Active Users:393 Time:17/06/2025 07:19:02 PM
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 1571 Views
hmm - 08/04/2010 12:29:41 AM 732 Views
Re: Can gateways be tied off? - 08/04/2010 12:56:04 AM 796 Views
Good points. - 08/04/2010 02:51:55 AM 744 Views
Sammael - 08/04/2010 01:49:08 AM 789 Views
I'd imagine that it'd be possible. - 08/04/2010 03:46:13 AM 823 Views
Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 06:25:28 AM 1062 Views
Interesting - 08/04/2010 11:03:08 AM 816 Views
yes about the warder bond - 08/04/2010 02:13:19 PM 679 Views
I always thought the gateway trick was Brandon's too - 08/04/2010 05:23:52 PM 631 Views
Re: Interesting - 09/04/2010 02:36:43 PM 601 Views
Re: Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 03:26:37 PM 665 Views
Re: Yup they can be.... - 08/04/2010 11:20:30 PM 616 Views
Uh, yes. Can't believe you forgot this one. - 08/04/2010 08:36:04 PM 628 Views
Re: Uh, yes. Can't believe you forgot this one. - 08/04/2010 09:03:35 PM 676 Views
Aha! Pie on my face! - 09/04/2010 12:42:47 AM 666 Views
Not for my purposes. - 10/04/2010 03:42:37 AM 628 Views
Re: Not for my purposes. - 10/04/2010 10:38:05 AM 597 Views

Reply to Message