Morningtide Posted April 14, 2021 Report Share Posted April 14, 2021 (edited) Is there a specific WoB that led to your conclusion that the Dawnshards were those four you mentioned? I understand Change, but there are so many different theories that I was wondering if I missed something. Edited April 14, 2021 by Morningtide 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mdross81 Posted April 15, 2021 Report Share Posted April 15, 2021 I've been thinking on this for a while, and reading others' groups of four, and feel like I'm ready to propose mine. So here goes. Provide/Sustain: Honor, Preservation, Devotion, Endowment Change: Ruin, Cultivation, Whimsy, Invention Strive: Autonomy, Ambition, Valor, [Wisdom/Prudence] Obey/Worship: Dominion, Odium, Mercy, [Justice?] Explanation These categories sort of came out of researching and thinking about the aspects of divinity in monotheistic traditions. The first category Provide/Sustain is sort of the "Let there be light" category. Honor for binding together matter from nothing and for natural laws (Unity if you insist). Endowment for the gift of life. Devotion for the promise to care for the life created. And Preservation as a promise that these foundational things would continue; to provide stability. The second category, Change, is pretty self-explanatory. The ability of things, once created, to grow and transform. The third, Strive, is a recognition that while Adonalisum will provide for the basics needed to sustain life, living beings have the capacity to work to improve their lives. Autonomy for a measure of free will. Ambition for the will to improve. Valor for bravery in facing uncertainty and conflict. And Wisdom/Prudence to guide them in their pursuit of a better life. The final category, Obey/Worship puts some outer bounds on the other categories. This is where we get to the jealous, love-no-god-other-than-me need for God to infallible. Dominion because Adonalsium still ultimately rules over all. Mercy because Adonalsium, by virtue of being God, can choose to bestow blessings on certain peoples as an act of divine blessing. Odium as the corollary of that, God's divine hatred doled out to those without God's favor, and to enforce his infallibility. And I slotted Justice in there as the last remaining Shard we don't know the name of. Alternatively, it could be something like Piety or Purity. My money would be on the aspects in this last category being the thing that led the Vessels to rebel against and shatter Adonalsium. What do y'all think? Lastly, just to answer @Morningtide, Change is the only Dawnshard we know for sure. The rest are just theories that have been espoused. That said, some of the more common proposed Dawnshards are Survive (based on events in Mistborn: Secret History) and Unite (because of Dalinar). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted April 15, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 15, 2021 9 hours ago, mdross81 said: I've been thinking on this for a while, and reading others' groups of four, and feel like I'm ready to propose mine. So here goes. Provide/Sustain: Honor, Preservation, Devotion, Endowment Change: Ruin, Cultivation, Whimsy, Invention Strive: Autonomy, Ambition, Valor, [Wisdom/Prudence] Obey/Worship: Dominion, Odium, Mercy, [Justice?] Explanation These categories sort of came out of researching and thinking about the aspects of divinity in monotheistic traditions. The first category Provide/Sustain is sort of the "Let there be light" category. Honor for binding together matter from nothing and for natural laws (Unity if you insist). Endowment for the gift of life. Devotion for the promise to care for the life created. And Preservation as a promise that these foundational things would continue; to provide stability. The second category, Change, is pretty self-explanatory. The ability of things, once created, to grow and transform. The third, Strive, is a recognition that while Adonalisum will provide for the basics needed to sustain life, living beings have the capacity to work to improve their lives. Autonomy for a measure of free will. Ambition for the will to improve. Valor for bravery in facing uncertainty and conflict. And Wisdom/Prudence to guide them in their pursuit of a better life. The final category, Obey/Worship puts some outer bounds on the other categories. This is where we get to the jealous, love-no-god-other-than-me need for God to infallible. Dominion because Adonalsium still ultimately rules over all. Mercy because Adonalsium, by virtue of being God, can choose to bestow blessings on certain peoples as an act of divine blessing. Odium as the corollary of that, God's divine hatred doled out to those without God's favor, and to enforce his infallibility. And I slotted Justice in there as the last remaining Shard we don't know the name of. Alternatively, it could be something like Piety or Purity. My money would be on the aspects in this last category being the thing that led the Vessels to rebel against and shatter Adonalsium. What do y'all think? Lastly, just to answer @Morningtide, Change is the only Dawnshard we know for sure. The rest are just theories that have been espoused. That said, some of the more common proposed Dawnshards are Survive (based on events in Mistborn: Secret History) and Unite (because of Dalinar). Having Honour out of the Dawnshard known to Bind? Bold move I don't see how Strive would anything to do with god providing, if anything these concept are opposite Also I think Morningtide was asking for clues in WoBs not for confirmations 13 hours ago, Morningtide said: Is there a specific WoB that led to your conclusion that the Dawnshards were those four you mentioned? I understand Change, but there are so many different theories that I was wondering if I missed something. No specific WoBs just people in universe speaking orders in the way I think Dawnshards would be used. Of course there's the risk these orders are just part of an actual Dawnshard like Remake is a part of Change 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mdross81 Posted April 15, 2021 Report Share Posted April 15, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, mathiau said: Having Honour out of the Dawnshard known to Bind? Bold move Provide/Sustain is my Bind category, as in binding the universe together at its creation. 2 hours ago, mathiau said: I don't see how Strive would anything to do with god providing, if anything these concept are opposite That’s kind of what I meant. Provide/Sustain is about providing, but only the minimal things necessary. I mentioned providing specifically to contrast this Strive category, which is all about making the effort to push to improve beyond that. Edited April 15, 2021 by mdross81 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morningtide Posted April 15, 2021 Report Share Posted April 15, 2021 Thanks, @mdross81 for the answer. I was just wondering if I had missed something important. The clarification is great! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LewsTherinTelescope Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 (edited) On 1/27/2021 at 1:11 PM, Leuthie said: Ruin is Destroy and Change with little Create or Bind. This was a while ago and so I don't remember what the conclusion people ended up coming to was, but a relevant quote from Secret History I stumbled across today that makes me disbelieve the "Destroy" theory: Quote Nothing can be destroyed, Kelsier, Ruin’s voice whispered, intruding directly into his mind. That’s something humans can’t understand. All things merely change, break down, become something new … something perfect. Ruin, by far the Shard most focused on destruction imo, doesn't even believe in things being "destroyed" (and, indeed, things can't be, only changed and broken to smaller forms, as Ruin says). However, it does echo Rysn's Dawnshard, and even the description of Transformation that Sja-anat gives, just more focused on one form of Change rather than the concept overall. So it would definitely fit under Change, I do agree there. Edited June 24, 2021 by LewsTherinTelescope 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halyo_Alex Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 13 hours ago, LewsTherinTelescope said: This was a while ago and so I don't remember what the conclusion people ended up coming to was, but a relevant quote from Secret History I stumbled across today that makes me disbelieve the "Destroy" theory: Ruin, by far the Shard most focused on destruction imo, doesn't even believe in things being "destroyed" (and, indeed, things can't be, only changed and broken to smaller forms, as Ruin says). However, it does echo Rysn's Dawnshard, and even the description of Transformation that Sja-anat gives, just more focused on one form of Change rather than the concept overall. So it would definitely fit under Change, I do agree there. Okay, then instead of "destroy" as a dawnshard, how about "Reduce"? That does kind of feel like a subset of Change though... Dangit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bejarden Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 Cultivation and Ruin are very similar and I would venture to guess they are in the same Dawnshard category, with their Intents being different 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted June 24, 2021 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 (edited) I think I found a WoB saying that both Ruin and Cultivation are Internal Shards and Preservation is an external Shard Quote Chaos It's a little odd that Preservation would inherently give up its power to fuel Allomancy, because you'd think he would preserve himself, you know? Does that make sense? Brandon Sanderson Preservation, as a Shard, is about preserving life, people, and the like. Not about self. No more than Ruin is about destroying self, or Cultivation is about growing herself. /r/fantasy AMA 2011 (Aug. 31, 2011) 13 hours ago, LewsTherinTelescope said: This was a while ago and so I don't remember what the conclusion people ended up coming to was, but a relevant quote from Secret History I stumbled across today that makes me disbelieve the "Destroy" theory: I don't think we ever got to a consensus, my personal conclusion is that if Rysn is right about Change being the same thing as Remake (which I find unlikely) then there has to be a Destroy/Diminish Dawnshard and if she's wrong then both conscept are already in Change Quote Ruin, by far the Shard most focused on destruction imo, doesn't even believe in things being "destroyed" (and, indeed, things can't be, only changed and broken to smaller forms, as Ruin says). However, it does echo Rysn's Dawnshard, and even the description of Transformation that Sja-anat gives, just more focused on one form of Change rather than the concept overall. So it would definitely fit under Change, I do agree there. Note that Ruin is more about Irreversibility than Destruction, destruction of everything is just a mean to for him archive Irreversibility just like Vin uses destruction for Protection (I'm convinced Vin's version of Preservation was closer to Protection than Stasis, contrary to Lera's one) 13 minutes ago, Bejardin1250 said: Cultivation and Ruin are very similar and I would venture to guess they are in the same Dawnshard category, with their Intents being different It's cannon Cultivation is the Shard the most compatible with Ruin Quote Autarchk If I can ask a question, I just read the Mistborn trilogy and, were Preservation and Ruin two different shards or a single one with their power split somehow? If they were two shards, does that mean a single person can hold more than one, since Harmony apparently holds both now? Brandon Sanderson They were two shards. Yes, one entity can hold more than one. Remember that holding a shard changes you, over time. Rayse knows this, and prefers to leave behind destroyed rivals as opposed to taking their power and potentially being overwhelmed by it. Nepene I have a question, if you are willing. Would Ruin be more compatible with Rayse, would he pick up that shard had he visited Scadrial and shattered him? All the shards we have seen that he has shattered seem rather different in intent than him- Honor, Cultivation, Love, Dominion. But Ruin seems more in line with Odium. Rayse has ruined the days of quite a few people. Brandon Sanderson Technically, Ruin would be most compatible with Cultivation. Ruin's 'theme' so to speak is that all things must age and pass. An embodiment of entropy. That power, separated from the whole and being held by a person who did not have the willpower to resist its transformation of him, led to something very dangerous. But it was not evil. None of the sixteen technically are, though you may have read that Hoid has specific beef with Rayse. Whether you think of Odium as evil depends upon how much you agree with Hoid's particular view. That said, Ruin would have been one of the 'safer' of the sixteen for Rayse to take, if he'd been about that. Odium is by its nature selfish, however, and the combination of it and Rayse makes for an entity that fears an additional power would destroy it and make it into something else. General Reddit 2013 (March 14, 2013) Edited June 24, 2021 by mathiau 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bejarden Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 1 minute ago, mathiau said: I think I found a WoB saying that both Ruin and Cultivation are Internal Shards and Preservation and external Shard I’m not seeing how that says that can you point it out 2 minutes ago, mathiau said: Remake I haven’t read Dawnshard yet but Ruining is ReMaking with just a detrimental connotation 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halyo_Alex Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 22 minutes ago, Bejardin1250 said: I’m not seeing how that says that can you point it out Indeed, it seems he's saying all 3 are external. They're about doing their Intent's act to other people, not themselves. 22 minutes ago, Bejardin1250 said: I haven’t read Dawnshard yet but Ruining is ReMaking with just a detrimental connotation That's true. Hence why Diminish or Reduce would probably just be Ruin's particular flavor of Change. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zrogezrg Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 I think that the dawnshard connected to Preservation is Stability. From Hero of Ages: Quote He reached out and touched the mist, and felt an awesome power. A power of stability. That is Sazed when touching Preservation power. Similarly, we have later: Quote Sazed reached out with his other hand, touching the smoke, and felt a different power—more violent. The power of change. this one is about Ruin. So "power of ..." seems to be referring to dawnshard name. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bejarden Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 1 minute ago, Zrogezrg said: I think that the dawnshard connected to Preservation is Stability. From Hero of Ages: That is Sazed when touching Preservation power. Similarly, we have later: this one is about Ruin. So "power of ..." seems to be referring to dawnshard name. This can very easily be a reference to the Shards Intent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted June 24, 2021 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 1 hour ago, Bejardin1250 said: I’m not seeing how that says that can you point it out I read it wrong and missed the "no more than" part :facepalm: Quote I haven’t read Dawnshard yet but Ruining is ReMaking with just a detrimental connotation What passage imply "Remaking better" but Ruin would consider matter with higher entropy to be better so you're probably still right Just now, Zrogezrg said: I think that the dawnshard connected to Preservation is Stability. From Hero of Ages: That is Sazed when touching Preservation power. Similarly, we have later: this one is about Ruin. So "power of ..." seems to be referring to dawnshard name. That's not stupid, I think it's more a case of Sazed trying tu understand the intent and hitting slightly of the mark but you could be right 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zrogezrg Posted July 21, 2021 Report Share Posted July 21, 2021 To expand on idea of Dawnshard Stability, I gravitate towards this arrangement: Change: Ruin, Cultivation, Invention (this one seems standard) Stability: Preservation, Autonomy, Endowment (saving what ones has, being self-sufficient, inherited constant) Motivation: Odium, Ambition, Dominion, Devotion (why one does something -> because one hates, wants to becomes someone, wants to control, loves) Virtue: Honor, Valor, Mercy, Whimsy (ideals to uphold) So potential shard Wisdom could go to Stability. To comment a bit about my choices, Dawnshard Change would the means of action. Stability would be what the action should not affect. Motivation would give the reason for action. And lastly Virtue would how the action should be performed. So I guess that Dawnshard Stability was on lunch break when shattering happened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted July 21, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2021 54 minutes ago, Zrogezrg said: To expand on idea of Dawnshard Stability, I gravitate towards this arrangement: Change: Ruin, Cultivation, Invention (this one seems standard) Stability: Preservation, Autonomy, Endowment (saving what ones has, being self-sufficient, inherited constant) Motivation: Odium, Ambition, Dominion, Devotion (why one does something -> because one hates, wants to becomes someone, wants to control, loves) Virtue: Honor, Valor, Mercy, Whimsy (ideals to uphold) So potential shard Wisdom could go to Stability. I don't understand the reasoning for Whimsy being in Virtue Quote To comment a bit about my choices, Dawnshard Change would the means of action. Stability would be what the action should not affect. Motivation would give the reason for action. And lastly Virtue would how the action should be performed. That's interesting, I assume the Dawnshard known to bind would be Virtue? My main issue against this breakdown is that I don't see how Odium could have bring Change or Virtue on Roshar if he only killed aspects of Motviation Quote So I guess that Dawnshard Stability was on lunch break when shattering happened. XD More seriously Stability could have been used so the world doesn't crumble when big A is shattered. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berylliosis Posted July 27, 2021 Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 Well well well! I finally decide to make an account to post a theory, and there's already a forum thread discussing the same kind of ideas On 1/26/2021 at 11:24 AM, mathiau said: From the difference in shape of the mural compared to the chart, it's likely the internal/external differentiation won't be present. It's possible the pushing/pulling one would be absent too but it's almost certain the four quadrant division will indeed be there. My categorization includes both internal/external and push/pull relationships; not sure if that makes it more valid or less valid. Mind, all the dawnshard names are applied and come up with after grouping by internal/external push/pull. I'm not very confident on which shard would be push and which shard would be pull; I do have them sorted in a way that makes sense to me here, but they could fairly easily be swapped. Also - I retroactively realized that internal/external are much more like abstract and concrete - the shards I categorized as internal represent an abstract idea, and the shards that I have as external represent some concretion of that idea. Without further ado, here they are (abstract on top, pull on the left): Odium <-> Wisdom Ambition <-> Invention Dawnshard: "Experience"? "Understand"? Mercy? <-> Honor Unknown <-> Valor Dawnshard: "Moralize"? Similar to "Virtue" as above Autonomy <-> Cultivation Whimsy? <-> Endowment Dawnshard: Change Preservation <-> Ruin Devotion <-> Dominion Dawnshard: "Control"? Things I really like there: Odium <-> Wisdom mirrors Taravangian Cultivation/Endowment being abstraction/concretion or internal/external Honor/Valor in the same relationship More generally, the Intent of all shards that are in abstract-concrete happens to really line up well - if you wanted to hold two shards without changing your Intent too much, those vertical connections are pretty good bets. Also, while the four dawnshards I propose aren't integral to the cosmere like Survive and Unify, they are reasonable commands for existence and deity that creates life - I especially like "Experience/Understand", because it reminds me of the One. Things I dislike: Ruin and Dominion don't line up Intent-wise despite their relationship on the chart Whimsy and Mercy's placements are weird, there might be some swapping worth doing with those, autonomy, and the unknown shard Whimsy doesn't fit Change that much (although I think Autonomy does, as it essentially means allowing things to change on their own) Thoughts on this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted July 27, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 2 hours ago, berylliosis said: Well well well! I finally decide to make an account to post a theory, and there's already a forum thread discussing the same kind of ideas Welcome to the Shard Quote My categorization includes both internal/external and push/pull relationships; not sure if that makes it more valid or less valid. Honestly at this point neither do I Quote Mind, all the dawnshard names are applied and come up with after grouping by internal/external push/pull. Well congratulation on managing to finish a theory by making the reasoning in that direction Quote I'm not very confident on which shard would be push and which shard would be pull; I do have them sorted in a way that makes sense to me here, but they could fairly easily be swapped. Honestly that's the case for a few allomantic metals too Quote Odium <-> Wisdom Ambition <-> Invention Dawnshard: "Experience"? "Understand"? Things I really like there: Odium <-> Wisdom mirrors Taravangian "Experience/Understand", because it reminds me of the One I also like Experience a lot, if only because it lines up neatly with the fact Investiture gains a mind when on it's own is part of Adonalsium's will I don't know how much I the Odium <-> Wisdom part, I do understand your idea of a parallel with Taravangian but I feel like Devotion would work better as Odium's counterpart and we know being Connected to oposite Shard is very detrimental to a Shardholder so I doubt Cultivation would have taken that risk (unless of course that was her plan from the start...). Don't get me wrong, Wisdom does belongs to the Experience quadrant, just not on Odium's line Quote Mercy? <-> Honor Unknown <-> Valor Dawnshard: "Moralize"? Similar to "Virtue" as above Honor/Valor in the same relationship I don't really see how Honour can be Valour's Abstract, what I do see are reasons to but Honour in Control and Valour in Experience (less strong for Valour though) Quote Autonomy <-> Cultivation Whimsy? <-> Endowment Dawnshard: Change Cultivation/Endowment being abstraction/concretion or internal/external Again, I don't see how Growth can be the Abstract of Gift. I also don't see how Growth is supposed to be more abstract than concreate. I think Autonomy would work better as a Control Shard, in the "I Control my destiny" way and Ruin would work very well as Cultivation's pulling Quote Preservation <-> Ruin Devotion <-> Dominion Dawnshard: "Control"? I like the idea Preservation as a Control Shard, I like Devotion (Love) being here far less I made a try at separating the Shard along these Dawnshards, I'm not sure how the Concrete/Abstract symmetry works for that list and I used the second Dawnshard a bit like a "I don't know where to put this" Dawnshard so... grain of salt Devotion <-> Odium Wisdom <-> Valour Dawnshard: "Experience" Mercy? <-> Endowment Unknown <-> Ambition Dawnshard: "Moralize"? Similar to "Virtue" as above Whimsy <-> Invention Ruin <-> Cultivation Dawnshard: Change Honour <-> Dominion Preservation <-> Autonomy Dawnshard: "Control"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zepto Posted July 28, 2021 Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 I listened to a shardcast episode where this was talked about (I don’t remember which one) and subsequently spent a few hours working on my own theoretical grouping. I don’t know if anyone’s suggested these categories already, but this is what I came up with. Change Preservation-involved with change by being it’s opposite/absence Ruin-wants to change things destructively Cultivation-growth is a form of change Endowment-gifting something makes it change hands, (this one’s a bit weaker but I don’t think it fits my other categories better) Think Invention-thinking of new ideas Whimsy-imaginative thinking Ambition-thinking that produces action toward your ambitions(also not as strong, but it fits her better than my other categories I think) One of the unknown shards, possibly “survival shard”-?? Feel Mercy-a feeling toward others Odium-he says he’s about passionate feelings Valor-feeling of courage Devotion-strong feelings of loyalty/love for someone/something Bind Honor-oaths and bonds are his thing Dominion-connecting things under one rule Autonomy-same argument as preservation being in change, opposites are still connected Last unknown shard, also possibly “survival shard”-?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LewsTherinTelescope Posted July 28, 2021 Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 38 minutes ago, Zepto said: Preservation-involved with change by being it’s opposite/absence You could argue it's thematically connected, I guess, but my issue with this is always: the Dawnshards are Commands. Why would commanding something to Change give you Preservation? Autonomy in Bind I actually don't dislike as much, since I could see an argument for it similar to Wax's speech to Steris in BoM (though I do think it'd be something of a stretch), but same goes for that. Why would giving something a Command to Bind result in something anti-binding? And why do the other two categories not have a "related by opposition" Shard, just Change and Bind? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frustration Posted July 28, 2021 Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 4 hours ago, LewsTherinTelescope said: You could argue it's thematically connected, I guess, but my issue with this is always: the Dawnshards are Commands. Why would commanding something to Change give you Preservation? "Don't Change" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted July 28, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 4 hours ago, Zepto said: I listened to a shardcast episode where this was talked about (I don’t remember which one) and subsequently spent a few hours working on my own theoretical grouping. I don’t know if anyone’s suggested these categories already, but this is what I came up with. Change Preservation-involved with change by being it’s opposite/absence I've stated my points against Preservation being in Change multiple time in this discussion so I don't think stating them again will be of any use. I will instead ask you why you think they're wrong. Quote Ruin-wants to change things destructively Irreversibly, not destructively. Not that it matter to your point Quote Change Endowment-gifting something makes it change hands, (this one’s a bit weaker but I don’t think it fits my other categories better) Other possible reasoning: giving something to someone change them Quote Think Invention-thinking of new ideas Whimsy-imaginative thinking Aren't these two idea basically the same? Honestly I'd like your theory far more if you had Preservation in Bind, Whimsy in Change and maybe Autonomy in Think (autonomy imply the ability think for yourself) Quote Think One of the unknown shards, possibly “survival shard”-?? That would be a great place for a Wisdom-ish Shard, yes. Quote Feel Valor-feeling of courage There's more to be Valorous than just a feeling of courage (is courage even a feeling? I thought it was about how you reacted to fear not about another feeling) so imo she could be in Feel as much as she could be in Think Quote Bind Autonomy-same argument as preservation being in change, opposites are still connected On the one hand if you're right about the name of the fourth Dawnshard being Bind, I disagree with this placement for the same reason I did to Preservation being in Change On the other hand if the Dawnshard known to Bind mortal and voidish creature has another name it's possible Autonomy would be one of it's aspects (see my argument for Autonomy being an aspect of Control in my last post) 4 hours ago, LewsTherinTelescope said: Autonomy in Bind I actually don't dislike as much, since I could see an argument for it similar to Wax's speech to Steris in BoM (though I do think it'd be something of a stretch), but same goes for that. I don't remember that speech, when was that? Just now, Frustration said: "Don't Change" Is not an part of Change, it can be a part of Bind, of Survive or of Endure, but not a part of Change Honestly Change is already a wide enough command without adding the "Don't Change" possibility 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LewsTherinTelescope Posted July 28, 2021 Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 5 minutes ago, Frustration said: "Don't Change" That.... isn't commanding something to change. Quote It was then that she grasped, in the smallest way, the nature of the Command inside her. The will of a god to remake things, to demand they be better. The power to change. I don't see how this can be interpreted as a command to not change. 3 minutes ago, mathiau said: I don't remember that speech, when was that? BoM 5: Quote “People,” Wax said, “are like cords, Steris. We snake out, striking this way and that, always looking for something new. That’s human nature, to discover what is hidden. There’s so much we can do, so many places we can go.” He shifted in his seat, changing his center of gravity, which caused the sphere to rotate upward on its tether. “But if there aren’t any boundaries,” he said, “we’d get tangled up. Imagine a thousand of these cords, zipping through the room. The law is there to keep us from ruining everyone else’s ability to explore. Without law, there’s no freedom. That’s why I am what I am.” 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathiau Posted July 28, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 7 minutes ago, LewsTherinTelescope said: I don't see how this can be interpreted as a command to not change. To be fair it's likely she's not understanding the full scope of Change, but yeah it wouldn't be called Change if it was not about things changing Quote BoM 5: Thanks I think this idea would be more fitting to a fusion of Honour and Autonomy than to just Autonomy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zepto Posted July 28, 2021 Report Share Posted July 28, 2021 Mostly I was just coming up with 4 possible dawnshard names that might make sense (with it being change) and then slotting things in where they seemed to fit best thematically. 19 minutes ago, mathiau said: Aren't these two idea basically the same? Honestly I'd like your theory far more if you had Preservation in Bind, Whimsy in Change and maybe Autonomy in Think (autonomy imply the ability think for yourself) I like your idea of changing these placements, as I said, this is just what I came up with a while ago and I don’t have strong evidence for it other than what seemed related. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.