Shard Theory

[Lord Tavash Shar]

Hello,

 

While I know that there is not a WoB on specific shards other then those that we have met and that questions about them tend to be RAFO I was wondering if anyone had theories on the 7 shards we don't know.

 

I ask because of a thought I had while reading the letter

 

Where is love?

We know that the shards are parts of Adonalsium and that this was a godlike being responsible for creating worlds. We also know that shards can exist in opposition to each other such is Ruin and Preservation and that there names are based of action or intent. While reading the MAG and AoL RPG books I was struck by how well each power complimented its opposite and some of the descriptions of shards and there nature.

 

We also know thanks to Wax in AoL that the "Rule of 16" Holds true as a sort of natural law of the Cosmere

 

The world exists in 3 plane. The Physical, Spiritual and Cognitive. We also know that the shards shape or affect these aspects. As such the pushing/pulling Internal/external tables and groupings should be usable to infer certain shards natures if not their abilities.

 

Physical:
Preservation

Ruin

Cultivation
Unknown

Spiritual:
Devotion

Honor

 

Cognitive:

Dominion

Hybrid?

Endowment

Dominion

 

6 Unknowns

 

This lead me to believe that there should be an opposition to odium. A "Push" to His pull that would exist some where in the Cosmere and that these as internal would have external members of there grouping.

Has anyone else Though about this or have a WoB on the subject? With 9 filled out if these rules hold there should be a way to infer traits about the other shards......

[Moogle]

Not all Shards have opposites by WoB, so I doubt the Allomantic table is the way to go. And if you're looking for Love, Devotion was once named that as I recall. I can't find the WoB on that, though. (I know Odium was originally called 'Hatred' or 'Hate'.)

 

If anyone can provide the WoB on that, I'd appreciate it.

 

If Shards can be placed on a table, I'm not sure why you'd place it according to the three Realms. Shards exist in all the Realms.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Moogle

[Lord Tavash Shar]

While its true that shards exist in all three realms I remember reading something that Implied that each shard Governed a specific one and that both Ruin and Preservation were specifically shards that governed the Physical realm which is why the spiritual and cognitive realms of Scadrial are so hard to access. I'm looking for the WoB on the subject and I'm not saying I'm right.

What I am say is that Patterns like this tend to repeat and that while not all shards have opposits they may have..... Similarities that tie them together into groupings.

Physical strengthening and physical sense are not opposite in Tin/pewter but pushing and pulling are. And they are all physical actions.

[Green Hoodie Mistborn]

I think a relevant WoB is that the way the Shards shattered isn't how they had to shatter either, so just because there is an Odium, doesnt' mean there is a Lovium

[Lord Tavash Shar]

Found part of an Answer while looking through Brandons Fourm posts here from 2012. 
 

Quote

2) In the Mistborn trilogy, the base 16 Allomantic metals separate into different groups like the Enhancement metals, etc. Given that there are 16 Shards, do they also separate into different groupings as well? For instance, are Shards like Honor and Devotion part of one 'grouping', with Shards like Cultivation and Endowment part of another?

Good question.

...

RAFO

So then this is something he will delve into and explain in the books. And its an important enough plot point that he is not telling Us.

[kaellok]

So then this is something he will delve into and explain in the books. And its an important enough plot point that he is not telling Us.

RAFO generally tends to mean that the question isn't one he is prepared to answer right now.  Not everything that has been RAFOd will be answered by future books.  Also, there are some subjects that he RAFOs every question (such as Hoid's early life gets an automatic RAFO).  So, unless he gives some kind of special or unique RAFO (see where someone asked if Hoid has ever been to Braize, for instance) I would be leery of using a RAFO as evidence of anything.

 

On the other hand, I do very much believe that we'll get a lot more about the underlying structure of the Cosmere as we go forward.  That's because it makes good storytelling sense, and is likely to fit in with his plans, though--and I expect any such clues to be rather small and incidental, rather than huge plot points.  (Then again, I consider the direct Shardic conflict in Mistborn between Preservation and Ruin to be largely incidental to the story, even though it brackets and contains and is ultimately the reason for the story.)

 

What we do know, currently, is that Shards do not require an exact opposite, and that Preservation and Ruin were at least somewhat unique in how perfectly they opposed each other.  It seems likely to me that there may be something going on between the Shards and their interactions that has similarities to the Allomancy table at a basic level, but is actually fundamentally quite different.  If there is something going on with Shards and the three Levels of reality, I expect that it has to do with whether their magic system is net positive, net negative, or net neutral, and that their interactions with each other are based on the 'charge' of their magic system.

[Oudeis]

Relevant Quotes:

 

 

Chaos

Are Shards all paired? Does Endowment have a counterpart?

Brandon Sanderson

RAFO. Also, yes and no. Not all Shards have perfect counterparts like Ruin and Preservation.

QUESTION

Why were Ruin and Preservation linked together?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Because they're such perfect opposites. Basically it's just an opposites attract thing.

 

Source

 

 

Windrunner

Can all Investitures be classified as end-positive, neutral, or negative?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes, though in the overwhelming majority of cases, it's end-positive or at least neutral. Hemalurgy really is an oddity in the cosmere

Source Edited October 11, 2014 by Outis

[the winter system]

This is interesting. Hmm. I can't wait to find out more Shards. 

[Shaggai]

Found part of an Answer while looking through Brandons Fourm posts here from 2012. 

 

Quote

Good question.

...

RAFO

So then this is something he will delve into and explain in the books. And its an important enough plot point that he is not telling Us.

Looks like a job for a RAFOgrapher! To the Bayesmobile!

 

First we need the prior probability that Shards can be grouped. Personally, I think that's somewhat unlikely, given the WoB about pairings. There's no need for groupings. Let's say there's a 40% chance that they can be grouped.

Now, we apply the RAFOgraphy. Since this is a one-time thing, and no predefined reasons for that to be RAFOd, we can go with the normal RAFO probability instead of getting as complicated as we did with the Hoid/Braize one. There's a 3 to 1 chance that the answer to any given RAFO is "yes", so we multiply the "yes" probability (40%) by 3, and leave the "no" probability (60%) as it is. 40 times 3 is 120, so the probability of it being "yes" is 120 to 60, which simplifies to 2 to 1, or 67%. So the chance of Shards being in groups is between 67% and 40%.

[Lightsworn Panda]

Looks like a job for a RAFOgrapher! To the Bayesmobile!

 

First we need the prior probability that Shards can be grouped. Personally, I think that's somewhat unlikely, given the WoB about pairings. There's no need for groupings. Let's say there's a 40% chance that they can be grouped.

Now, we apply the RAFOgraphy. Since this is a one-time thing, and no predefined reasons for that to be RAFOd, we can go with the normal RAFO probability instead of getting as complicated as we did with the Hoid/Braize one. There's a 3 to 1 chance that the answer to any given RAFO is "yes", so we multiply the "yes" probability (40%) by 3, and leave the "no" probability (60%) as it is. 40 times 3 is 120, so the probability of it being "yes" is 120 to 60, which simplifies to 2 to 1, or 67%. So the chance of Shards being in groups is between 67% and 40%.

 

I see your Member Title is indeed well earned... 

 

While its true that shards exist in all three realms I remember reading something that Implied that each shard Governed a specific one and that both Ruin and Preservation were specifically shards that governed the Physical realm which is why the spiritual and cognitive realms of Scadrial are so hard to access. I'm looking for the WoB on the subject and I'm not saying I'm right.

What I am say is that Patterns like this tend to repeat and that while not all shards have opposits they may have..... Similarities that tie them together into groupings.

Physical strengthening and physical sense are not opposite in Tin/pewter but pushing and pulling are. And they are all physical actions.

 

But what about Lerasium? It grants you the abilities of a Mistborn. Shouldn't that change at least your Cognitive presence?

 

But the, God Metals tend to break rules. 

Edited October 19, 2014 by Lightsworn Panda

[Shaggai]

I see your Member Title is indeed well earned... 

I try. Although there aren't really that many opportunities to use it.

[Lord Tavash Shar]

 

 

But what about Lerasium? It grants you the abilities of a Mistborn. Shouldn't that change at least your Cognitive presence?

 

But the, God Metals tend to break rules. 

 

 

Not only do the god metals tend to break rules, They are outright exceptions to them. Shards do not have physical body's while they are shards from what we have seen, only vessels that they drop on death of the host.

 

I'm not even going to try and quote or expand on all the WoB and theories about Atium and Lerasium.  From them being normal metals that have been "Invested" spiritually in a way that can only be likened to Feruchemic storing to being the distilled manifestation of a shards energy similar to cooling plasma.

All theory involving god metals is weird and I feel that they are specifically an exception to standard shard behavior. The best I have contributing to my theory is that they can be distilled to a physical form in the first place while other investments such as spren are spiritual in nature.

 

Actually......... Excuse me while I look up all the different processes by which one can be Invested or learn to Invest. I'm Fairly certain that they should be categorized into some kind of groups. They are a Pantheon and pantheons always have a default base set of connections from one to another.