Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
Fanatic-Templar Send a noteboard - 07/01/2010 12:21:50 AM
I see it as a single offensive, or single battle. The idea that it was done in a single weave seems inconsistent from what we've read so far - we've seen Rand, the most powerful channeler in the world, use balefire in battle against Rahvin and Sammael, and it never came close to what was necessary to wipe out a city. Moiraine, one of the strongest Aes Sedai in centuries, wove balefire weak enough that there was some question that Be'lal might be reincarnated despite it. As this is pre-Choedan Kal, I cannot see how it is possible to imagine a weave of balefire capable of eradicating an entire city.
So why is it then, that RJ did not say that. He did not say that a hundred thousand people were killed in a single battle. Or a single offensive. Or during a single day. Those are NOT the words he used. What he said, is "one go", which to me suggests a momentary instant.
Well, same to you. If Robert Jordan meant a single weave of balefire, why did he not say that? He did not say that a hundred thousand people were killed in a single weave. Or a single blast. Or during a single day. Those are NOT the words he used. What he said, is "one go", which to me suggests a momentary instant.
And yes, it does seem inconsistent to what we have seen so far, UNLESS there is a way to control balefires width so that you can make it wider than what we have seen, without using insane amounts of strength. Essentially making a wide beam large enough for even a city, that is still weak enough not to burn people back months and instantly destroy the pattern. Which is what I am arguing happened at Graendals palace, minimizing the damage since Rand did not yet want to destroy the pattern.
But there is no reason to believe this can be done, except to satisfy an inconsistency that exists only if you choose to interpret RJ's word in a way that creates an inconsistency in the first place. Far simpler simnply to interpret his words in a way that is consistent, and therefore does not need the introduction of a never before hinted at and unfounded mechanism simply to justify it.
Moiraine and Rand might not have had the knowledge or the need to do this before. But Rand/LTT at Graendals palace did, so thats what he did.
Read Rand's battle with Rahvin again, there is no way you will convince me that Rand was holding back. And if he learned in between the two, you'd think it would get mentioned somewhere.
How does the quote suggest that both sides were using balefire? All it says that several cities were balefired. Unless you have a different quote than the one I used?
It says both sides agreed to stop using it. You cannot stop doing something you are not doing.
I figure it was indeed used to wipe a single city in an instant, maybe the other side then retaliated on a different city using the same technique, at which point the pattern started groaning and people realised that maybe this is not such a good idea.
Could be, but that seems ridiculously inefficient. We know for a fact that the Light at least tried to defend its territories, so why would they simply not balefire the attacking channelers rather than balefire some unrelated city? Or are you suggesting that there was never any channelers in the attacked city and that the Light simply went around annihilating entire defenseless cities?
Minutes you say? How will you wipe out a hundred thousand people in minutes in a large city with people going everywhere and hiding and so on and so on. With the defenders fighting back, forcing you to proceed slowly, etc. I think it makes far more sense if the entire city was taken out in one go, with a big blast.
Lets use Rand as an example, his balefire stream was the thickness of a man it is said. Lets say 1 meter thick then.
Lets say you have, oh, 5000 channelers.
Now imagine those channelers in the city, going from house to house, room to room and balefiring people with balefire streams only 1 meter thick. And killing 100K people.
This is something that would not take minutes, it would take days. You don't sack and destroy an entire city in minutes without weapons of mass destruction.
And tell me this, even if it were possible, WHY would they have done this? If they wanted to destroy a city, why would they send in a large group of channelers to wave around their bars of balefire, killing people one by one, rather than just blowing the entire city up in a traditional way. Or even using nuclear weapons or the like.
Why use an inferor weapon like balefire, if you could just use a circle of 72 to annihilate the entire city in a fireball.
No, the only reason to use balefire is if it was even better than that. And having huge groups of channelers roaming the city would not be. The only logical explanation is that the AoLers could indeed use balefire to wipe out an entire city in an instant. That is why it was so feared.
No, rather imagine a densely populated city. Then imagine two armies shooting bars of balefire at each other through that city. Damage becomes catastrophic in no time.
I already have and you know it. RJ said so. You can disagree what he meant, in which case there is nothing to do but either agree to disagree, or try to ask BS if there is anything in the notes saying if the balefired cities were wiped out in an instant or if it took days.
No I didn't. I would never have considered this evidence if you hadn't told me. Even if you were correct, this wouldn't even support your cause. All the existence of this hypothetical city-destroying beam of balefire would prove is the existence of a city-destroying beam of balefire.
My view is to believe that RJ was literal and his "one go" does mean exactly that. One go. One blast. 100K balefired in an instant. And that requires a balefire blast that is very wide. Suggesting that width can be controlled. Which is my argument.
It's a figure of speech, it can't be literal. You're simply choosing an interpretation which you believe would support your unfounded speculation.
The first rule of being a ninja is "do no harm". Unless you intend to do harm, then do lots of harm.
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
Rand the psycho?
- 06/01/2010 02:53:30 AM
1766 Views
I cannot follow your assumptions.
- 06/01/2010 04:07:33 AM
1175 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions.
- 06/01/2010 04:59:12 AM
1006 Views
Wait!
- 06/01/2010 05:10:33 AM
1099 Views
Re: Wait!
- 06/01/2010 05:20:02 AM
1008 Views
Re: Wait!
- 06/01/2010 05:58:00 AM
1001 Views
Re: Wait!
- 06/01/2010 11:46:13 AM
956 Views
I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 06/01/2010 07:30:56 AM
1063 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 06/01/2010 03:32:24 PM
961 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 06/01/2010 09:52:47 PM
1065 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 06/01/2010 11:19:56 PM
977 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 07/01/2010 12:21:50 AM
1036 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 07/01/2010 12:56:26 AM
969 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire.
- 07/01/2010 01:46:16 AM
1029 Views
Of course, I agree with you, esp since I just put forth the idea you support earlier in the thread.
- 11/01/2010 04:58:26 PM
1472 Views
Rand crossed a line
- 06/01/2010 02:36:42 PM
1071 Views
Doesn't Balefire remove your thread from the Pattern permanently?
- 06/01/2010 02:55:38 PM
1051 Views
No, RJ stated balefired people can be reborn. *NM*
- 06/01/2010 03:26:00 PM
511 Views
But not in this turning of the Wheel. So they'd miss out on MANY lifetimes.
- 06/01/2010 05:46:04 PM
967 Views
No, balefire just kills you backwards in time. It is not super-death. *NM*
- 06/01/2010 09:58:18 PM
522 Views
LOL ... super-death!
- 06/01/2010 11:59:31 PM
906 Views
Yes it was.
- 06/01/2010 06:51:15 PM
1048 Views
Re: Yes it was.
- 06/01/2010 07:16:14 PM
999 Views
Re: Yes it was.
- 06/01/2010 08:58:40 PM
996 Views
Re: Yes it was.
- 06/01/2010 10:47:11 PM
991 Views
let me ask the question in a different way
- 06/01/2010 11:26:43 PM
1003 Views
Re: let me ask the question in a different way
- 06/01/2010 11:40:56 PM
972 Views
actually that quote supports my thoughts
- 06/01/2010 11:50:40 PM
1044 Views
Re: actually that quote supports my thoughts
- 07/01/2010 12:10:07 AM
938 Views
yet it could take him some undetermined amount of time to figure out your dead?
- 07/01/2010 12:34:34 AM
944 Views
Re: yet it could take him some undetermined amount of time to figure out your dead?
- 07/01/2010 01:13:40 AM
902 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
1043 Views
Sigh. What mass murder?
- 07/01/2010 12:15:01 AM
881 Views
In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 03:14:32 PM
951 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 03:57:43 PM
982 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 07:13:21 PM
985 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 07:52:24 PM
912 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 08:56:43 PM
994 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 09:26:01 PM
955 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 09:30:45 PM
879 Views
Personally I'm kind of sick of Rand being the only person killing FS!
- 07/01/2010 09:42:57 PM
1044 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully.
- 07/01/2010 09:56:02 PM
997 Views
OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol:
- 07/01/2010 10:30:19 PM
1006 Views
Yes. Anakin Skywalker all over again
- 06/01/2010 11:01:02 PM
1071 Views
Meh
- 06/01/2010 11:30:24 PM
904 Views
The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them!
- 06/01/2010 11:33:32 PM
906 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them!
- 06/01/2010 11:50:37 PM
997 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them!
- 06/01/2010 11:55:03 PM
974 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
967 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them!
- 07/01/2010 12:23:11 AM
891 Views
I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing
- 07/01/2010 12:52:25 AM
933 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing
- 07/01/2010 01:24:32 AM
990 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing
- 07/01/2010 03:33:52 PM
917 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing
- 07/01/2010 04:28:18 PM
1074 Views
right cause all Generals are so well versed in medical conditions 
- 07/01/2010 09:44:09 PM
1037 Views
- 07/01/2010 09:44:09 PM
1037 Views
Nice way to avoid the argument.
- 07/01/2010 10:00:17 PM
973 Views
I'm just done talking in circles. You seem to think that because people
- 07/01/2010 11:53:05 PM
1000 Views
I concede
- 07/01/2010 01:09:11 AM
905 Views
You weren't wrong overall, but there were some serious flaws in your reasoning.
- 07/01/2010 02:43:17 AM
1040 Views
Morals are subjective anyhow,
- 07/01/2010 06:23:09 AM
982 Views
Re: Morals are subjective anyhow,
- 07/01/2010 03:23:59 PM
916 Views
I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention
- 09/01/2010 12:00:02 AM
993 Views
You are treating Graendal's "pets" as though they were enemy combatants
- 07/01/2010 03:40:03 PM
1046 Views
Like I give a damn what a group of professional killers would do.
- 08/01/2010 11:39:11 PM
913 Views
Graendal captured these people as part of the Shadows offensive, Operation Chaos Rules
- 09/01/2010 12:00:40 AM
1211 Views
Well, I still liked your first argument. It's a freaking war. The argument ...
- 07/01/2010 07:08:53 PM
958 Views