Active Users:2554 Time:19/06/2026 09:37:27 AM
What? Datakim Send a noteboard - 06/01/2010 06:20:56 PM
In fact, it's almost like they've been murdered at birth every time their soul would have been reborn in that turning. And we have no idea how long each of the Seven Ages are.


Huh? Where are you getting this?

RJ said that balefire just killed you backwards in time.

So if I balefired you, it would essentially be the same if I traveled back in time 5 minutes, stabbed you with a sword, and then came back to the future. Your thread in the pattern would stop but your soul would be utterly unaffected. A piece of metal or balefire, no difference to how you will be reborn.

It does nothing for the soul. The soul is reborn normally. And while some souls might be born more rarely like Rand/LTT, it seems likely that most are born more often.

For example, it is very possible that Rahvin who was balefired has already been reborn. Maybe his soul is even one of Elayne's children. That would be ironic. And while I admit that its not very likely, there is no mechanism that says its impossible.

All those that died will be reborn normally. They would have been reborn equally normally if Rand had just burned the place to the ground with regular fire. It is likely that some who died in that palace will be reborn in a new infant within the next decade. Perhaps even before the books are over. I don't think there is anything to support the idea that they would all have to wait until all the ages reset.
Reply to message
Rand the psycho? - 06/01/2010 02:53:30 AM 1861 Views
I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:07:33 AM 1274 Views
On Balefire - 06/01/2010 04:43:18 AM 1264 Views
Good point - 06/01/2010 05:04:26 AM 1293 Views
On the nature of BaleFire - 06/01/2010 03:32:25 PM 1199 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:59:12 AM 1107 Views
Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:10:33 AM 1184 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:20:02 AM 1094 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:58:00 AM 1082 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 11:46:13 AM 1050 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 03:55:01 PM 1057 Views
I disagree - 06/01/2010 05:42:44 PM 1014 Views
Re: I disagree - 06/01/2010 06:41:08 PM 1051 Views
Re: I disagree - 07/01/2010 04:42:40 AM 1038 Views
I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 07:30:56 AM 1152 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 03:32:24 PM 1052 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 09:52:47 PM 1159 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 11:19:56 PM 1082 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:21:50 AM 1131 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:56:26 AM 1062 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 01:46:16 AM 1126 Views
I agree with Templar - 09/01/2010 04:36:20 PM 1039 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 07:57:54 AM 1152 Views
Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 02:36:42 PM 1159 Views
Re: Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 04:16:12 PM 1107 Views
But... - 06/01/2010 04:34:02 PM 1190 Views
Re: But... - 06/01/2010 06:14:25 PM 1001 Views
Doesn't Balefire remove your thread from the Pattern permanently? - 06/01/2010 02:55:38 PM 1158 Views
No, RJ stated balefired people can be reborn. *NM* - 06/01/2010 03:26:00 PM 559 Views
But not in this turning of the Wheel. So they'd miss out on MANY lifetimes. - 06/01/2010 05:46:04 PM 1057 Views
What? - 06/01/2010 06:20:56 PM 1063 Views
Where did you get that? - 06/01/2010 07:09:38 PM 1024 Views
No, balefire just kills you backwards in time. It is not super-death. *NM* - 06/01/2010 09:58:18 PM 566 Views
LOL ... super-death! - 06/01/2010 11:59:31 PM 999 Views
Hah! *NM* - 07/01/2010 12:06:07 AM 559 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:20 AM 1042 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:33 AM 983 Views
Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 06:51:15 PM 1141 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 07:16:14 PM 1110 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 08:58:40 PM 1086 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 10:47:11 PM 1081 Views
let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:26:43 PM 1092 Views
Re: let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:40:56 PM 1072 Views
actually that quote supports my thoughts - 06/01/2010 11:50:40 PM 1163 Views
Re: actually that quote supports my thoughts - 07/01/2010 12:10:07 AM 1026 Views
Meh. I just think advocating mass-murder is the opposite direction RJ meant for this to take. - 07/01/2010 12:00:44 AM 1147 Views
Sigh. What mass murder? - 07/01/2010 12:15:01 AM 978 Views
you are kidding right? - 07/01/2010 12:19:58 AM 1075 Views
In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:14:32 PM 1051 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:57:43 PM 1066 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:13:21 PM 1080 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:52:24 PM 1005 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 08:56:43 PM 1091 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:26:01 PM 1059 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:30:45 PM 974 Views
Personally I'm kind of sick of Rand being the only person killing FS! - 07/01/2010 09:42:57 PM 1122 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:56:02 PM 1102 Views
OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 07/01/2010 10:30:19 PM 1110 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 01:53:25 PM 1030 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 02:56:41 PM 1062 Views
What might work... - 08/01/2010 12:35:17 PM 965 Views
Re: What might work... - 08/01/2010 11:38:09 PM 990 Views
Yes. Anakin Skywalker all over again - 06/01/2010 11:01:02 PM 1166 Views
Meh - 06/01/2010 11:30:24 PM 1000 Views
The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:33:32 PM 992 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:50:37 PM 1090 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:55:03 PM 1055 Views
I do have to guiltily say, though, that if Rand had balefired the Seanchan and THEN became good... - 07/01/2010 12:03:20 AM 1053 Views
*laughs behind hand* - 07/01/2010 12:05:54 AM 1126 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 07/01/2010 12:23:11 AM 983 Views
I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 12:52:25 AM 1023 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 01:24:32 AM 1091 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 03:33:52 PM 1008 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 04:28:18 PM 1176 Views
right cause all Generals are so well versed in medical conditions - 07/01/2010 09:44:09 PM 1121 Views
Nice way to avoid the argument. - 07/01/2010 10:00:17 PM 1058 Views
I'm just done talking in circles. You seem to think that because people - 07/01/2010 11:53:05 PM 1086 Views
I concede - 07/01/2010 01:09:11 AM 1000 Views
You weren't wrong overall, but there were some serious flaws in your reasoning. - 07/01/2010 02:43:17 AM 1117 Views
Tee hee. - 07/01/2010 05:28:52 AM 1078 Views
Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 06:23:09 AM 1068 Views
Re: Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 03:23:59 PM 1003 Views
I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 12:00:02 AM 1084 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 05:56:16 PM 1263 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 18/01/2010 01:00:23 PM 1389 Views
Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 11/01/2010 04:47:10 PM 972 Views
Re: Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 18/01/2010 12:49:26 PM 1006 Views

Reply to Message