Simple Rules

[Oudeis]

Is it only human blood that draws shades? Silence served venison. Did she suffocate the poor deer to death first? Are you allowed to spill dead blood? Yet the surveyors mention that predators got eaten by the shades, so spilling animal blood must count. Even if you did it indoors, surrounded by silver, at high noon, they'd still enrage. Silence's grandmother ran around in circles on the other side of silver, and she still provoked the shade she'd trapped with Silence.

 

My current theory is that they kill the animals in some non-blood-letting way, maybe wrapped up in tarred burlap like the bandits, wait for the blood to cool, then open it and butcher the animal. Doesn't sound sanitary to me...

[Blindillusions]

Well, it stands to reason that the rule applies specifically to humans. The rule goes, "Don't shed the blood of another." To most people, a deer would not be "another." After all, the shades only come from the deaths of humans. As such shades are (theoretically) only drawn to blood when one human draws the blood another human.

 

Addtionally, there is the part about blood "shed in anger, exposed to open air," which gives rise to an additional theory that the blood has to be drawn through violence. If this were not the case, any common accident involving someone causing someone else to bleed could lead to angering the shades. As these people live in the woods, I can see quite a few instances where blood is shed in an accident. But it's not mentioned that this is also something to avoid.

 

As for the other rules: They simply seem to attract the shades' attention, not outright infuriate them. Fire to dazzle and confuse, motion to draw attention.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Blindillusions

[Kurkistan]

As to fire, I have a rudimentary proto-theory: It's the creation of a fire that upsets the shades, right? You can grow or split or share a single already-created fire as much as you like, but kindling a new one is what upsets and dazzles them. So I'd posit that fire coming into being as a new "object", in some Cognitive sense, is what is so upsetting to them.

 

@Blind

 

I think you're starting off on the wrong foot here. We know that there aren't any predators in the forest, almost certainly because they get killed off when they draw animal blood.

 

Recall that Silence was concerned that the Fort bounty hunters would accidentally spill each-other's blood when swarmed by shades, so it seems that accidental bloodletting is definitely a concern. Same with when Sebruki almost accidentally drew Silence's blood when dropping the crossbow: Silence was concerned.

 

I think the other Rules also "infuriate" shades to some extent: they seem to "activate" when the appropriate rule is broken, not just drift quickly towards the area/person who did it.

[Oudeis]

As to fire, I have a rudimentary proto-theory: It's the creation of a fire that upsets the shades, right? You can grow or split or share a single already-created fire as much as you like, but kindling a new one is what upsets and dazzles them. So I'd posit that fire coming into being as a new "object", in some Cognitive sense, is what is so upsetting to them.

 

Interesting... but, if you have a candle, and I light my candle from yours, they will gain separate cognitive aspects, yes? Or perhaps they don't. That'd be an interesting implication for Shadesmar. Or maybe one bead "budding" off another is different from sparks being used to generate one out of nothing? Maybe the blood and the fire are both entropy? Blood spilled to harm a human, fire consumes? Fire can be used for creation, but it always turns fuel to ash. Interesting that the act of fire creation upsets them while the fire itself blinds them... is this only new fire, or would any torch blind a shade?

 

@Blind

 

I think you're starting off on the wrong foot here. We know that there aren't any predators in the forest, almost certainly because they get killed off when they draw animal blood.

 

Recall that Silence was concerned that the Fort bounty hunters would accidentally spill each-other's blood when swarmed by shades, so it seems that accidental bloodletting is definitely a concern. Same with when Sebruki almost accidentally drew Silence's blood when dropping the crossbow: Silence was concerned.

 

I think the other Rules also "infuriate" shades to some extent: they seem to "activate" when the appropriate rule is broken, not just drift quickly towards the area/person who did it.

All excellent points. Slaughtering a deer is at least as "drawn in anger" as Sebruki dropping something that cuts her "aunt", or a wolf taking down a deer.

[Kurkistan]

Interesting... but, if you have a candle, and I light my candle from yours, they will gain separate cognitive aspects, yes? Or perhaps they don't. That'd be an interesting implication for Shadesmar. Or maybe one bead "budding" off another is different from sparks being used to generate one out of nothing? Maybe the blood and the fire are both entropy? Blood spilled to harm a human, fire consumes? Fire can be used for creation, but it always turns fuel to ash. Interesting that the act of fire creation upsets them while the fire itself blinds them... is this only new fire, or would any torch blind a shade?

 

It was my impression that only the actual lighting of the fire resulted in blinding/confusion for shades: Otherwise, carrying a torch around would be a nearly necessary plan at all times in the Forest, as even if you broke one of the other two Rules you'd be a bit protected from immediate attack.

 

So, by my reading of the story, someone who ran while carrying a (safely-lit) torch would be just as doomed as someone who ran with a jar of glowpaste. (Tangent: Also, fluorescence and the use of UV light in a fantasy story? Yes please. )

 

---

 

As to the "new" fire being "new", let's look at that.

 

From this story, I gather that a Rothfuss-style "sympathy" magic would be able to work quite well—at least to some extent—in the cosmere. For instance, a coal taken from a fire should give you some connection to that fire. To get all proclaim-y: Yes, a "new" fire is "new", but it is at the same time the same as the fire it was born from. Only when building a fire out of naught, creating light and life where once there was none, is a truly new fire created, without any lineage or connection to the fires of old.

 

*Minute WoK Spoilers*

 

It may bear looking into this in relation to Syl's "all spren are, in a sense, virtually the same individual" statement.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Ookla the Inveterate

[Arook]

 Slaughtering of animals

 

It is possible that they have a room that would be protected from open air to keep the shades from anger. But with a broken window a cut could drive them to attack. She did state that exposure to the air of blood drawn from an individual, the use of tar sacks to prevent that means its not completely the act of drawing it enrages them. Almost like sharks with blood in the water. 

 

it could be that if the intention of the action was to harm then it will enrage the shades. Unlike say a nose bleed which is simply a leak. i could be tied to the how the blood cognitively feels it is and then the shades when entering the same space as the blood communicate with it and become enraged. Once blood congeals it would change what it felt it was.

 

Also the Theopolis was unconcerned about drawing blood in the way stop so I think the silver would have protected them. Her concern could have been over the cost of replacing any silver damaged due to the drawn blood or to any possible future blood loss on he impending hunt that night. Also Chesterton used silver powder to allow him to slaughter Sebruki's family I would guess that after and hour or two the shades give up and disperse.  

 

 

 

Fire and Movement

 

As we move we create a ripple effect with the air around us what if to great a ripple makes them angry fire springing to life would create a ripple as would walking fast or running. She says that if you move at a steady place what I imagined as a saunter they move away from you. It could be that small disturbances repulse them and so they avoid them and anything too great they try to destroy it.

[Kurkistan]

Fire and Movement

 

As we move we create a ripple effect with the air around us what if to great a ripple makes them angry fire springing to life would create a ripple as would walking fast or running. She says that if you move at a steady place what I imagined as a saunter they move away from you. It could be that small disturbances repulse them and so they avoid them and anything too great they try to destroy it.

 

My impression from the text is that you could use a tinder box to set a building on fire, and they'd be fine. It was the creation of a fundamentally new fire that upset the shades. I think we're better off taking refuge in Realmatics than coming up with pseud-physical explanations.

[Arook]

My impression from the text is that you could use a tinder box to set a building on fire, and they'd be fine. It was the creation of a fundamentally new fire that upset the shades. I think we're better off taking refuge in Realmatics than coming up with pseud-physical explanations.

I'm a little confused by this because a tinder box would be a new fire and that would make them mad. 

 

Also all things that exist in the physical have a cognitive side changing one changes the other. So a change in the physical could create a change in the cognitive that the shades are responding to. Granted we don't know what the shades focus on so it could be any number of reasons. The air ripple was just supposed to be an example. I may not have made that clear, sorry.

[Kurkistan]

I'm a little confused by this because a tinder box would be a new fire and that would make them mad.

 

Right you are! Sorry, I messed up my terminology. For some reason, I thought "tinder box" meant "box you carry around a slowly-burning coal/match in". So, to (very much) clarify, I meant to say that you could start a massive fire from a tiny one and the shades would be cool with it. 

 

Also all things that exist in the physical have a cognitive side changing one changes the other. So a change in the physical could create a change in the cognitive that the shades are responding to. Granted we don't know what the shades focus on so it could be any number of reasons. The air ripple was just supposed to be an example. I may not have made that clear, sorry.

 

My mistake again, it seems. I jumped to conclusions when interpreting what you meant.

 

My apologies on both counts.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Kurkistan

[dyring]

A few things.

firstly, There should be a range issue shouldent there? How far do you think it goes?

And is it enough for one shade to be near for it to spread to those out of range? If not, the range gotto be really huge.

 

Since it is ok the shed blood inside of a bag as silence shows, would perhaps, inside of a house be safe aswell if there are no shades inside? If so it would be ok to kill animals inside the inn, since all shades(except the pet one in the shrine) are kept a decent distance outside by the silver.

But then, if that was the case, Silence would have no cause to be so concerned after the child accidentically fired a crossbow almost hitting her. (Unless was not counting on it, or didnt know. She does say that only a fool ignores the simple rules when they think they are safe.)

 

It would be wierd if a bag stopped the effect of blood spilled, but being inside a house did not.

 

also, silver stops shades but are hurt doing so. Then, do you think the shades are actually hurt or just repelled? If they are really hurt, it should be possible to kill/destroy them.

 

Will that world run out of silver, or can it perhaps be purified somehow?

[Oudeis]

A few things.

firstly, There should be a range issue shouldent there? How far do you think it goes?

And is it enough for one shade to be near for it to spread to those out of range? If not, the range gotto be really huge.

 

Since it is ok the shed blood inside of a bag as silence shows, would perhaps, inside of a house be safe aswell if there are no shades inside? If so it would be ok to kill animals inside the inn, since all shades(except the pet one in the shrine) are kept a decent distance outside by the silver.

But then, if that was the case, Silence would have no cause to be so concerned after the child accidentically fired a crossbow almost hitting her. (Unless was not counting on it, or didnt know. She does say that only a fool ignores the simple rules when they think they are safe.)

 

It would be wierd if a bag stopped the effect of blood spilled, but being inside a house did not.

 

also, silver stops shades but are hurt doing so. Then, do you think the shades are actually hurt or just repelled? If they are really hurt, it should be possible to kill/destroy them.

 

Will that world run out of silver, or can it perhaps be purified somehow?

 

The bag is a very special case, because it was very carefully lined with tar so that no air got out. I guess it's like, the scent of blood? So inside a house would work, as long as it was literally air-tight. Which would be difficult with the technology available in the Forests of Hell, and would result in suffocation.

 

No idea about the range. It seems like you can't walk 20 feet without finding a shade, so I wouldn't worry so terribly about not finding one in range. If they could each "boost the signal" than drawing blood would literally result in every shade across the forest eventually hearing about it and coming, so it has to be range from the act itself.

 

Drifting along and bumping into silver seems to hurt and repel, but not kill or enrage, a shade. That's actually odd, now that I think about it. Shades cannot be enraged by the only thing that can kill them. Is that a terrible survival trait, or a good one? Does it teach them only to harass people who can't necessarily fight back, but to leave people alone who might be able to kill them?

 

Being stabbed by silver wounds and presumably kills a shade. The silver is tarnished in the act. I actually have a theory as to why they hate fire, or at least its generation. What if melting the silver down and re-casting it purifies it somehow? Otherwise, you're right, whatever silver mine they currently have access to will dry up at some point and then they'll be in trouble. It might also explain why they hate fire; silver itself is temporary, since at least it gets hurt when it hurts shades. But what if fire were the key to endless silver? I could theoretically see silver merchants knowing this, but keeping the knowledge a trade secret to artificially inflate the price. Tech is low enough on this planet that I buy that only a few people would know the truth. Eventually, of course, someone with a forge out of their control will figure it out, but for now it's a decent scam, and they can feign ignorance after the fact.