Jump to content




  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Stormcrown

  • Birthday 04/21/1992


  • Member Title

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Grand Strategy, Fantasy, Writing.

Stormcrown's Achievements


Enthusiast (6/16)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

  1. I disagree on pretty much every point you just made, Nitavonne. Androl and Pevara was a much needed interaction and the dialogue was fine. "Another known Asha'man"??? The lack of Moraine+Siuan/Lan/Others was very glaring. I felt Nyneave's position wasn't that bad. Could have been more...yes...but its a hard balance. Glaring mistakes about Mat/Min? Like what? And I dont know idea what you mean by "Quality of the history" - History lines.
  2. To each their own! There are lots of people exaggerating the faults of the last book. I wouldn't take the bad stuff here too seriously. I got through the entire thing without catching anything these guys are saying. After reading their comments I'm like "Yeah....thats true" - But it doesn't bother me.
  3. To everyone who has got the sads, it gets better. Give it a week or two, took me about 5-6 days of bitter/sadness before I accepted that it was over and am content with it. @EmperorAllspice, Don't read these threads if you don't have the final book. Everyone goes into it with different expectations.
  4. When Lan took down two Myrdraal at once, I nearly shit myself.
  5. No, my comments are not pointless. In 100 pages all that I mentioned could have been easily addressed. Again I say I am not expecting another book's worth of material, but something as opposed to nothing. I get that you like the idea that we have EVERYTHING left open and thus that's an appropriate ending, but I completely disagree. We got an ending to TG, but NOT an ending to the story. The story of WOT is not only about TG and I expected the "end" to be more than just "Battle's over, so everyone go home!!". In a perfect world Jordan wouldn't have died. In a perfect world he would be alive to write the trilogy to address your concerns. But I suppose Harriet didn't feel comfortable with anyone trying to "guess" what RJ would have decided. It sucks, it really does suck, but it was out of anyone's hands. Jordan said multiple times he doesn't want anyone writing in his world, and even finishing the series was a near thing. I get that you are upset, but it's pretty much a pointless thing to talk about because most people already know. Jordan wrote the Epilogue, and Sanderson even adding the things he did was a little more than he wanted to do. The fact the epilogue was pre-written limited what BS could do. On top of that, even if RJ had notes for what happened after, they wouldn't be complete. Maybe we COULD have had one character's post-TG journey, but it wouldn't be right unless it was complete. That was impossible, thus we got what we got. I had the exact same emotions after I finished the series and I'm still a little bitter about it. But in the same regard if my own father died. In both situations you will end up accepting it.
  6. @mrhumble: Your complaints about closure are really pointless. Robert Jordan WROTE the epilogue, Sanderson was then UNABLE to write anything after Rand. He also left many parts of the plot clearly open for the outrigger trilogy he had planned. I enjoy RPing, so I absolutely LOVE the open ending. It truly symbolizes the "this AN ending, but it is not THE ending" - To wrap up all of the characters it would have taken a whole nother book at minimum, to simply do it justice. Admittedly for a good 3-4 days I was super agitated about not having more closure or what they will do. It took me a week to come to terms with the ending. Did you really want to read a paragraph of "And Mat goes on to rule the Seanchan after doing this, lives to be 50, has a bunch of kids, oh one of them can channel and takes over after him" - No. The style of epilogue you desire wouldn't fit in the WoT. That much content, detail, would take books, as RJ planned, but died and did not have notes to complete.
  7. First of all, You are pursuing this buffer argument like it makes or breaks the entire last books plot. The responses you are getting from some of the more avid fans is because of this. Every flaw you guys speak about is like it ruins the entire book for you. You also make a lot of assumptions, the first being is you are equating Angreal to Sa'angreal. They are not the same. They have different names, among other things. You also make another LARGE assumption "Even if we have 3 that don't have the buffer, you can't say that all sa'angreal dont" - You can't say either way. We only KNOW of 5 Sa'angreal. The only time a buffer was even mentioned was with Vora's wand, among any Sa'angreal. Jordan always did a lot of "RAFO" and Brandon mentioned a lot of his notes were "I'm going to do this or that" RJ probably didn't even think about it a whole lot. Overall the fact that Callandor is mentioned as being soooo unique for not having a buffer doesn't make sense throughout the ENTIRE series, as all Sa'angreal up to the point either dont have buffers or don't make sense to have them (Chokal). Up until Demandred's we only knew of 4. For Callandor to be known, even in the 3rd age, for not having a buffer....we would need an example of other Sa'angreal that HAVE buffers, and we don't. So....i'm rambling, but my point is that we don't know enough here to have a conversation.
  8. As for why the Angreal hasn't been discovered to have no buffer, how often does an Aes Sedai use so much of the power that they would take in that much? Would they be aware they COULD go farther? What if a channeler doesn't they can go past the safe area unless they actually do?
  9. Yeah. I think I was smoking something when I posted this.
  10. Rane, I'd take your point more seriously if you could give examples of major angreal's, all of them specifying buffers. You are saying "most have the buffer" but I don't remember buffers being mentioned very often.
  11. Okay. So I have spent the past hour re-reading a bunch of parts of WoT with circles but I can't find something to disprove or prove my theory. If there are two circles, one led by a man, on by a woman, and both were wielding Saidar and Saidin, could the man see the woman using Saidar? I'm pretty sure I'm wrong but I've been trying to find an example in the book where it says they couldn't see the opposite power. I suppose I'm trying to figure out cross-gender teaching of the one power. I've had a lot of people tell me one way or the other, but none have any proof.
  12. Suttree, do you have any links to examples of what Jordan wrote? I'm not good with identifying writing styles. Or perhaps even a few scenes you know of.
  13. I also feel a bit uncomfortable when people say "Sanderson" wrote this or that. I'd probably avoid using any author name. Because we don't know which parts he wrote and which he didn't. If you guys have any hints on scenes you know/pretty sure RJ wrote then I'd love to hear it. But we really don't know what pieces of dialogue RJ wrote, and BS had to write around. It's a very unique situation, and critiquing it should be done carefully. I'd probably just say "RJ/BS" to be safe. This would also avoid any Anti/Pro Sanderson discussions as well, because again, we really don't know where one starts and the other ends.
  14. I do appreciate those examples, Sutt. That's what I mean. When you guys use them in a generalized context it falls flat on people who don't really grasp your point of view. We go back in our heads and think, where did Sanderson do that? (or Robert Jordan, depending on who wrote that scene, we don't know.) But our heads don't think that way. We didn't think anything of those situations you mentioned because they weren't memorable in our minds. They are in yours, because you DO think that. I really enjoy seeing them, despite reducing the tint on my glasses. Discussions are for learning, although I understand that you guys like your discussions, we got caught in the crossfire.
  • Create New...