PDA

View Full Version : Oath Rod Avoidance


Squocka
12-05-2010, 05:45 AM
I read somewhere about 3 ways for Messanna to avoid the Oath Rod and that the way given about the fake voice in TOM was correct acording to BS

My point is that in the yes of a forsaken it would be easy to not lie by saying I am not a Darkfriend or I am not Black Ajah.

In my opinion Lanfear could hold the oath rod and say i am not Aes Sedai after the truth oath and have no issues.

Why?

In Lanfears view the definition of Aes Sedai today does not mean anything near to what it used to, and in the eyes of who would be judging her she is so far greater that that that it would not be true.

As for the Darkfriend by the same logic All of the Forsaken are "Chosen" and not lowly scum like darkfriends so with minimal thought they are so far above that and also not Black Ajah that is a construct of this age so they could say that as well.

Seeker
12-05-2010, 03:39 PM
I agree.

That would have been the perfect escape.

"I am not a darkfriend."

Well, she's Mesaana. She's not a dark friend.

yasiru89
12-05-2010, 06:18 PM
In Lanfear's case, even 'I do not serve the Shadow' would have a grain of truth in it, given her desire to supplant both the Dark One and the Creator!

Squocka
12-05-2010, 06:42 PM
In Lanfear's case, even 'I do not serve the Shadow' would have a grain of truth in it, given her desire to supplant both the Dark One and the Creator!

This would be very borderline, imagine the mind justifications going on.

Cortar
12-06-2010, 12:31 AM
This would be very borderline, imagine the mind justifications going on.

Exactly though, its not what is actually true, but instead what the person truly believes!

And knowing how arrogant the Chosen are this is definitely within reason

cottillion
12-06-2010, 12:32 AM
One thing I'm wondering is, if it was so easy to counteract the oath rod why did Semirhage choose to go to the shadow when she was given the option of being bound or being stilled(At least I believe that is the reason given for why she turned to the shadow)? Is it just that in the AOL they had other means to make sure that she was bound? Seeing as they were so much more adept back then I suppose it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.

Juan
12-06-2010, 01:18 AM
@cottillion
I'm not sure they could've defeated the Oath Rod that easily, although it does make sense. I just don't think the Forsaken could convince themselves that they weren't "Darkfriends" etc etc.

Remember though that the Oath Rod is one of other Bands of Dominion.

Assuming that it was this easy and assuming that Semirhage could indeed make use of that loop hole, she would still be out of place with the Light. Remember she had her little pervesion BEFORE the drilling of the bore and she was supposedly evil before it. She out of all the Forsaken would definitely not fit in with the Light. So the simple answer is that the Shadow allowed her to practice what she willed. Kind of like Aginor and his crazy experimentations with humans. The Light wouldn't allow it so he went to the Shadow. So even if Semirhage avoided the Oath Rod, she couldn't practice her "passion" so to speak.

morat'corlm
12-06-2010, 01:30 AM
We know from Galina's binding in TPOD11 and Talene's unbinding in WH6 that the flow of Spirit does not even have to originate from the bindee. So presumably in the Age of Legends they could simply have shielded her, preventing her from pulling off any tricks with inverted weaves.

A technique that might have been applied in the Tower the first time, particularly since the Black Ajah hunters already used it.

Cortar
12-06-2010, 02:43 AM
One thing I'm wondering is, if it was so easy to counteract the oath rod why did Semirhage choose to go to the shadow when she was given the option of being bound or being stilled(At least I believe that is the reason given for why she turned to the shadow)? Is it just that in the AOL they had other means to make sure that she was bound? Seeing as they were so much more adept back then I suppose it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.

Because in the AOL that bounded differently, I presume that they would shield her then bond her with a SUPER specific oath that fits that person's crime
i.e.
A murdered might get this oath, "I swear not to cause physical harm to another living creature nor shall I cause or influence others to cause harm upon another living creature"
basically, something very specific unlike the Aes Sedai's 3 oaths which are pretty general

GonzoTheGreat
12-06-2010, 05:54 AM
A murdered might get this oath, "I swear not to cause physical harm to another living creature nor shall I cause or influence others to cause harm upon another living creature" basically, something very specific unlike the Aes Sedai's 3 oaths which are pretty generalWhich, if that person considers plants to be living creatures too, would make him starve to death pretty soon. Or, alternatively, if, like me, he was not a Creationist, it would place no limitations at all on him.

Both of which show that you're not quite super specific enough.

SixPips
12-06-2010, 07:52 AM
@cottillion
I'm not sure they could've defeated the Oath Rod that easily, although it does make sense. I just don't think the Forsaken could convince themselves that they weren't "Darkfriends" etc etc.

Remember though that the Oath Rod is one of other Bands of Dominion.

Assuming that it was this easy and assuming that Semirhage could indeed make use of that loop hole, she would still be out of place with the Light. Remember she had her little pervesion BEFORE the drilling of the bore and she was supposedly evil before it. She out of all the Forsaken would definitely not fit in with the Light. So the simple answer is that the Shadow allowed her to practice what she willed. Kind of like Aginor and his crazy experimentations with humans. The Light wouldn't allow it so he went to the Shadow. So even if Semirhage avoided the Oath Rod, she couldn't practice her "passion" so to speak.

Remember that the big white book was coauthored, not just written by RJ. He did this to allow some misconceptions and permit the book to appear as though it was truly from the mind of a person who did not have access to all the information. That being said, RJ has been quoted as mentioning the nine RODS(not bands) of dominion were indeed not oathrods but actually nine seated rulers akin to kings and queens at that time. He refers to Lews Therin having summoned the nine rods to him and how that was essentially a conference of the most powerful and influential people of the age.

As for a very specific Oath, Semirhage was to be bound as a criminal and as such her crime would be prevented in a very direct way such as "I swear to never cause pain to another human being." Even a non-creationist can not deny the inevitable fact that we each are human by our genes (in a time where genetics was prevalent), and as such would be restricted to causing no harm.

yasiru89
12-06-2010, 08:06 AM
Does tying off an inverted weave mean it goes away if you get shielded though?

Anyway, as was mentioned, the AoL law enforcers would term the oaths stringently, and Semirhage would have found it much more difficult to pull self-absorbed mental gymnastics about something she's agreeing to do in future compared to a simple statement.

I wonder if more oaths means more of your life off. But either way, hopefully Elayne replicates the thing, could be the way to turn the Empire (Seanchan), by threatening to incite chaos by revealing the true nature of sul'dam but presenting the Binder to supplant the a'dam.

The Immortal One
12-06-2010, 08:11 AM
Because in the AOL that bounded differently, I presume that they would shield her then bond her with a SUPER specific oath that fits that person's crime
i.e.
A murdered might get this oath, "I swear not to cause physical harm to another living creature nor shall I cause or influence others to cause harm upon another living creature"
basically, something very specific unlike the Aes Sedai's 3 oaths which are pretty general

Yes. The Aes Sedai of the Age of Legends made the Binder (Oath Rod). They knew exactly what it did and it's limitations

They would also keep the Binders secure. So if the person did get around swearing oaths the Aes Sedai would soon know - they wouldn't gain the Ageless look.

Which, if that person considers plants to be living creatures too, would make him starve to death pretty soon. Or, alternatively, if, like me, he was not a Creationist, it would place no limitations at all on him.

Both of which show that you're not quite super specific enough.

Isn't the main belief behind Creationism that everything was created by a supernatural being or force (usually a god) rather than evolution?

How does this belief make you think, in any way, that humans and the like aren't 'living creatures'?

As for the starving to death; well many people these days never cause harm to 'living creatures', they simply buy pieces of already dead meat and already dead vegetables. So this theoretical murderer doesn't starve he/she will simply have to receive already dead animals and vegetables to eat.

GonzoTheGreat
12-06-2010, 08:44 AM
Isn't the main belief behind Creationism that everything was created by a supernatural being or force (usually a god) rather than evolution?

How does this belief make you think, in any way, that humans and the like aren't 'living creatures'?The quibble is over the term "creatures". Specifically: if one does not believe that plants and animals and such were created, the term "creatures" does not apply to them.

As for the starving to death; well many people these days never cause harm to 'living creatures', they simply buy pieces of already dead meat and already dead vegetables. So this theoretical murderer doesn't starve he/she will simply have to receive already dead animals and vegetables to eat.With the meat you might be right. But with the vegetables you wouldn't be. Those are still mostly alive when you buy them. They are dying, of course. But that's not the same as dead.
Besides, letting someone else do the killing for the criminal is probably not what's intended either. So a good Oath would prevent contract killings, which in the "no harm to living beings" case would also stop one from buying any meet or vegetables (or grain, or ...).

Of course, all of this is just another example why the Oath Rod, even if used by an expert (which the AS most definitely are not) is an extremely buggy tool. Perhaps that's a hint for the meaning of the numbers on them: the Microsoft Oath Rod version 3.01, and such.

The Immortal One
12-06-2010, 09:12 AM
The quibble is over the term "creatures". Specifically: if one does not believe that plants and animals and such were created, the term "creatures" does not apply to them.

Well the reason for that specific oath was to stop murder - surely you have to admit that humans are 'living creatures'.

And I would assume that in Randland (what is the AoL version of that? Rand won't be born for another 3000+ years) 'living creatures' would probably include things like Ogier and Nym too.

Casabamelon
12-06-2010, 10:27 AM
I read somewhere about 3 ways for Messanna to avoid the Oath Rod and that the way given about the fake voice in TOM was correct acording to BS

My point is that in the yes of a forsaken it would be easy to not lie by saying I am not a Darkfriend or I am not Black Ajah.

In my opinion Lanfear could hold the oath rod and say i am not Aes Sedai after the truth oath and have no issues.

Why?

In Lanfears view the definition of Aes Sedai today does not mean anything near to what it used to, and in the eyes of who would be judging her she is so far greater that that that it would not be true.

As for the Darkfriend by the same logic All of the Forsaken are "Chosen" and not lowly scum like darkfriends so with minimal thought they are so far above that and also not Black Ajah that is a construct of this age so they could say that as well.

There was a TON of discussion about this pre-ToM. The big quibble is did Mesaana avoid the oath, or defeat the rod. The difference is, by doing the voice trick, she is completely free of the AS oaths. If she took the oath, but quibbles that she's not a darkfriend, she's Chosen, then she's STILL bound to not hurt, not lie, not make weapons. Considering she went to the Dark Side to avoid being bound, I doubt she would be cool with that, even if she was able to claim non-darkfriend status on a technicality.
________
Big Dick Video (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/9/big-dick/videos/1)

SixPips
12-06-2010, 11:27 AM
in the end, Mesaana is never referred to as having any resemblance of the ageless features, as such we must assume she did not swear any oaths on the rod. I find this interesting because it seems that the Black Ajah sisters do swear oaths on some form of oath rod, since during TGS there is a section where a Black Sister is forced to forswear all Oaths bound on her and she suffers excruciating pain, far more than the original swearers do when they reswear.

This begs the question of whether the current age Aes Sedai swore their oaths to the DO on the rod on purpose in order to gain the ageless face the others have and not stand out. I think so, which makes it ironic that the very people who go to the DO seeking immortality have their own lives cut in half instead by their greed. Very fitting and poetic.

GonzoTheGreat
12-06-2010, 11:46 AM
Well the reason for that specific oath was to stop murder - surely you have to admit that humans are 'living creatures'.No, I do not.
Living beings, yes. Living creatures, no.
Creatures are created beings, and if you do not believe in a Creator, then that means there are no creatures, as far as you are concerned.

That may be rather unexpected to you, but then: that's my point. If it had been Semirhage who came up with that bit of sophistry, then all the Oath Rod would have done was shorten her life. It would not in any way have stopped her from doing what she had been doing.

melville
12-06-2010, 05:37 PM
The ageless look is not immediately evident, It takes more than a few weeks, if not months, before it can be noticed. Messana also may have been able to remove the oaths a short time later if she could get a hold of the oath rod. Begs the question, can you remove the oath given on oath rod microsoft 3.01 using oath rod microsoft 99.2.

Juan
12-06-2010, 08:59 PM
@SixPips
My mind is a bit rusty; have finals this week and have been sleep deprived. Shouldn't be on here, but what the hell. It's rods of dominion then? I'm not sure if I remember where/when exactly and who said it, but I believe it was Semirhage in the TGS when she saw the male adam when she would capture Rand. I think she mentioned this as a rod/band of dominion or whatever and them being much better than the Seanchan adam. If not, I'm fairly positive that somewhere, it was mentioned that there were more "oath" rods so to speak that had different roles I imagine.

Cortar
12-07-2010, 02:37 AM
No, I do not.
Living beings, yes. Living creatures, no.
Creatures are created beings, and if you do not believe in a Creator, then that means there are no creatures, as far as you are concerned.

That may be rather unexpected to you, but then: that's my point. If it had been Semirhage who came up with that bit of sophistry, then all the Oath Rod would have done was shorten her life. It would not in any way have stopped her from doing what she had been doing.

I think you are looking too far into my words, I did give a bad example, but for all we know their oaths could have been more specific, like each situation that could come up and could take hours to say or something.

Side Note: We ARE talking about a universe in which a "Creator" created everything so technically everything is a creature in Randland... And if you lived in this place you would probably think like everyone else...

Jokeslayer
12-07-2010, 03:21 AM
Side Note: We ARE talking about a universe in which a "Creator" created everything so technically everything is a creature in Randland... And if you lived in this place you would probably think like everyone else...

If you really wanted to, you could argue that although the Creator created the world, he had no direct part in the creation of any individual being (excluding perhaps WoT "Adam and Eve", who are long dead). Thus if you define creature as "anything created", there are no human living creatures at the relevant time.

@Gonzo: I don't think anyone would starve to death over that oath. You're basically arguing that people would define the terms according to self-interest right? Well if I go to a butcher or a greengrocer, the food items I buy weren't specifically killed for me; they would have died anyway, so I can eat them without breaking the oath.

The Immortal One
12-07-2010, 03:39 AM
If you really wanted to, you could argue that although the Creator created the world, he had no direct part in the creation of any individual being (excluding perhaps WoT "Adam and Eve", who are long dead). Thus if you define creature as "anything created", there are no human living creatures at the relevant time.

Does this mean that Creationists believe that their god has a hand in creating every single human being?

If not, if then their god created only the 'Adam and Eve' primogenitors, then all other humans descended from them are not 'creatures' either.



I guess I'm with Gonzo then, nothing alive on Earth is a living creature after all.

Jokeslayer
12-07-2010, 03:45 AM
Does this mean that Creationists believe that their god has a hand in creating every single human being?

If not, if then their god created only the 'Adam and Eve' primogenitors, then all other humans descended from them are not 'creatures' either.



I guess I'm with Gonzo then, nothing alive on Earth is a living creature after all.

I have no idea what Creationists would say in answer to that. I'm just saying that you could make that argument if you really wanted to.

Grig
12-07-2010, 11:30 AM
It's rods of dominion then? I'm not sure if I remember where/when exactly and who said it, but I believe it was Semirhage in the TGS when she saw the male adam when she would capture Rand. I think she mentioned this as a rod/band of dominion or whatever and them being much better than the Seanchan adam.

No idea what you're getting at here, but nothing we've seen on screen has anything to do with "rods of dominion". Those were actually people, according to RJ. She does refer to the male a'dam as a Domination Band, though, and it does indeed allow more control than an a'dam (although with the drawback that the control can flow both ways).

SixPips
12-07-2010, 11:50 AM
No idea what you're getting at here, but nothing we've seen on screen has anything to do with "rods of dominion". Those were actually people, according to RJ. She does refer to the male a'dam as a Domination Band, though, and it does indeed allow more control than an a'dam (although with the drawback that the control can flow both ways).

its a triune miscommunication :) The Rods of Dominion were nine rulers during the Age of Legends. I confused that with your mention of the Dominion Band, or male a'dam that Semirhage refers to. Yet, when you were referring to the Dominion Band yourself, you thought it was Semirhage speaking of an Oath Rod.

See, its like a circle...(random I now Pronounce you Chuck and Larry reference.)

Juan
12-08-2010, 12:02 AM
I don't know. I'm pretty sure I read something about many different things such as Oath Rods except slightly different with different purposes. I assumed they were called rods of dominion or something, but apparently I'm completely wrong on what they're called. But I'm pretty sure these other Oath Rods exist.

Weird Harold
12-08-2010, 12:33 AM
I don't know. I'm pretty sure I read something about many different things such as Oath Rods except slightly different with different purposes. I assumed they were called rods of dominion or something, but apparently I'm completely wrong on what they're called. But I'm pretty sure these other Oath Rods exist.
There are other ter'angreal intended for the control and/or correction of criminals. As far as I can tell, only the Binders, aka "Oath Rods," are anything like a "rod."

IIRC, Talene Minly was questioned on the White Tower's "Chair of Remorse" before she was exposed as Black Ajah:

Chair of Remorse

The Chair of Remorse is a ter'angreal kept in the second basement of the White Tower. It is a rectangular block of marbled gray, hard as steel except on the top, which molds itself to one who sits on it. There is a palm sized rectangular hole on one side with tiny, unevenly spaced notches. Channeling into the hole causes one sitting on the Chair to relive the consequences of ones crimes. It is an outstanding cure for recidivism.

References
WH,Prologue - Saerin, Seaine, Pevara, Doesine and Yukiri use the Chair of Remorse on Talene and force her to forswear her Black Ajah oaths on the Oath Rod. Then the force her to reswear the Three Oaths and an additional oath of obedience to them.

Sammael told Sevanna that the binder, #111, that he gave her would not work on a man, but if she could capture Rand, he would provide her with something else that would bind a male channeler. He was unspecific as to the nature of what he would provide -- and he may not have had anything specific in mind as he had no intention of putting something like that in Sevanna's hands or where Greandal could get ahold of it.

Juan
12-08-2010, 01:49 AM
Thanks Harold, that was gonna bug me for the longest time haha.

subwoofer
12-08-2010, 04:05 PM
There are other ter'angreal intended for the control and/or correction of criminals. As far as I can tell, only the Binders, aka "Oath Rods," are anything like a "rod."

IIRC, Talene Minly was questioned on the White Tower's "Chair of Remorse" before she was exposed as Black Ajah:



Sammael told Sevanna that the binder, #111, that he gave her would not work on a man, but if she could capture Rand, he would provide her with something else that would bind a male channeler. He was unspecific as to the nature of what he would provide -- and he may not have had anything specific in mind as he had no intention of putting something like that in Sevanna's hands or where Greandal could get ahold of it.

Well- what about that red rod Elayne was playing with? What kind of "Binder" was that?;)

Were the rods of dominion used to bind nations to their rulers? Or were they just symbolic like Rand's dragon scepter?

Weird Harold
12-08-2010, 06:51 PM
Well- what about that red rod Elayne was playing with? What kind of "Binder" was that?;)

Were the rods of dominion used to bind nations to their rulers? Or were they just symbolic like Rand's dragon scepter?
Ellayne's Red Rod:

Red Rod
A ter'angreal in the form of a wrist-thick red rod about a foot long. It feels firm rather than hard and feels even warmer than ter'angreal normally do. The red rod is activated by Fire. It creates visual and aural illusions, but if the user is unwary it may put her to sleep and broadcast her fantasies and dreams.

Since this is a PG rated site, I'll just speculate that it was a tool for therapists to get at a patient's subconscious.

:D:D:D

subwoofer
12-08-2010, 10:10 PM
Ellayne's Red Rod:



Since this is a PG rated site, I'll just speculate that it was a tool for therapists to get at a patient's subconscious.

:D:D:D

What kind of therapy are we talking about here? I though before Elayne blanked out she was naked and doing ... stuff... this actually belongs on the LOL thread on this site.;)

Weird Harold
12-09-2010, 02:42 AM
What kind of therapy are we talking about here? I though before Elayne blanked out she was naked and doing ... stuff... this actually belongs on the LOL thread on this site.;)

No, Elayne wasn't singing bawdy songs or dancing on the tables before she triggered the Red Rod -- that was a different embarassing incident, IIRC.

The fantasies Elayne's subconscious broadcast under the influence were certainly embarassing -- or would be if she knew what they were -- but only because she was trying to act all grown up and fantasies about playing spin the bottle and having tea parties with boys is embarassing childish. :rolleyes:

ETA: As for what kind of therapy, the Red Rod is the ultimate refinement of an 18th century, 8-ton, steam-powered, device -- for treating "Female Hysteria." :D

Squocka
12-11-2010, 10:26 PM
The Balefire Rod was a rod as well. I imagine there are lots of rod shaped terangreals but just certain Binders that have the Oath fuction.

As for the 9 Rods of Dominion as stated above its teh 9 rulers but i also assumed they perhaps had a scepter "rod" they carried around i mean what King/Queen doesn't have some such thing

RDDK
12-12-2010, 01:44 AM
One thing I'm wondering is, if it was so easy to counteract the oath rod why did Semirhage choose to go to the shadow when she was given the option of being bound or being stilled(At least I believe that is the reason given for why she turned to the shadow)? Is it just that in the AOL they had other means to make sure that she was bound? Seeing as they were so much more adept back then I suppose it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.

They weren't as ignorant in the age of legends. I doubt she'd have been able to get away with using a weave, and even more, I bet they had really good wording for the oaths.

subwoofer
12-12-2010, 10:46 AM
The fantasies Elayne's subconscious broadcast under the influence were certainly embarassing -- or would be if she knew what they were -- but only because she was trying to act all grown up and fantasies about playing spin the bottle and having tea parties with boys is embarassing childish. :rolleyes:

ETA: As for what kind of therapy, the Red Rod is the ultimate refinement of an 18th century, 8-ton, steam-powered, device -- for treating "Female Hysteria." :D
8 tons of fun huh? Interesting:)
The Balefire Rod was a rod as well. I imagine there are lots of rod shaped terangreals but just certain Binders that have the Oath fuction.


Well, let's hope they don't get those rods mixed up with the red one:D

Weird Harold
12-12-2010, 06:55 PM
8 tons of fun huh? Interesting:)

Seriously, I'm not sure about the eight tons figure, but google around a bit, and you'll find a picture of the world's first vibrator -- which was powered by Steam and severely NOT "portable."