Active Users:288 Time:30/10/2026 08:48:01 PM
Re: I disagree Lord Haart Send a noteboard - 07/01/2010 04:42:40 AM
Given that, and given that he knows that the timespan he burned Rahvin back was sufficient since Moridin told him that Rahvin was gone. And given that he has not had his breakdown yet and does not want to destroy the pattern, why would he burn Graendal back any more than he did Rahvin? I see no reason why he would.

I think what we saw was a wide balefire stream that had been attuned so that while it touched everyone, those that it touched were not burned back all that long. No more than Rahvin and probably less. He might even have used as little as what Moiraine used when he took out Bel'al.


Actually, we DO know that Graendal was burned back at LEAST 15 minutes or so. There had to be enough time for Ramshalan to get Compulsed, return to Rand, be delved for Compulsion, and then for Rand to act. Given that they were a fair way from Natrin's Barrow, and that Ramshalan would take time to find his way out, I'd say an estimate of 30 minutes is reasonable. And this is the MINIMUM balefire strength - Rand could have used more for all we know, but any less and the Compulsion would not have been removed.

Based on this, we know the strength of the balefire was similar to that used on Rahvin (ie, Rand's total strength). Couple that with the area affected:

1km squared = 1 million metres squared.


and we see that

This strongly suggests that he is definitely drawing deeply on the Choedan Kal.


Because we have to assume that the Balefire was equally strong at all points (Rand didn't know where in Natrin's Barrow Graendal was, and he had to hit her hard enough that he would get the confirmation of her death from the removal of Ramshalan's Compulsion).

1 million times Rand's own strength is certainly a massive boost, no matter how you look at it. Even if we assume that Natrin's Barrow is only 250m squared, that's still 62,500 times Rand's unaided strength.

So in answer to your argument, we do definitively know that the balefire was of substantial strength, and therefore covering a large area of it was a dangerous act.
Reply to message
Rand the psycho? - 06/01/2010 02:53:30 AM 1938 Views
I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:07:33 AM 1403 Views
On Balefire - 06/01/2010 04:43:18 AM 1345 Views
Good point - 06/01/2010 05:04:26 AM 1384 Views
On the nature of BaleFire - 06/01/2010 03:32:25 PM 1282 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 04:59:12 AM 1193 Views
Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:10:33 AM 1281 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:20:02 AM 1182 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 05:58:00 AM 1169 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 11:46:13 AM 1138 Views
Re: Wait! - 06/01/2010 03:55:01 PM 1140 Views
I disagree - 06/01/2010 05:42:44 PM 1109 Views
Re: I disagree - 06/01/2010 06:41:08 PM 1133 Views
Re: I disagree - 07/01/2010 04:42:40 AM 1127 Views
I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 07:30:56 AM 1230 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 03:32:24 PM 1155 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 09:52:47 PM 1243 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 06/01/2010 11:19:56 PM 1195 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:21:50 AM 1211 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 12:56:26 AM 1140 Views
Re: I doubt he meant 'in one go' as a single stream of balefire. - 07/01/2010 01:46:16 AM 1214 Views
I agree with Templar - 09/01/2010 04:36:20 PM 1114 Views
Re: I cannot follow your assumptions. - 06/01/2010 07:57:54 AM 1234 Views
Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 02:36:42 PM 1240 Views
Re: Rand crossed a line - 06/01/2010 04:16:12 PM 1187 Views
But... - 06/01/2010 04:34:02 PM 1263 Views
Re: But... - 06/01/2010 06:14:25 PM 1080 Views
Doesn't Balefire remove your thread from the Pattern permanently? - 06/01/2010 02:55:38 PM 1267 Views
No, RJ stated balefired people can be reborn. *NM* - 06/01/2010 03:26:00 PM 604 Views
But not in this turning of the Wheel. So they'd miss out on MANY lifetimes. - 06/01/2010 05:46:04 PM 1143 Views
What? - 06/01/2010 06:20:56 PM 1141 Views
Where did you get that? - 06/01/2010 07:09:38 PM 1109 Views
No, balefire just kills you backwards in time. It is not super-death. *NM* - 06/01/2010 09:58:18 PM 608 Views
LOL ... super-death! - 06/01/2010 11:59:31 PM 1083 Views
Hah! *NM* - 07/01/2010 12:06:07 AM 605 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:20 AM 1125 Views
It makes me think of History of the World Part 1 - 07/01/2010 12:53:33 AM 1060 Views
Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 06:51:15 PM 1226 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 07:16:14 PM 1195 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 08:58:40 PM 1176 Views
Re: Yes it was. - 06/01/2010 10:47:11 PM 1170 Views
let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:26:43 PM 1184 Views
Re: let me ask the question in a different way - 06/01/2010 11:40:56 PM 1153 Views
actually that quote supports my thoughts - 06/01/2010 11:50:40 PM 1283 Views
Re: actually that quote supports my thoughts - 07/01/2010 12:10:07 AM 1109 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 1259 Views
Sigh. What mass murder? - 07/01/2010 12:15:01 AM 1105 Views
you are kidding right? - 07/01/2010 12:19:58 AM 1161 Views
In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:14:32 PM 1127 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 03:57:43 PM 1141 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:13:21 PM 1159 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 07:52:24 PM 1097 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 08:56:43 PM 1175 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:26:01 PM 1136 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:30:45 PM 1057 Views
Personally I'm kind of sick of Rand being the only person killing FS! - 07/01/2010 09:42:57 PM 1206 Views
Re: In this book Rand was a wimp and a bully. - 07/01/2010 09:56:02 PM 1191 Views
OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 07/01/2010 10:30:19 PM 1200 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 01:53:25 PM 1097 Views
Re: OK I'm sorry but this gets a huge ROFL :lol: - 08/01/2010 02:56:41 PM 1155 Views
What might work... - 08/01/2010 12:35:17 PM 1044 Views
Re: What might work... - 08/01/2010 11:38:09 PM 1066 Views
Yes. Anakin Skywalker all over again - 06/01/2010 11:01:02 PM 1248 Views
Meh - 06/01/2010 11:30:24 PM 1098 Views
The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:33:32 PM 1075 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:50:37 PM 1178 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 06/01/2010 11:55:03 PM 1146 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 1135 Views
*laughs behind hand* - 07/01/2010 12:05:54 AM 1203 Views
Re: The worst part about his atrocities is his rationalizing them! - 07/01/2010 12:23:11 AM 1059 Views
I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 12:52:25 AM 1105 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 01:24:32 AM 1196 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 03:33:52 PM 1089 Views
Re: I don't think Rand or LTT (who has/have) little capacity for Healing - 07/01/2010 04:28:18 PM 1253 Views
right cause all Generals are so well versed in medical conditions - 07/01/2010 09:44:09 PM 1204 Views
Nice way to avoid the argument. - 07/01/2010 10:00:17 PM 1132 Views
I'm just done talking in circles. You seem to think that because people - 07/01/2010 11:53:05 PM 1192 Views
I concede - 07/01/2010 01:09:11 AM 1090 Views
You weren't wrong overall, but there were some serious flaws in your reasoning. - 07/01/2010 02:43:17 AM 1209 Views
Tee hee. - 07/01/2010 05:28:52 AM 1163 Views
Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 06:23:09 AM 1155 Views
Re: Morals are subjective anyhow, - 07/01/2010 03:23:59 PM 1109 Views
I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 12:00:02 AM 1158 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 09/01/2010 05:56:16 PM 1346 Views
Re: I have religious beliefs and that is an absurd contention - 18/01/2010 01:00:23 PM 1469 Views
Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 11/01/2010 04:47:10 PM 1045 Views
Re: Your assertions weaken your overall argument. - 18/01/2010 12:49:26 PM 1091 Views

Reply to Message