 07:44:42 PM 903 Views
It may take an exceptional Delver/Healer Gher - 06/01/2010 08:49:37 PM 857 Views
perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves! darius_sedai - 06/01/2010 11:06:49 PM 796 Views
Re: perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves! RugbyPlayingAshaman - 07/01/2010 03:42:17 PM 834 Views
What if.. Tweak - 06/01/2010 10:41:44 PM 760 Views
I'll roll my eyes, and snort if she's alive Wotmaniac Reborn - 08/01/2010 04:21:20 AM 784 Views
Well... Heiko - 10/01/2010 03:24:39 AM 989 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes