twiztedterry

I believe, that since there were very limited numbers of mistings and mistborn at the end of HoA, it could account for the disparity in mistings, since it's most likely that the most common misting to survive would have been a coinshot or lurcher. Even assuming a fair and even distribution of allomantic mistings, we wouldn't see a guaranteed equivalent amount after several generations, this is because, given the information at hand - we assume that allomantic ability is recessive and is a sex-linked trait (passed on the X chromosome). The real question here is whether or not allomancy itself is the trait passed, with the type being determined after birth, or if each type of allomancy has a chance to be passed based on the genetic history - my guess is the latter, which means that in a given family, there would be different chances for the different mistings depending on how many of a specific type were in that family previously. For example, if Lord Mistborn got together with a Tineye, there would be disproporionate chance that the child born would be a tineye, but there would also be chances that they could be any of the others (including full mistborn) AND a chance that they would be normal. It's a lot of math, but It would make sense that some of the most commonly born mistings would be the ones who A.) Had more population to begin with, or B.) Were highly valued for their ability, such as lurchers and coinshots. Man, one of these days I'll have to go to a book signing to ask him about the genetic process for allomancer births. Sorry for the necro