Active Users:2262 Time:18/06/2026 10:28:58 AM
Not for my purposes. Cannoli Send a noteboard - 10/04/2010 03:42:37 AM
But still, the effect is the same, isn't it?

The gateway stays open.



My point in asking was to determine if permanently tied off gateways could be set up as transportation/communication aids for normal people, and to relieve the pressure on the channelers from having to do all the gateways each time one is needed. Since Rand's method of blocking Aviendha's gateway was failing visibly, it would not suffice for the purpose which I would have used a tied off gateway. I was seeking confirmation that if you wove a gateway and tied it off, it would stay that way indefinitely. I will be posting a thread fairly soon contemplating the possibilities of this weave, and I wanted to see if it was possible or if I was forgetting something in the books that rendered the idea moot.
Cannoli
"Sometimes unhinged, sometimes unfair, always entertaining"
- The Crownless

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Deus Vult!
Reply to message
Can gateways be tied off? - 07/04/2010 11:52:42 PM 1760 Views
hmm - 08/04/2010 12:29:41 AM 879 Views
Re: Can gateways be tied off? - 08/04/2010 12:56:04 AM 947 Views
Good points. - 08/04/2010 02:51:55 AM 900 Views
Sammael - 08/04/2010 01:49:08 AM 942 Views
I'd imagine that it'd be possible. - 08/04/2010 03:46:13 AM 984 Views
Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 06:25:28 AM 1258 Views
Interesting - 08/04/2010 11:03:08 AM 990 Views
yes about the warder bond - 08/04/2010 02:13:19 PM 819 Views
I always thought the gateway trick was Brandon's too - 08/04/2010 05:23:52 PM 786 Views
Re: Interesting - 09/04/2010 02:36:43 PM 746 Views
Re: Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 03:26:37 PM 814 Views
Re: Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 11:20:30 PM 790 Views
Uh, yes. Can't believe you forgot this one. - 08/04/2010 08:36:04 PM 779 Views
Re: Uh, yes. Can't believe you forgot this one. - 08/04/2010 09:03:35 PM 820 Views
Aha! Pie on my face! - 09/04/2010 12:42:47 AM 805 Views
Not for my purposes. - 10/04/2010 03:42:37 AM 783 Views
Re: Not for my purposes. - 10/04/2010 10:38:05 AM 739 Views

Reply to Message