Leaderboard

Preface, this is going to be long but it's important. I'm new to the forums and haven't had a chance to get to know people personally but I wanted to create this topic because I've seen some discussion surrounding Gavilar that I wasn't comfortable with. Rather than continuing in those threads I'm creating this to center the discussion of Gavilar and his treatment of those close to him here. If you feel like you are in an abusive relationship, Trust your gut, you can get support here: 1−800−799−7233 First I'm going to refer to some of the National Domestic Violence Hotline's criteria for abuse that I believe are relevant to the Prologue chapter: Just because someone does something that is on this list does not mean it is abuse. There can be a single instance of abuse or continued abuse. However, I think we can establish that the severity of a single action is what would make the action abusive, whereas continued actions from the list of criteria qualifies as abuse. Prologue: This is setting the reader up for what is coming. It's establishing that Navani isn't feeling like she belongs at Gavilar's side. BS notes that her anxieties/insecurities have gotten worse lately. In a healthy relationship she would be able to express this to her husband and he would be able to reassure her anxieties. This does not happen. This is number (2) from the segment above. He does not trust her. More evidence of lack of trust And more. Clearly this is a pattern, yeah? One time is circumstance, two times is coincidence, three times is a patter. Brandon is drilling this lack of trust from Gavilar into us. This is clearly (3) he has threatened her without resorting to physical abuse... yet. A glimpse into why she may deserve the abuse (spoiler, no one deserves the abuse, that's a sign of abuse). Number (7) he is accusing her of cheating, and is jealous of her relationship with Dalinar. No matter how founded it is. This is (4) he is humiliating her by twisting a once compassionate gesture into mockery. He is blaming her for the abuse (5) Wow, this is a lot all in one. He is calling her names, belittling her, and humiliating her for something she loves (1 and 4). Then he concludes with telling her that she isn't worthy of their relationship (8) This is the only quote I've pulled that I feel like is any stretch to call it abuse. But her internal monologue here "Don't let his lies become your truth. Fight it" Screams that he has been gaslighting her for an extended period of time. Here's what I find the most important part of the chapter, it's not evidence of actual abuse. It's showing how we normalize it. Our society and many of us normalize the behaviors I listed above. We say what Navani says that this was an "argument" and that they "bring out the worst in eachother". This is not the case, this is abuse, we need to recognize it for what it is, and not be afraid to call it that. We can have a whole long discussion about the justification or rationalization of what it is, but that just enables abusers. Allowing abusers to get away with these kinds of behaviors only protects them. We as a society need to do better by providing support for their victims and safe exits for them to leave their abuse. I'm not an professional in the field or anything close to an expert. Please, if you feel like there is abuse in your relationship, Trust your gut, reach out to someone -- You can reach out to me if you want. If you're looking for professional support you can contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline by calling 1−800−799−7233 If you are being abused or have been abused you need to know this. You do not deserve it, there is nothing that can make that true. No one deserves abuse.

I just wanted to say thanks to every person I've interacted with so far on the Shard. Y'all are all so kind and welcoming to everyone. I just wanted to let you know, that this is not a normal occurrence of the internet at all. People here have all sorts of differing political and religious beliefs, but nobody really lets that get in the way. I know I'm still new and all, but from what I've seen, you guys are really the best to everyone. When I first entered the forum, so many people welcomed me and didn't treat me as an outsider. This is kind of a continuation from some things I was saying in the good news thread, that basically things have been tough for me lately, but the Shard has brightened my days (to say the least). I found that the last few days, the thing I looked forward to the most was not the reading that lets me escape, but coming on the Shard and talking to people who will just talk. You guys are ok with talking about stupid stuff, and weird stuff, and nerdy stuff, and deep stuff, and that's really cool. Anyway, I'm going to tag the main people who've been super welcoming to make sure that they get this: @Condensation @revelryintheart @DramaQueen @Channelknight Fadran @Vapor @Mist @Lunamor @Adran Oathbreaker @AonEne @Spren of Kindness @Sorana @A Windrunner @Honorless @Darkfinder @I Am A Fish @Rushu42 @The_Truthwatcher @Nathrangking @Enter a username @Truthless of Shinovar @Hentient PLUSSS literally everyone else I've come in contact with since getting here!! I unfortunately do not have photographic memory, otherwise I'd totally put you ALL on here. SOOOOO if you see this, then THIS IS FOR YOU!!! I have yet to meet someone mean or harsh on the Shard, and you're all cool.

[OOC] So, I wanted to address Araris's point because something about it nagged at me last Turn but I wasn't really in the place to sit down and think about why. And then I slept on it I recognise part of this is going to, of necessity, pertain to things better talked about in an OOG thread. It's fine if the GMs or IMs tell me to desist. I just seem to have a chronic inability to shut up about things I'm going to use purple to indicate where I make bold markings as compared to Araris's original. Before I do this, I want to make it clear that we all are aware that the general rules of SE, which apply to every game but I'm going to cite them here again for reference: Asking people to prove that they have the same GM PM by citing a specific word in the GM PM has gone into a grey area and has been called off by the GMs. This should not be done in the game, and we have all accordingly desisted. 1. As someone who was in training to be a professional philosopher, I always have to ask what people mean by words. Words are important, and if we don't mean the same things, then we get into pointless fights because we aren't even talking about the same thing. "Lynches based on meta information are bad." What sort of badness are we talking about here? Ethical badness? I certainly think it's somewhat ethically wrong to out players without their consent. It sure didn't stop Maili from becoming famous for info dumping if we revealed information to him and later lynched him. And I certainly do out players anyway when I feel it is absolutely necessary. The point I am making is this: if the badness inherent to using meta information is an ethical one, I question if this sort of ethical badness is meant to be universal, i.e. all players should recognise it is ethically bad and not do it, or it is meant to be particular, i.e. I think it is bad, and I as a player would not engage in it. If it is a particular ethical badness, then it has no power to become a constraining norm that binds the entire game. If it is a universal ethical badness, we must ask what the basis of this norm is. b. Now, one natural response might be semi-Kantian. "If I, as a player, recognise that using meta information is particularly ethically bad, I should also will that other players recognise the ethical badness of using meta information." Thus, universal norms are particular norms writ large. The problem with this response is: why is the ethical badness of using meta information so special? Consider the Maili case again. The community response to Maili was as follows: don't give information to Maili unless you want to risk your information being dumped. In other words, what determines the difference between cases where the community response to particular norms is no, and where the community response to particular norms is yes? Where is the ethical basis that determines the difference between our moral responses? I'm waiting [For the record, my personal views are that that community norms are simply community norms - some of them are ethical, but some of them are not, and there is no especial basis apart from mod or communal fiat. But if community norms are largely based on mod or communal grounds, then we cannot expect these grounds to have a particular ethical character, or to support ethical claims of badness.] c. If we can't find a basis for the claim of universal ethical badness, then we have two questions to answer: why think it is universally ethically bad, if we have no reason nor ground for this? Moreover, what might be the source of confusion such that I consider meta information lynches to be universally ethically bad? This is a non-trivial exercise best left for another meta-ethics paper 2. Let's presume the badness here isn't an ethical one though. I certainly think there are ethical dimensions, as Araris acts and writes as though he believes there definitely is ethical badness involved. But we can also notice two other strands of thought in what he says: a. It's epistemically (read: informationally) bad: basing trusts and lynches on meta information can be wrong and can lead to losing the game. i.e. "lynches based on meta information are bad IMO, and trusts based on them can be wrong and lead to losing the game." I'm going to assume here Araris is referring to precedent, but we also need to be both charitable and critical about Araris's argument. Clearly, game loss comes apart from regarding meta information as a basis for trust. Perhaps he's referring to what happens if all players acted that way, but I certainly don't think anyone is making a claim that all players should use meta-information! But here's the problem. What distinguishes meta information - epistemically-speaking - from making arguments based off player behaviour, or gut, or even voting patterns? Players can act irrationally. Players have had bad gut reads before. People's guts have been Darkfriends. People have falsely read voting patterns to make wrong inferences before. Just look at me trying to get Elk as a Jeskeri last game - yeah, no, he was a Cultist. Ask yourselves: have you ever analysed a post or voting pattern and made a mistake before? If you haven't made a mistake, please @ me - if you can provide evidence of your infallibility, I'll follow your lead in voting for the rest of this game. Eliminators, this applies to you as well. If you can show me proof that you have only ever 100% been correct in your Eliminator reads in SE, I'll follow your lead. I'll wait. I'll bet none of you - except possibly Orlok, and I don't think even Orlok has been completely infallible without the need to correct himself - can meet that criterion. And that's because the point is that meta information isn't epistemically different from player behaviour, gut, vote analysis, or post analysis. Let's be clear: meta information isn't epistemically privileged over player behaviour, gut, vote analysis, or post analysis. But neither is the latter epistemically privileged over the former. They are sources of evidence. Sources of evidence can be wrong. Part of this is due to the nature of epistemic inferences, as inference is inherently none truth-preserving. I can go into this in greater detail as it's been part of my academic work for the past ten years or so, but that's best left for Discord, a dead doc, or another paper on epistemic inferences and truth-preservation Now, let's take a look at the Wilson claim. Part of the problem is we need to distinguish between what Araris is talking about, which involves a move from basing trusts or lynches entire on meta information and nothing else and never, ever revising your beliefs, to...regarding meta information as one out of many sources of evidence. Let's be clear: Wilson's trust in Claincy as an info hub was partly based on timezone analysis. It was also based on an assumption about Eliminator behaviour that turned out to be false: that a player who was so clearly uninterested in being told information and participating in an information hub was unlikely to be an Eliminator. If we want to balance that out, we can take MR4 again: part of my basis for narrowing down Spy suspects to include Karlin was basically the fact that my timezone used to be a bit weird for SE - and Karlin shared a similar timezone, and I was in an anonymous PM with the Elim because of RNGesus. I didn't get to act on it as there were other things and Karlin didn't say much in thread, but I was rambling on suspects in my GM PM with Wyrm. Where does this leave us? So: if you use post analysis as your source of evidence, and only post analysis, and fail to account for and aggregate other sources of evidence or context, and you fail to revise your beliefs in the face of countervailing evidence, you end up with: "Wyrm contradicted himself! Elim! Lynch him!" And then you end up with bad votes, and possibly, losing the game. Funny how that works, isn't it? It's almost like the epistemic badness doesn't emerge from the source of evidence itself, but from poor epistemic behaviour on the part of the player Let's take stock. I'm arguing so far that we can't simply claim that the badness of meta information is inherent to meta information qua meta information: that this has much more to do with players being epistemically vicious (i.e. opposite of virtuous) rather than it has to do with meta information as a source of evidence in and of itself. But barring what has been @Illwei's view on Mint and myself, I don't think of us are making this claim! (But I'll come back to this after the section break, in my handy tldr; for this game before y'all scream at me for making this esoteric.) b. it's pragmatically bad: doing this makes things unfun for other players. i.e. It also just breaks the game, and makes it less fun for everyone (or at least for people who like doing analysis). It's like in One Night Werewolf, where you don't say anything if you heard someone moving their card around during the night. Does it, though? Does it, really, though? Again, as I have clarified at the start of this mini-essay, no one is talking about the three prohibitions from the SE rules. While my arguments may be taken to partly attack their basis, I am much more concerned with problematising the whole issue of meta information in the first place. I would argue there's a distinction between saying, "Only a Villager would secretly roleclaim the way Mint did," and demanding that all other players cough up their GM PMs. One is gamebreaking and rule-breaking. The other is not game-breaking, and may be grey by the rules. But in this particular game, we have already wandered into the grey twilight realm anyway. Is it game breaking? Is it any more game breaking than having a Seeker create a trust and Mayor the whole village and tell people what to do? Any more fun destroying than that, by any chance? Let's be clear: no one here is asking players to reason this way. This began from Illwei saying he reasons this way, and from me saying, "Gee, Araris, in light of some presumptive, defeasible reason to think Mint is a Villager, I'm interested in why you're zooming in on her like this." No one at all is saying: "Everyone should reason this way. Analysis, schmanalysis, who needs that?" I think the charge that: if we acknowledge some players will and do reason this way, then it will break the game and no one will have fun, or at least, players who enjoy analysis won't have fun is extremely exaggerated. How do we get from one to the other? Do you think, for instance, that maybe players who enjoy RP are any less put off by the constant focus on analysis? Or that players who like being chaotic and going on a gut level are any less annoyed by being made to analyse? How the ruddy hell do we deal with that? The same we always have. By asserting that within limits, it is okay for players to do the things they do, as long as it doesn't become a game-wide expectation that everybody plays this way, or else! If players are reasoning using meta information as one source of information, I don't see how this is game-breaking. I also would go so far as to say that One Night Werewolf is fundamentally a communal norm. If you want to make this a communal norm in SE, fine. I accept communal norms as the price of doing business in a community, but I don't pretend to reify them if they are not based in rationality. You can claim: "Well, if we stop saying it's bad, more people would do it, and that would make discussion boring." To which my response is: "Too bad. Deal with it." You want more analysis? Encourage players to do more. Bring that up in discussion. Stop engaging deeply in meta debates and engage players in analysis debates to shift the focus of the thread. Honestly, I used to be really put off by having to do pages and pages of analysis, which is why I've started to play the game more Kasually. And I could level the same charge: coming as an RP style player, it can be quite off-putting for players to miss what I'm doing or to fail to engage because they're not there for RP. Doesn't sound nice, does it? The whole point of being a community is we have to tolerate each other. We have to allow for diversity in playstyles. And while I'm on this, thanks to those who put up with my failed attempts at quoting for the first cycle-and-a-half. On a very crude, practical level: Someone show me where Illwei is breaking everyone's fun. Or I am. (This post excepted ) I'll wait. 3. What do we define as meta? I think this is a relevant question to ask. Clearly, not everything OOG or about the game is considered 'meta' in the unacceptable way. Is it unacceptable for players to blue-text inform us they are busy and can't commit attention to the game as a way of prefacing or explaining differences in their playstyle? If meta reasoning is unacceptable, is it unacceptable for us to say, "Okay, TJ seems suss but he's busy, and so I grant that he doesn't do as deep analysis as he used to"? You are directly letting out of game reasoning impact your own in-game analysis. You are allowing it to function as a mitigating factor. You are allowing it to serve as a counter-point to analysis-based reasoning. Do not give me anything about how it's not being used as evidence. It's being used as a counterpoint. How about this: Teft has last logged in to 17S on Tuesday, at 12:02PM (my time.) Is that meta-information? Would you use it to reason that Teft cannot have been the one to do any vote manipulation this cycle? How about this: if we know there is last minute vote manipulation that required recent knowledge of lynch states, would you look to see which players were or tend to be on at the end of the cycle? If you have answered yes to any of these questions, or no to any of these questions, why or why not? Do you think everyone shares your views of what is meta? Where do you draw the line, and what is your basis for the determination? What do you think makes your views correct? Here is the promised tldr; for everyone: Some players dislike the use of meta-information. Araris is among them, and so is El, and probably Wilson. I respect that, and I'm quite frankly tired of having to defend different views; I hope the same respect will be extended to those of us who treat it as just another source of evidence, within the rules of the community and the game. Respecting and accommodating differences in the way we play and reason has been core to SE. I hope this will continue. I argue that meta-reasoning is like any other source of evidence: players reason badly when they do not open themselves to revising their beliefs, or when they do not bother to account for other sources of evidence. I argue that no source of evidence (in general, with exceptions) should assume priority over the other. I argue that charges that meta-reasoning is bad because it is ethically bad, pragmatically bad, or epistemically bad cannot account for either how the community functions or cannot be substantiated without appeal to a player's preferences. In SE, the solution has generally been to accommodate each other's preferences and to maintain fun. I argue that meta-reasoning properly harnessed it not intrinsically anti-fun. I argue that the line between meta and OOG and non-meta is fundamentally troubled anyway, and that distinctions drawn are not going to be bedrock and can be open to charges of ad-hocery. The direct application for this game: I don't think anyone apart from @Illwei has argued that Mint should be treated as a Villager without reservation. Illwei has since adjusted his view, which will be for the better. My personal read on Mint is mild/tentatively Village, partly for Illwei's reason, and partly for circumstantial reasons that I won't elaborate on at this point in time. My own read on Mint certainly isn't exclusively based on her claim, given the circumstantial reasons. I have thus also appropriately regarded it as a weak read, since Mint hasn't said much more. If anything, my question to Araris from D2 might be appropriately phrased as thus: why do you not engage with the people who do think there is weak reason to believe Mint a Villager? He has answered that he considers it defeasible. Well and good. I will and have adjusted my views on Araris accordingly. Thank you to anyone who made it to the end.

These last two months have been some of the hardest two months of my life (and probably for different reasons you think). With one of my sisters and my dad becoming disabled, my mom stressing over saving our school, and accepting the fact that at the end of the summer, every last one of my friends will have officially willingly chosen to leave me, things have been kinda rough. But this is not the bad news thread, but the good news thread, and just this last week, a couple things went right for a change, and right you guys are some of the only people who have the free time to listen. So yeah, here's some stuff: 1. I got hired at Chick-fil-a 2. I am now the captain of the Speech team 3. One of my sisters delivered a beautiful little girl safely in a pandemic hotspot Not to mention that right before everything went crazy, I discovered Brandon Sanderson, and just recently I discovered a wonderful online community with wonderful welcoming people (I will elaborate further in the compliments thread in just a second) So, yeah, life is kind of cool this week.

Yet another double post, but of my roast I must boast, @DramaQueen is surely toast!

My quarantine contribution: Peeps Before Death: I will protect peeps who cannot protect themselves.

Hello! I'll be honest, I probably won't review past cycles a whole lot (brief skims, basically) so I can focus on what's happening currently. If there's been anything important, let me know.

I scoured the YouTube for the best, most SFW compilation of Sanderfan vines. Spoilers for SA up through OB, and enjoy the next 20 minutes of your life! I didn't make these, I didn't make this video, I am but a humble fan of great vines.

I have heard your pleas and have come to some share decisions. First, I apologize for the vagueness of the game. @The_God_King and I were excited to try out a slow reveal format. For that reason, we still haven't even told anyone the actual names we have for their conditions. I thought it might be more obvious than I have realized that it is. However, we have used mostly the same wording for multiple people with the same action. Being cryptic for the sake of being cryptic may not be the most healthy way to run a game. Therefore, I will be PMing those with actions and revealing the true name of their conditions. Further, as you have received all the information except for the names of three abilities, I will reveal now that Mist was afflicted with Transformation, Lord Silberfarben had Progression and Pyro had Tension. When we censured the conversation on GM PMs it was because I was a little overworried about the use of GM PMs to prove alignment. The village was referred to offhand in the GM PMs to the infiltrators and it would have been better just to mention the name we had given villagers in the Elim doc. As no condition is exclusive to village or eliminators, I was slower to step in on the topic of describing conditions (both what they can do and what symptoms came with them). Given this lack of alignment indication, I am still not worried about discussing the flavor or ability of conditions in public or private or sharing the surge it is associated with. The same goes for backgrounds if they do (or do not do) anything. A few other matters to resolve: The God King is unavailable for a few days and I will be running the game more or less on my own. That's why last night's cycle was up a little late. I appreciate how patient you have been so far and would appreciate patience going forward. @Elbereth will continue to have the final word on this ruling. If I am allowing too much information to be discussed, I will not be offended to be wrong. I am often wrong and will often be wrong. This is only my opinion on the state of the game.

There's a million seas I haven't swum, but just you wait...

This point is also emphasized by Moash’s arc in OB, where he justifies all his mistakes by blaming society. It’s a lot like blaming peer pressure. While the magic influence of the Unmade and Odium may make this pressure harder to resist, it is a significant aspect of the concept of Honor that each individual is ultimately responsible for their own actions, whatever the circumstances. Knowing those circumstances may make a character more sympathetic, but only in the sense that we understand them better, not in the sense that they are absolved of the bad choices they made. This applies to Gavilar too, and I think the question people are wondering about is whether he would have eventually done like Dalinar and taken responsibility, or whether he would have gone the way of Moash and blamed circumstance, or like Amaram where he believes the ends justify the means, or full Odium where he essentially doesn’t believe in good and evil or morality in the first place. I think that the truly honorable will feel remorse and take responsibility when they hurt other people, even when they didn’t intend to hurt them.

Me at the amount of vote manipulation apparently going on this game:

Nothing too weird but a couple of fun stories: 1.My companion and I were walking across the street of a Golf Course and he got completely blindsided when a golf ball drove into his face. He described it as “It felt like Satan punched me in the mouth.” It was hilarious observing the entire thing (after I found out it wasn’t a serious injury). 2. We were teaching a family that had a daughter that had these fits where she had to be taken to the hospital occasionally. She started having one and a blessing was given; it stopped immediately. The family had never seen anything like it. In case you were curious I don’t think they ever got baptized to my knowledge. I can not tell you the number of families (of our faith and not of our faith) I’ve met who have had miraculous things happen to them and they just blow it off and don’t want to live the life of discipleship.

This may have been touched on already so my apologies if it’s redundant. Due to the nature of the RoW chapter introductions from Navani, I think that the sibling fled the tower, similarly to how the midnight mother subsequently came in, then later fled. Makes sense to me for a few reasons: 1. The nature of Navani’s intro material for each chapter is how to lure a spren into a gemstone. The obvious parallel is that the sibling was once “trapped”, albeit willingly, in the core column of Urithiru. intro’s by Sanderson are never accidental or itrelevant, and based off what we’ve read so far I’m willing to bet Navani is the mystery main character. Sorry Adolin. 2. the midnight mother copies what she sees, as we all know from OB. Perhaps she copied the sibling by hanging out on/around that column. Got it, she was previously trapped by a light weaver and eventually escaped—- but that info comes from whack job shallan who I wouldn’t trust with a potato gun (reference the movie “Armageddon”) 3. I think the sibling is “slumbering” at the honor spren city in Shadesmar, and that Adolin and Shallan’s expedition to that place will accomplish 2 things: get the honor spren to commit, and the sibling to wake up and throw some skin in the game. 3.a. The Stormfather is well aware of the siblings whereabouts, and the humans thought/reported that he had died due to Urithiru’s light. I think his 100% absence from the physical realm is more to blame. 3.b. This does nothing to answer the issue of similar Urithiru style veins in the rock in Kholinar, perhaps someone can make more connections.

Daily Report 07-02-766 We can’t quantify everything that is happening. The interns are experiencing odd reactions to the samples. See the attached file to outline the effects. Many of the symptoms seem to correlate with surges. More stormlight is requested to further this research. Several researchers were supposed to return to the project, but due to unforeseen accidents, they end up on medical leave indefinitely. Follow up note 09-02-766: the attached files have disappeared Incident Report 08-02-766 Interns living on and near the facility campus awoke to shouts and cries for help. A trail of blood spots led the length of the main facility. Hand prints on the wall lead us to believe he was able to fight his attacker off, but only after being mortally wounded. The body of Dr Gear was found at the emergency rear exit to the campus. We believe it was his intention to activate the security protocols to aid in catching the culprits. The strange thing is there were no lacerations or signs of harm on the body that would explain the profuse blood loss. Whatever killed him left no marks. All interns are to travel in groups of no less than three and please stop "forgetting" to sign in as you move to new areas. Dr Gears was killed. He had a medical background and no condition. Teft the mosshead has withdrawn from the game. Elandera has been kind enough to take his position. With deepest apologies, I present the corrected Vote tally from Day 2 Votes Young Pyromancer (4): Gears, Lotus, Lahilt Lahilt (3): Kasimir, StrikerEZ Lotus (1): Matrim, Illwei, Vapor Mint (2): Sart, Araris Araris (1): TJ Shade Sart (1): Player List The Cycle will end at 8 pm MDT on Monday August 10th.

oh thanks i'm flattered

This theory could be right. My issue with it is I don't know whether Re-Shephir is really smarter than the no hyphen ones. She mimics what she observes and she recognized Shallan had the same power as one who trapped her long ago. She can't talk as far as we know and doesn't seem that smart. Shallan compares her to an axehound. At the end of Oathbringer, Dalinar thanks the Thrill for making him strong when he needed it and the Thrill reacts positively, like it understood. Or understood the emotion like an axehound might. In my mind I've divided them into the person sized ones that can talk: Sja-Anat, Yelig-nar (he can talk according to Hessi's Mythica). And the giant inhuman shaped ones that can't talk (Nergaoul, Re-Shephir).

Live On that note, live. Look around. Enjoy every single moment that you experience. Celebrate the good. Embrace the bad. Love who you are and what you are becoming. Love the people around you. We never get these seconds back, so seize the moment. DON’T wait until tomorrow. Start living now.

I LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVVVVVVVVVVE!! And, believe it or not, I found a greatshell while on vacation.

Yeah, I could have worded that better. I meant symptoms that weren't mechanics.

Correct. And Here's my (Short) RP for this round. ______________ Lucy lay on the bench, whimpering slightly. Light, her head was killing her! She felt worse than that one time she'd tried Horneater white on a dare. It was passed the time she normally left to go home, but she just couldn't bring herself to do anything other then just lie here.

Me, I fished for him. Me, I swam with him. Me, I'm one of him. Me, I freed him And me? I'm the dang fool that ate him.

Fish is in the harbor now, See if you can spot him. Another pufferfish comin' up from the bottom, Anemone's clung to the steps, but no one has forgot 'im... My name is fish, and I'm a poet, and I wrote this Ketek just to show it: I am fish; sea is home; under waves I roam; I wave under home; Is sea fish? Am I?

You will never be satisfied, you will never be satisfied...

I've been enjoying the time skip very much - it feels fresh and exciting, like really catching up with these characters, learning something new about them again. It's great for me, because whatever was skipped, no matter how cool it sounds, is what Brandon decided was less exciting than whatever happens in the rest of the book. I'm psyched!

Most other forms of Compounding are obvious in their effects: Iron Compounding gives much greater weight, Gold Compounding gives much greater healing, Bendalloy Compounding assures you’ll never get a bad case of the munchies ever again, etc etc. Other forms of Compounding are a bit more mysterious but nevertheless somewhat guessable: e.g. basically all of the Spiritual Feruchemy Metals (Fortune, Connection, Invesititure, Identity). However, one metal stands out from all the rest in that nobody really knows what it would do if you Compounded it: Copper. I’ve seen people guess ‘perfect recall’ (as in, Compounding a copper memory perfectly ingrains it into your brain without it ever fading); however, I also have an alternative theory. Compounding gives you a much greater quantity of whatever you’ve stored in your metalminds, and that being the case it makes sense to me that when you burn a copper metalmind you gain duplicate versions of the memory that’s inside it. Now, you may be wondering: What’s the point of that? What application could having multiple versions of a single memory have? Here’s where you have to remember the crippling disadvantage to copperminds: Once you store a memory in a coppermind it no longer exists in your head. You can either have it in your head or in your coppermind, but never both at once. And every time you remove it from your coppermind, the memory degrades a little more. Feruchemists developed a few tricks to get around this, of course. Remember the scene where Sazed has to write information down on a piece of paper in order to remind himself of what he had stored in his coppermind? But it’s a limited and less than ideal method. With Copper Compounding, however, this limitation becomes null. You could burn a coppermind, duplicate the memory that’s within it, and then store one of those duplicates in another coppermind while keeping the other(s) in your head. Moreover, with the creation of copper medallions, it becomes possible to share memories with others. Depending on how many duplicates a Copper Compounder is capable of creating (it should be quite a few considering it’s repeatedly said that Compounding is supposed to enhanced Feruchemical power ‘tenfold’), you could widely spread information depending on how many unkeyed copperminds you have available, all the while keeping the information in your head as well. It’s interesting to think about what might be possible with this skill. What is the limitation on how many memories you can duplicate? If a Copper Compounder had a coppermind like those of the old Keepers, where it contained centuries of inherited knowledge, could they duplicate those vast stores of knowledge into other copperminds? Imagine being able to keep infinite backups of valuable memories and information. That’s my theory, basically. And with medallions, Copper Compounding also becomes effectively the Feruchemical version of the printing press, able to widely disseminate large quantities of identical, reproduced information. Either way the main reason I like this theory is because I think it’s more in keeping with the original theme of Compounding: Instead of simply being able to store memories, you’re able to duplicate them; just like instead of only being able to store strength or speed, you’re able to enhance the power stored in the metalminds. What do you guys think? This is my first every theory post, so I'm curious what responses I'll get.

How to win: Do not play

Didn’t we see Radiant in Plate? I think Shallan was just handing the Plate off to her more soldierlike personality. Jasnah has her Plate, I am certain of it. Szeth might get his Plate in book five, as he has a small role in this book. Book five may detail his quest to cleanse Shinovar as part of his fourth oath. Kaladin will probably get his Plate this book. He will have to overcome his guilt and depression to swear it, which will be tough for him. The rest of Bridge Four either are working their way up there, or just can’t find a Spren to bond. Venli may have sworn the second oath offscreen. It has been a year, so who knows how far she has progressed? Dalinar probably will not get plate, considering that he doesn’t have a Shardblade. He may swear his next oath this book, although I am uncertain what situation will prompt him to do so. I do believe that he did have Plate. I may be wrong, but it seems that Windrunners can Lash themselves while in plate, but cannot Lash others while Plated.

Herate is taken aback by the sudden change in Jaxevist's demeanor, but then she looks away, shrugs, and sits down on the floor.

Beep. beep. beep. beep. beep. beeeeeeeeee-

While I like the poetry, a ketek has 5 parts.

I'll be getting into Realism after Character and Plot Development, which is happening... now. Come one! Come all! Come see, Character and Plot Development in worldbuillding! Not to be confused with good 'ol fashioned character and plot development; that's completely different. Therefore, without further ado... LESSON NUMBER which one am I on? Three? Five? Oh, four. FOUR. Lesson 4: Character and Plot Development in Worldbuilding --or-- Worldbuilding in Character and Plot Development So we've made worlds. We've developed a cool factor. Now we need to know how that fits into the story as a whole. Particularly, we want to how and why it affects our characters, and how and why it affects our plot. I'm going to start with plot affection, then move onto characters, because characters are cooler and plots are meh. It's important to note that almost every single fantasy story to ever permeate the earth has been a save the world story. Good versus evil, final battle, that sort of thing. And there is nothing wrong with that. I'm writing a save-the-world, you guys are probably writing a save-the-world, all of the Cosmere has been save-the-world at this point (except White Sand, but that's a graphic novel so I DON'T CARE), which means what I'm going to be discussing is a save-the-world story! I might discuss other forms of writing in a fantasy later, such as heist fantasy (like in Six of Crows which I haven't read so I might be totally wrong and it also might be save-the-world), or *gags* romance fantasy (like Twilight, which I haven't read and never plan to). So, save-the-world stories! The good guy's gotta kill the bad guy so the bad guy doesn't kill all the good guys. Sometimes they win, and sometimes their books never hit the shelves (I.E. they always win). Now, designing a plot is something we've been doing since middle school. First, you got the exposition, right? And then rising action, climax, then falling action, and resolution. Right? Right? WRONG! It is so much more complicated than that! People always think it looks like this (spoiled for size): But it actually looks more like this: I may or may not have just borrowed a stock market image for this, but it is pretty accurate. I'll be referring back to it now and again, so keeping it open might be a good idea. So here you have a nice plot outline. Exposition at the start (that flat part of the blue line at the beginning), and then things start ramping up. You hit that first hump, go back down, hit the climax, and then plummet. Well, yeah, Fadran! I hear you think (yes, I can hear your thoughts). That's how plotline works. Where does worldbuilding and magic come in? Shh, my little minions. All will be explained in time. Three seconds of time, actually, because I'm talking about that... now. I'm going to refer to our good friend Brandon Sanderson and his lovely Laws of Magic Systems, because they don't just affect magic systems; they affect worlds, as well. I'm going to pull on his first law, which is "An author's ability to solve conflict with magic Worldbuilding is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic World." I'm also going to tear it up for scraps and build something new. Behold, everyone! Fadran's First Law of Worldbuilding! "An author's ability to create conflict with Worldbuilding is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said Worldbuilding." To return to the stock market plot outline, I'm going to refer to that first big hump. That first big hump is important. Sometime around then, you need things to go downhill. Sometime around then, the characters have to fail at something big. Because we're talking under the context of save-the-world stories, then it's probably something to do with the big bad guy being prepared for the characters and screwing them over. Take The Last Airbender chapter 3, for example (spoilers, btw). That first hump would be the invasion of the Fire Nation capital. Azula was ready for them, she stalled for time, the Fire Lord stayed alive, literally everyone except the main protagonists and a few unimportant side characters were captured--in other words, a failed false climax. However, as you might've noticed, that wasn't exactly worldbuilding-based. This failed false climax isn't just an inciting incident for the characters--it's also the point at which the reader needs to understand your world. They don't need to understand all of it; in fact, they don't need to know any of it. When I say that a reader's understanding of your world is proportional to how well you can create conflict with it, I mean that a reader's understanding of the characters' understanding of the world is proportional to how well you can create conflict with it. Mystery is very important to a story, so you can actually introduce new worldbuilding elements in this failed false climax (I'm calling it an FFC from now on) to intrigue your readers. Nobody knew what Hemalurgy was or did back in the first Mistborn book, but that didn't mean that Brandon couldn't create conflict with it--that meant that Brandon was basically obligated to create conflict with it, because it was a mystery to characters and readers both why you couldn't kill the inquisitors. So I guess I'll go back and revise my First Law of Worldbuilding. It is now "An author's ability to create conflict with Worldbuilding is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well a reader understands a character's knowledge (or lack of) of said World." Boom. It's there. Feel free to quote me on it, it is a thing! Oh dear... this is already a really long post. Okay, this is lesson 4/1, and I'll cover characters in the next one (hopefully it won't take me too long to post that). Don't die! ~ Fadran.

I would say yes. Definitely yes. A crossover suggestion? No. Definitely no. But a reference, for sure. Good catch!

Took it today.

DAWNSHARD PROLOGUE IS OUT Spoilers: It is no longer like this:

There’s been an implication that Gavilar was trying to become a cognitive shadow. Personally I think he failed to do so before his untimely death and was referring to some other stage of his plans when he told Szeth to tell Thaidakar(? Or was it Restares?) that it was too late.

I think this is more likley. Maybe future epigraphs will be from "the ravings of Shalash and Talenel"

Crushes are like fishsticks. They're both painful to swallow.

I just love how Sanderson in the first chapters of each sequel gives us a lot of answers to questions everyone has discussed for years, and then just runs off releasing loads of new and exciting mysteries. What I hate with other, more soap opera-type stories is that there are story lines that never ends, conflicts that go on and on with the same characters and the same logic, just different people that stab each other or resent each other, it's so boring and nagging. Yeay, Sanderson, keep it up!

I just read through this whole thing and it is HILARIOUS! Slaveboi, Stormdaddy, Rock lobsters, it's all comedy gold; I won't be able to read Stormlight the same way ever again!

The cycle Mat got lynched QF46, I expected to get lynched next. So I wrote this. Mist for lynchee C5! Running mate: @Vapor. Make this expedition great again! I promise if I am elected, I will die and my alignment will be revealed! If you're red party, vote for me! My name is often red! Blue party, why not eliminate someone not from your party! We already know how well Vapor completed the same campaign promises that I make. As my running mate, she can help me fulfill those promises. Since we are siblings, we will have effective communication. My name is Mist and I approve this message. This message paid for by the Mist for Lynchee Foundation. Haikus from QF46 C7. Probably shouldn't have been posting them at that point. Also on The Last Post Wins! People will not trust. It makes sense. Trust is broken. I mourn victory. Remember that time But wait, not that one, or then I see your reasons.

I don't want Lirin to die, I think he is an interesting character, it would be great to see how reacts if he himself becomes a Radiant and how he comes to terms with it. We already have Tien, so many slave crews and other bridge crew members, old squad in Amaram's army, betrayal of Moash, death of Elhokar, Syl almost died. At this point I don't see what death of Lirin would bring to the table, Kaladin's thing has always been trying to protect people and not being able to, and I don't think he's especially trying to protect Lirin or that it is any sort of a conflict for him, it's more about their relationship. It is nice having a main character with both parents actually alive and named (Seriously, try to think of which cosmere main characters have both their parents alive). Side characters being treated as fodder for the development of main characters is not a trope I like, it gives me a feeling that the lives everyone except the main characters is meaningless and it breaks my immersion. I'm not at that point yet but we already have so many main characters all being part of just one family, if characters outside of the core team that could get spotlight keep dying then that will really start to bug me. It all depends on execution but it would really bring down the story for me personally if Lirin dies just for the sake of 4th ideal. I don't think Lirin's attitude is the best, especially towards Kaladin and to me it seems like he is being stubborn and purposefully ignoring certain realities. But reading the comments I feel like readers are a lot quicker to forgive faults of the main characters and look past their horrible deeds as compared to side characters, especially ones who are at odds with the main characters. For main characters it's just a character flaw or trauma or something to atone for the sake of character development. For side characters it's "just because you didn't have the best life doesn't give you a reason to be an cremhole" kind of deal. Anyways, I feel like Lirin has been beaten down by the world and given up on a lot except few things dearest to him that he holds on to tightly and that is why he is having trouble letting go of Kaladin, he still hasn't given up on Kaladin as a surgeon. It'll be interesting to see where it goes.

Yep. But I'll say that given his own background and beliefs he writes Jasnah (an atheist) really well and has taken pains to not only do justice to her worldview but construct things in a way that it can be every bit as valid as someone like Dalinar (reformist theist), Navani (orthodox theist) or Kaladin (agnostic) and it's up to the reader to decide which perspective they support, in the same way that questions like the existence of a soul, the Beyond and the God Beyond are always going to be the subject of in-universe debate and belief rather than something he's going to assert, even if he has a particular idea about the subjects. https://wob.coppermind.net/events/117/#e1695 https://wob.coppermind.net/events/332/#e9596 https://wob.coppermind.net/events/31/#e1733 And by extension, I think he handles religion in general really well. You can tell he's fascinated by it and the possibilities for storytelling that different beliefs can offer. .

First off, I dont think Brandon needs to write people with tons of different sexualities, faiths, illnesses, etc in order to be good at characterization. That is representation, which is a different beast. So if anyone on that reddit thread is using that as critcism of his characterization, they have got their terminology wrong. Second, I think Brandons characterization is one of the strong points in his books. I have not suffered from depression myself, but I have never seen a person with that experience criticise Kaladins character. On the other hand, they praise him. That is a sign of good characterization. Same with Jasnah. I am no atheist, but she has been praised for being a great representation of how atheists do think. Personally, I have recognized myself in Elend (just general nerd behavior), Dalinar (being ashamed over bad stuff you have done) and Hrathen (religious stuff). As long as Brandon keeps on creating characters which tons of readers identify with, I think that is a sign of great characterization.

I’m pretty ambivalent about any relationships for Kaladin right now. I definitely enjoy the almost-brotherly relationship Kaladin has with Adolin (especially since being the “little brother” makes Kaladin always feel slightly off balance). i think he’s done with Shallan, and I think they’ve had a good conclusion. I’m not sure I see anything from him and Jasnah, though I think their interactions will be interesting from a discussion of ethics and morality. She’ll inevitably try to outeducate him and he’ll hit real-world experience hard. A discussion of oaths and Nahel bonds might be more common ground. Losing Laral was an important lesson for him. But re-engaging with her, and going back to some of his struggles even in TWoK may be valuable as he moves to the 4th Oath.

Hello there