A Way to Evade the Oaths (Full Spoilers)

[yoniy0]

Semirhage was never bound by the Rod. She joined GLoD to avoid that fate.

Really? I thought she had the Oath removed after joining the Shadow. My bad. What about Balthamel then?

[Shadow Rider]

Semirhage was never bound by the Rod. She joined GLoD to avoid that fate.

Really? I thought she had the Oath removed after joining the Shadow. My bad. What about Balthamel then?

 

 

I think the Oath Rod came into effect after the breaking or the war of shadow...or they wouldn't have been able to make the Power forged Swords and such.

[MikeRiley]

I don't see your point. Semirhage was bound by a Binder at one time, no permanant damage was done. It was something she wanted to get rid of, but it didn't cause a devastating sensation (and it's especially easy for Mesaana since she would need to spend a couple of days at most before removing the Oaths).

 

The side effects I'm referring to would be the actual oaths.

 

 

 

The "oath rod" came about after the Breaking, with the three oaths designed to gain the peoples' trust in them again. Before the Breaking they were referred to as binding rods and were used to police channelers during the Age of Legends. This is why one of the forsaken once freed looks at the Aes Sedai with scorn and says they bind themselves like criminals.

[Sharaman]

Semirhage was never bound by the Rod. She joined GLoD to avoid that fate.

Really? I thought she had the Oath removed after joining the Shadow. My bad. What about Balthamel then?

Balty was also threatened with being bound several times for scrapping (using channeling in bar-brawls) but apparently he was also actually never bound.

I'd made a similar mistake earlier - thinking Balty was bound. 

I think the Oath Rod came into effect after the breaking or the war of shadow...or they wouldn't have been able to make the Power forged Swords and such.

 

In the AoL, they used the oath rod (it was called a "binder") to keep criminal channelers under control. The AS started to use it to swear the three oaths only long after the Breaking when the original purpose was forgotten and also nobody knew that it sliced life span. That specific oath "not use the power to make weapons for any man to use against another" was a post-AoL oath.

 

[yoniy0]

The side effects I'm referring to would be the actual oaths.

Well then, I really don't understand what you said. If the worst she needs to suffer is not being able to kill someone with the OP for a day or two, why look for a complicated way to beat the OR? I mean I know she's probably a bit psychotic, but even she should be able to abstain from murder for a few days :)

[MikeRiley]

She's one of the forsaken. Being bound by the oath rod for however long would be a serious problem for her. There's a big Black Ajah crackdown going on, she's in the middle of all her enemies. The Last Battle could happen any time, she has no idea whether Rand will locate and come for her or not (although that'd be low priority since she's a woman). Then if any of the other forsaken had even a glimmer of an idea that she was bound like the rest of the Aes Sedai, it would be the end of her. It's like I said, stepping into a bear trap and hoping it's broken.

[Swigaro]

MikeRiley put it perfectly.  There is no way Messana would stay in the tower if she thought there was even a chance that she would be bound.  Tower AS knew the purge was comming (hence, why so many escaped).  If they knew, you can be sure Messana knew.  BS said there is a way to beat the rod, not the oath.  She may have said the words, but they weren't oaths...

[yoniy0]

Of course you know that both of those things are subjective (whether she would stay, and whether BS actually said that).

But you're entitled to your own opinion, and since I have to admit those are valid possibilities (i.e. Mesaana might have a reason to go through an elaborate scheme to get around the Oaths), I'll shut up now.

[WWWwombat]

"You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it." -Brandon Sanderson

[algspkr]

I think the answer for this is the Mirror of Mists inverted.  You merely use the mirror to make it look like you took it, and then use air inverted to hold it in place.  Not too difficult.  You need knowledge of inversion, the rest is basic.  You're timing would have to be good, but the Forsaken's job.  If you can't control a mirror and a flow of air at the same time you're probably not that good.

 

I think you may be on to something, but over complicating things; what if she just made herself "gloves" of air that were thick enough to separate herself from the rod, but thin enough that it appeared that she was holding it?

[mb]

I doubt Mesaana did 'Mask of Mirrors' or any other channeling trick.

I take she was bound to the Oaths when she told that she was not a darkfriend.

 

[Dreamwalker]

I doubt Mesaana did 'Mask of Mirrors' or any other channeling trick.

I take she was bound to the Oaths when she told that she was not a darkfriend.

 

 

Agreed. I think that people have taken this one quote by Brandon and blown it way out of proportion. When you read the whole quote and the question it is in answer to I think he was just trying to hint that Mesaana is still in the tower (that Egwene's hunch is right) and that she was able to escape the purge (in my opinion by typical AS word-twisting), not that she used some new and elaborate trick on the rod. His quote even seems to confirm the questioner's theory that Mesaana could honestly swear she's not Darkfriend, so I don't see why people can't just accept that as an answer. If it was more than this, I would have thought he'd just say RAFO.

[Malivis]

I can't give you a direct quote, I don't have the book.

 

Somewhere in Chapter 20 in TDR, when Lanfear appears to Mat, he asks her if she is a Darkfriend. Now, granted, she is not bound by the oath rod so she COULD lie. However, she seems taken aback by this, offended that Mat would call her one, then replied that she definitely was not, implying that she was better than a Darkfriend Again, without the direct quote it's hard to express this, but on my last read-through it struck me that she definitely did consider herself a Darkfriend.

 

Hopefully someone can pull up the quote.

[bronnt]

I think the answer for this is the Mirror of Mists inverted.  You merely use the mirror to make it look like you took it, and then use air inverted to hold it in place.  Not too difficult.  You need knowledge of inversion, the rest is basic.  You're timing would have to be good, but the Forsaken's job.  If you can't control a mirror and a flow of air at the same time you're probably not that good.

 

I think you may be on to something, but over complicating things; what if she just made herself "gloves" of air that were thick enough to separate herself from the rod, but thin enough that it appeared that she was holding it?

 

If you combine both, you eliminate the possibility of detection.  Just use the Mask to make your hand appear slightly off-set from where it is, while you have a glove of air. There's a chance someone might have noticed even the slight separation form her hand, so why not cover up what you're doing?

[thewalrus777]

I'm a believer of being able to defeat the Oath Rod, just by not believing you are not what the questions asked make you out to be. Mesaana does not believe she is a DF, BA, or a Forsaken. She only believes her self to be a Chosen servant of the DO. The Chosen see all other servants of the Shadow as being beneath them. It seems to me that Egwene's possible questions asked after the Sisters reswear the oaths are:

 

1)Are you a DF?

2)Are you of the BA?

3)Are you one of the Forsaken?

 

Those seem like the likely things she'd ask. For regular darkfriends and BA, this would work fine. But, because there is one of the Chosen, they could simply deny being any of those things, because they simply just don't believe they are those things.

 

And I just reread book 3 and Lanfear is very offended when Mat assumes she's a DF or otherwise. And as RJ said before sometimes the Forsaken telling the truth isn't as farfetched as we think. Ishamael told LTT the truth in the beginning, just like he did Rand in his dreams. Lanfear has absolutely no reason to lie to Mat at this point. Sometimes just telling the truth is more fruitful than lying. And if you look at some of the other Chosen, they have the same attitude towards how they view DF's, BA, and other Chosen.

[bronnt]

I'm a believer of being able to defeat the Oath Rod, just by not believing you are not what the questions asked make you out to be. Mesaana does not believe she is a DF, BA, or a Forsaken. She only believes her self to be a Chosen servant of the DO. The Chosen see all other servants of the Shadow as being beneath them. It seems to me that Egwene's possible questions asked after the Sisters reswear the oaths are:

 

1)Are you a DF?

2)Are you of the BA?

3)Are you one of the Forsaken?

 

Those seem like the likely things she'd ask. For regular darkfriends and BA, this would work fine. But, because there is one of the Chosen, they could simply deny being any of those things, because they simply just don't believe they are those things.

 

And I just reread book 3 and Lanfear is very offended when Mat assumes she's a DF or otherwise. And as RJ said before sometimes the Forsaken telling the truth isn't as farfetched as we think. Ishamael told LTT the truth in the beginning, just like he did Rand in his dreams. Lanfear has absolutely no reason to lie to Mat at this point. Sometimes just telling the truth is more fruitful than lying. And if you look at some of the other Chosen, they have the same attitude towards how they view DF's, BA, and other Chosen.

 

"You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it." -Brandon Sanderson

 

This still puts Mesaana in a position to be bound by the Oaths, which isn't defeating the Oath Rod.  She's still required to tell the truth, not to make weapons, and not to use weapons.  It's been said many times, and I don't think this is what is meant.

[thewalrus777]

What about her direct connection to the DO? He himself bound her to those oaths she took when she swore to do his bidding. Maybe her Oaths that were bound to her by the DO himself protects her from the OR?

[Dreamwalker]

I'm a believer of being able to defeat the Oath Rod, just by not believing you are not what the questions asked make you out to be. Mesaana does not believe she is a DF, BA, or a Forsaken. She only believes her self to be a Chosen servant of the DO. The Chosen see all other servants of the Shadow as being beneath them. It seems to me that Egwene's possible questions asked after the Sisters reswear the oaths are:

 

1)Are you a DF?

2)Are you of the BA?

3)Are you one of the Forsaken?

 

Those seem like the likely things she'd ask. For regular darkfriends and BA, this would work fine. But, because there is one of the Chosen, they could simply deny being any of those things, because they simply just don't believe they are those things.

 

And I just reread book 3 and Lanfear is very offended when Mat assumes she's a DF or otherwise. And as RJ said before sometimes the Forsaken telling the truth isn't as farfetched as we think. Ishamael told LTT the truth in the beginning, just like he did Rand in his dreams. Lanfear has absolutely no reason to lie to Mat at this point. Sometimes just telling the truth is more fruitful than lying. And if you look at some of the other Chosen, they have the same attitude towards how they view DF's, BA, and other Chosen.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself :)

 

"You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it." -Brandon Sanderson

 

This still puts Mesaana in a position to be bound by the Oaths, which isn't defeating the Oath Rod.  She's still required to tell the truth, not to make weapons, and not to use weapons.  It's been said many times, and I don't think this is what is meant.

 

Your use of the quote in this way is exactly what I was saying about people reading too much into it. When you read what the person asked Brandon and his full quote it seems more like he's just confirming their theory about Mesaana twisting words, and the fact that she's still in the tower.

 

What about her direct connection to the DO? He himself bound her to those oaths she took when she swore to do his bidding. Maybe her Oaths that were bound to her by the DO himself protects her from the OR?

 

But the BA take oaths to the DO also, and they didn't seem to be protected.

[Calderis]

Not saying I agree with the point given (I love to play devil's advocate and all), but The oaths that DF's and BA take I think would be a little different than the ones taken by the forsaken. Can't imagine many DF's gave oaths at Shayol Ghul.

[thewalrus777]

Not saying I agree with the point given (I love to play devil's advocate and all), but The oaths that DF's and BA take I think would be a little different than the ones taken by the forsaken. Can't imagine many DF's gave oaths at Shayol Ghul.

 

Thanks for bringing that up. Because, that's what I was gonna say. The Forsaken took their oaths at SG in the Pit of Doom. They were bound by the DO himself. We know a little of how the BA get sworn in. And judging by Verin trying to use the OR to remove those oaths she took, I bet the BA use the OR in their ceremonies. DF's just swear allegiance to the DO through higher up DF's or the Forsaken themselves. SO, I would have to believe the Forsaken have a lot more protection from certain 'things' due to their direct connection with the DO.

[Sharaman]

Not saying I agree with the point given (I love to play devil's advocate and all), but The oaths that DF's and BA take I think would be a little different than the ones taken by the forsaken. Can't imagine many DF's gave oaths at Shayol Ghul.

 

Thanks for bringing that up. Because, that's what I was gonna say. The Forsaken took their oaths at SG in the Pit of Doom. They were bound by the DO himself. We know a little of how the BA get sworn in. And judging by Verin trying to use the OR to remove those oaths she took, I bet the BA use the OR in their ceremonies. DF's just swear allegiance to the DO through higher up DF's or the Forsaken themselves. SO, I would have to believe the Forsaken have a lot more protection from certain 'things' due to their direct connection with the DO.

 

We know from Verin and Talene and from Galina's PoV that the three BA oaths are sworn on the Oath Rod.

First, they're freed of the three AS oaths and then, they're sworn to three new oaths to GLoD.

 

[thewalrus777]

Not saying I agree with the point given (I love to play devil's advocate and all), but The oaths that DF's and BA take I think would be a little different than the ones taken by the forsaken. Can't imagine many DF's gave oaths at Shayol Ghul.

 

Thanks for bringing that up. Because, that's what I was gonna say. The Forsaken took their oaths at SG in the Pit of Doom. They were bound by the DO himself. We know a little of how the BA get sworn in. And judging by Verin trying to use the OR to remove those oaths she took, I bet the BA use the OR in their ceremonies. DF's just swear allegiance to the DO through higher up DF's or the Forsaken themselves. SO, I would have to believe the Forsaken have a lot more protection from certain 'things' due to their direct connection with the DO.

 

We know from Verin and Talene and from Galina's PoV that the three BA oaths are sworn on the Oath Rod.

First, they're freed of the three AS oaths and then, they're sworn to three new oaths to GLoD.

 

 

Yep,yep. Even though according to Verin the oaths she took for the BA were very 'specific', they were on the OR. So thanks for that bit o' info, Sharaman. :)

[yoniy0]

I agree, BA Oaths are made on the OR. However, we do know (Verin told us) that there's more to the ceremony, presumably some icky stuff.

Also, we do know that every person in Randland is born with a natural defense against the DO. He can't reach you/take control of you if you remain firm in your allegiance to the Light (hence Rand's attempted denial of Ishamael in the first book, according to Moiraine's advice). Swearing to the DO means foregoing that defense, and we still don't know how that's done.

[bronnt]

"You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it." -Brandon Sanderson

 

This still puts Mesaana in a position to be bound by the Oaths, which isn't defeating the Oath Rod.  She's still required to tell the truth, not to make weapons, and not to use weapons.  It's been said many times, and I don't think this is what is meant.

 

Your use of the quote in this way is exactly what I was saying about people reading too much into it. When you read what the person asked Brandon and his full quote it seems more like he's just confirming their theory about Mesaana twisting words, and the fact that she's still in the tower.

 

That full quote and question are on the very first post of the very first page of this thread.  Given that he says "As long as she believed it to be true," then immediately follows up with the excerpt I quoted, I believe he's pointing us specifically away from the word-twist theory.  Why immediately give that qualifier if he'd already confirmed that she could have just twisted words?  To indicate that there's something the question missed, clearly.

 

That quote is the entire basis of this thread.

[Dreamwalker]

"You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it." -Brandon Sanderson

 

This still puts Mesaana in a position to be bound by the Oaths, which isn't defeating the Oath Rod.  She's still required to tell the truth, not to make weapons, and not to use weapons.  It's been said many times, and I don't think this is what is meant.

 

Your use of the quote in this way is exactly what I was saying about people reading too much into it. When you read what the person asked Brandon and his full quote it seems more like he's just confirming their theory about Mesaana twisting words, and the fact that she's still in the tower.

 

That full quote and question are on the very first post of the very first page of this thread.  Given that he says "As long as she believed it to be true," then immediately follows up with the excerpt I quoted, I believe he's pointing us specifically away from the word-twist theory.  Why immediately give that qualifier if he'd already confirmed that she could have just twisted words?  To indicate that there's something the question missed, clearly.

 

That quote is the entire basis of this thread.

 

I've read that full quote many times, I think I'm just interpreting it differently than you. I think that if he meant there was some new weird way to beat the rod (other than word-twisting) he would have just RAFO'd it rather than saying she could word-twist if she believed it. But, like I said, it's just a difference of opinion. It would probably help if we could have heard him say this in person (inflection and expressions and all) to know which way we should be reading it. I can see your point too, because it could totally go either way, so I guess we won't know til ToM  ;)