Direwolf18 wrote: quote="Henry Brown" quote="Direwolf18" Agreed. My take away of this was that it was Nahrmahns plan. That being said I think this is a big of a gamble and I personally would have waited a couple of years but hey. /quote
I missed the fact that it might have been Nahramhn's plan initially. But now that you and other posters have mentioned it, I have to agree. But what do you think they would have gained by waiting? I have the opposite idea, that breaking down the church is going to take a long time and that they need to get started on it as soon as possible. /quote
I have actually been noodling this around, and I will be honest it was my first reaction, I just have a bad gut feeling that something is going to go wrong. I freely admit I am a very cautious soul by nature, and this is a radical departure from their normal mode of operation.
That being said I think the part that worries me is that I think that everyone might be off by a year... Remember when introduced the concept of zero? What if the timer actually starts at year 1, the first official year in the calendar, and not say year 0. So instead of the archangel popping out at the start of the year it would be the end.
Maybe I am jumping at shadows, but I personally would have gone with a 20 month safe period instead of what, a 5 month?
Of COURSE something is going to go wrong - where would the fun be if everything went right?
Also, the first year was the year 1 - in the Christian era we went from from 1 BC to 1 AD. Zero represents absence and there was never an absence of a year.