kaellok

Members
  • Content count

    905
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

979 Highprince

About kaellok

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Pacific Northwest
  • Interests
    Reading. Writing. Teaching. Playing games! Video games, board games, tugging at the strings that all people have so that they dance to my will.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,585 profile views
  1. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
  2. Smart Mr T was working for Mr T, and so did not tell Dalinar. Dumb Mr T was following the plan laid out by smart Mr T. The plan worked because Odium could not see Renarin, which left a gaping hole in his knowledge of what was happening/going to happen (and is a large part of the reason why it was important for Renarin to deliver the spren to Odium; Odium would be able find them, but not how or why they got there, and so would draw the exact wrong conclusions). Mr T's motivations are not, and have never been, perfectly aligned with Dalinar's. There is some overlap, but not that much. Mr T is presented as the ultimate "Ends justify the means", while Dalinar is a very strong "Means are the only thing that matters". We do see that Mr T may not be entirely truthful with himself about even that, though, as moments after assuming the power of Odium, his goal of saving humanity from extinction has shifted to beating Dalinar (possibly in a very 'why not both?' sort of move). Which further shows that they are, more than ever, working at cross-purposes.
  3. In one situation Moash is supposedly acting without emotion. In the other, he blatantly isn't. This is an inconsistency for a character that has supposedly 'given away' his emotion to a godlike being. However, I think that it is another instance that clearly shows there are limitations on that 'gift', where Moash's true character shines through--he wants vengeance for petty and selfish reasons, because he is a petty and selfish man. Read again through every scene that has Moash in it from WoR on. Every action has, at its core, "I am right to think that lighteyes are evil by definition, and humans deserve to be punished for obeying them." Even the aid that he provides to the Singers that were being punished for inadvertently helping Kaladin was rooted in this--he didn't help them because it was right to help them, he did so because he did not want to see the Singers acting like human lighteyes; and if Singers were to be no different than humans, then maybe that is a character trait that is learned, and so Moash's hatred is misplaced.
  4. Just a bit of nitpicking, but all of the anti-Light kills belong to Navani. Or maybe El, if they end up being responsible for its widespread manufacture. Or to the people that actually employ the weapon. Raboniel's culpability is actually rather minor, if integral--she shared information, nothing more. (Granted, she would have done far more had she lived.)
  5. Just want to point out that Mr T was not concerned with saving the world, but rather ensuring that humanity survived. Assimilating the knowledge that he has after Ascending to Odium, his definition of 'human' may have shifted. Does he consider those on Roshar to be human? What about Scadrial? Nalthis? As a mortal with large influence, a limited guide to the future, and limited power, he managed to do incredible harm. I'm incredibly skeptical that giving him more influence, more future-sight, and more power will suddenly make him less destructive--especially given the sense of a Cosmere-wide conflict we're given in RoW. Even if he become 100% benign to everyone living on Roshar, the nature of the man and the Shard make deadly interference in the Cosmere as a whole very likely to continue unchecked. (And those actions could easily draw the Rosharans into such conflict, as it seemed was Rayse's desire anyway.)
  6. Sanderson has said openly before that he writes his stories to have more optimistic endings to them to stand in contrast to the darkness that pervades the works of GRRM, Abercrombie, and others. (And that this take is done intentionally.) If we look at the body of his work, a series (and Book 5 of SA will be the end of a series) has always ended with the world in a more hopeful place than it began. In general, we'll also see that each book will end with the surviving characters in a better place than they began. There is still sacrifice, there is loss, but above all else there is hope that tomorrow will be better than today.
  7. Venli in the present when she's showing character and actually acting. Sure, she's not a good person, but she's not particularly worse than the vast majority of all humanity. And she struggles with what she did, refusing to let others take away the blame and responsibility for her actions. Timbre tries giving her an out multiple times, that it was due to Odium's influence and Ulim's manipulation that she did what she did, but she refuses to give herself a pass for that, knowing that she still could have made a difference choice but didn't. It's not often when we see the point of view from a character whose selfishness and self-centeredness causes the destruction of their entire people and ushers in a war to ravage the world, but it turns out they were being used the entire time and the promises are not fulfilled with the same Intent they had been made. And now they're learning how to live in this new world where they know nobody and are of use to only slightly more. Mistborn spoilers: The scene when Venli finds out that there are still Listeners that are alive, and what she wants more than anything is to see if the one person who might still care about her is alive.
  8. We have to make certain assumptions when we're speaking about how the Skybreakers could be, since the narrative gives us very few clues. However, from the brief scenes of Skybreakers training in Oathbringer, as well as the pair in Edgedancer, it's pretty clear that Highspren simply do not interact with their Radiants that often. There's not any clues that I can recall seeing anywhere that would indicate that a Bond with Nightblood would affect a Nahel bond with a spren. Given the absolute most forgiving best-case scenario, time is the primary limitation, as I've mentioned previously. If they are tracking one crime/criminal, and see another taking place, they have to decide which one is more important. Likewise if they see evidence of such. Literally one of my two points in virtually every post I've made. So many people in this thread keeps speaking about how Skybreakers are better/more consistent than other Orders. They aren't. Why? There is no requirement for that in our legal system. The U.S. legal system does not make it mandatory to go after the greatest infractions. Instead, police officers are given great leeway in when/how/where/why to arrest alleged criminals. This is true for pretty much every legal system that I'm familiar with, that there are few (if any) actions that require law enforcement to act. If the Skybreaker hated lighteyes and was chasing a lighteyes thief, and they saw a darkeyes commit a murder, there is nothing that we are textually aware of that would require them to then pursue the murderer--unless the law or code or person they swore to follow has such a clause built in. This is my second point. Unless the outside code requires action, the Skybreaker chooses to act or not act. This leads to greater consistency only if the only Skybreakers chosen are those that will (almost always) choose to act. If the spren were more involved, then they could help challenge and guide their Radiants to a better understanding of when/where/why/how to do so, but (as I've mentioned in previous posts) there's zero evidence that this happens to those that are not approaching the Fourth Ideal. A Windrunner (Kaladin) who did this ceases to be a Windrunner. See: Kaladin ceasing to be a Windrunner when he decided to allow his friend to assassinate the king. A Skybreaker who does this remains a Skybreaker. A Skybreaker is making a moral choice every single time they choose to act or not act unless there is a codified reason for it (and modern nations in Roshar have few reasons to have done so). Yet they are not required to develop a strong, consistent moral code to base those actions off of, which means they are less likely to even notice when there is a moral dilemma, let alone handle it well. People learn to make moral choices by intentionally making moral choices, not by pretending that their actions weren't a choice dependent upon their morality. The entire argument for consistency for the vast majority of Skybreakers (those of the First thru Third Ideals) requires a specific code of conduct for them to follow along with the law or person. Without this, the way that they interact with the law is up to the individual Skybreaker. You may get consistency within individuals that way (eg, I will always pursue the lighteye criminals over darkeyes), but not across the Order as a whole. And so, in the end, you end up with an Order that is no more consistent than any of the others.
  9. I'm not sure why I went into this thread thinking that this would be about Navani giving Kaladin Bridge Four, and thinking that I'd just missed that in the book or something.
  10. When Kaladin acts in ways which cause conflict with his moral code, he ceases to be Radiant. That's his basic arc in WoR. This is why Honorspren like Syl and Phendorana spend time forcing their Radiants to build strong, cohesive moral systems. We see Pattern engaging with Shallan and Timbre with Venli along similar paths, implying that regular engagement with spren about right and wrong is common across most Orders. [REDACTED BY MOD] The Law may have a consistent words used to describe an action as legal or illegal, but the application and interpretation of that law is subject to personal opinion. We see it every single day in real life, and we see a multitude of examples of this in the narrative. For good and ill, selectively deciding which laws are enforced is up to the individual enforcing them. Skybreakers claim that they are the most consistent Order because they rely upon the Law, but they still must make choices about which laws they enforce. This means that there will by necessity be some laws that are enforced more than others, and it will be left up to the moral judgment of the individual Skybreakers on how they do so. Which, once again, tears them away from their stated strength.
  11. I mean, that's pretty much my point. I'm critiquing the values of the Order as a whole, using the modern incarnation as a basis for the judgments. They say that they favor consistency above all else, but are allowed to be inconsistent. Their greatest strength (abiding by a code that is not subject to the whims and follies of a single individual) is their greatest weakness (they are allowed to choose when and how to enforce the dictates of that code). But nobody ever speaks about that, and it is instead flagrantly disregarded in favor of nebulous ways that the Skybreakers could have been super cool way back when. Great! I'm sure that they were. The best case scenario for Skybreakers truly is really great. It's just that the worst case scenario for them is actively evil, and the spren are cool with that either way because they don't actually care about Right and Wrong or Moral and Immoral or Just and Unjust. And there we go, backing away from what is argued to be their greatest strength--reliance on something fixed and unchanging instead of their own whims. I think you're misunderstanding my argument, because I am not saying that the law is not necessary. Not even the teeniest of tiniest bits. I'm saying that there is effectively no difference between people who are allowed to choose how and when they enforce the law and those who write the laws. Skybreakers swear to something external because their own judgment is flawed, and yet they are expected to use their own judgment in how to uphold that external thing. Highspren and Skybreakers are said to value consistency above all else, but simple checks that would help to ensure this occurs are blatantly lacking. A hidden quality assurance monitor on a factory line will encounter far more defects than one that is visible. As a general rule, people are more consistent and behave differently when they think they are being watched. At some point over the last 4000 years, you'd think that the Highspren would have noticed this and decided to engage with their Radiants more. As regimented and rule-bound as they are, this entire process seems to be by design. And it's a bad design. The very best that a Skybreaker can be is definitely something good and worthy of the highest praise. It's just that it's incredibly easy to slip off of that mountain, and it's a much steeper and sharper drop than it would be for at least some other Orders because there is no safety net, and limited job training.
  12. @Subvisual Hazenot sure if you'd seen this WoB before. There are some...wobbly factors that this doesn't take into consideration, like the color of Voidlight, but that might be due to the interaction with the gem (similar to how Stormlight-infused gems don't glow Blue unless its a sapphire).
  13. That's just it, though. Skybreakers follow the Law, but they choose when and how it is enforced. They are still making personal judgments all the time, because their time is limited and so they have to make decisions on how it is spent. Yet from what we've seen, they aren't challenged on how and why they make decisions to enforce this law or that one. The Highspren are fine with however they interact with the law, so long as the law is followed--that is what allows for the modern-day Skybreakers to exist as they do. Their challenges are instead on enforcing the law, not the morality behind their actions. For instance, take the Szeth Interlude from Oathbringer where the prospective Skybreakers are brought to capture/kill escaped prisoners. They are told that the escaped prisoners are all dangerous killers, and can be executed. No fault is found for those that execute the escaped prisoners. No challenge is made about whether they had the right person or not. From what we can see, Szeth is the only one who doesn't immediately leap to killing them. Sure, the modern-day Skybreakers don't fit the idealized version of their past selves, but they are an incarnation that the spren are fine with. Skybreakers are allowed selective enforcement of the Law, so long as it is the law; adhering to that seems to be their defining feature, with zero regard as to whether the law is right or good or moral. The law is the rule they follow, and that is not challenged or tested by their spren. Nothing that we have seen indicates that how they follow the law, or why they follow the law, or when they follow the law is challenged--only that they follow it. Consistency is a big necessity for Order, but that isn't a trait of Skybreakers that we've actually seen. Again, they get to choose when and how they enforce the law, which allows for significant inconsistency. Windrunners are not allowed selective enforcement of their own morality, and are constantly challenged by their spren about what Right and Wrong actually mean to them, as well as understanding that actions can be both. I'll grant you that a 1st and 2nd Ideal Skybreaker will be more consistent in their application of non-morality than a Windrunner would. However, quite frankly, a 3rd and 4th Ideal Windrunner is likely to be more consistent than a 3rd and 4th Ideal Skybreaker. This is the time period when, from what we have textually seen, the Windrunner has a significant depth and understanding of their own moral code and it is not likely to change or wobble in any meaningful way.
  14. So, the rest of what you have posted is great, but the page after this one Cultivation is talking to Toadium. Growing can also point to something becoming larger, even if only by appearance from it coming closer. I think that this is a stretch too far. To help fuel your theory, I would also like to point out two conversations Jasnah and Hoid have had. In the epilogue of WoR, where Hoid says that salvation will be found in the hearts of men. And then again in RoW:
  15. Suicide baiting is a very particular form of evil which deserves no absolution, no forgiveness, no redemption. What makes him worse than others is that he does not accept responsibility for his own actions. After WoR, I spoke a lot about Szeth and how he doesn't deserve a redemption arc because of the willful abdication of morality (and I still stand by that), but Moash in RoW exemplifies this attitude far more than Szeth ever did. Even Mr T, as heinous and despicable as he is, makes no pretense that he is not a monster that deserves the raw hatred people will have for him if they find out what he has done. Even if the particular actions that Moash/Vyre have taken are inconsequential in comparison to others, the betrayal is on a deeply personal level and with zero remorse. If given the opportunity to do everything over again, we're led to believe that he would make the exact same choices and still be left wondering why Bridge 4 stands against him. Shallan killed her mother in order to save her own life. She killed her father in order to save the lives of her brothers. She killed her spren because she was a child, and too young to be making such binding Oaths. Killing her spren is the only one that has any weight of 'atrocity' attached to it, and I simply fail to see how an 11 year old child can be expected to bear full blame in that instance. It's a tragedy, for sure, but I don't think it's more than that.