The Best Age to Give One's Breath

[Trusk'our he/him]

Been thinking on this one lately, but if a society required everyone to give up their Breath at a certain age, which age would be best?

Younger Breaths are stronger and more vibrant, but young children have less ability to choose responsibly, leading to more moral complications. Plus, you'd lose most of your life having it around, and your immune system isn't fully developed until your late teens/early adulthood. 

An elderly person would give weaker Breath, not to mention that their already compromised immune system would mean giving their Breath would probably kill them shortly thereafter.

Spoiler

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/9-calamity-philadelphia-signing/#e7593

Questioner

I teach economics at Rutgers and in general I love the books but *inaudible* I like to tease him because he loves them, and say it doesn’t really make sense to have a fixed price for Breaths and it doesn’t make sense that if you give it away when you’re young, and his claim was that somewhere in the book it talks about how the Breath actually gets weaker as you get older.

Brandon Sanderson

So, dying Breaths can be much weaker, but not middle aged ones. So, you have a legitimate thing, my counter to you is, having listened to a ton of Freakonomics, economic people do not do what is logically economic, particularly in a closed system. You might find that Breaths sell for different things, or are treated differently, in other countries.

Questioner

In the Warbreaker world.

Brandon Sanderson

But I do think about these things.

Questioner

Oh no, it’s obvious you do. It’s pretty clear when you start looking at it, and that's not something...

Brandon Sanderson

Here’s the thing, there are fantasy writers who are actually economists, L.E. Modesit is the most famous one, and he-- I’ve been on panels where he’s complained about how writers, fantasy writers ignore economics, basic economics, all the time. So I try to listen at his feet a bit.

However, they do get to keep their Breath most of their life.

Young adulthood seems better, as you're stronger by that time and better able to choose for yourself. You might end up notably weaker for a time, but if society is prepped for people giving Breath at this time it's probably manageable. 

[IcedOutPenguin He/Him]

I'd say 35-50 would be the best age so that you can live most of your life with your breath but still give it up when it is still strong.

[Quantus he/him]

12 hours ago, Trusk'our said:

Been thinking on this one lately, but if a society required everyone to give up their Breath at a certain age, which age would be best?

Younger Breaths are stronger and more vibrant, but young children have less ability to choose responsibly, leading to more moral complications. Plus, you'd lose most of your life having it around, and your immune system isn't fully developed until your late teens/early adulthood. 

An elderly person would give weaker Breath, not to mention that their already compromised immune system would mean giving their Breath would probably kill them shortly thereafter.

  Hide contents

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/9-calamity-philadelphia-signing/#e7593

Questioner

I teach economics at Rutgers and in general I love the books but *inaudible* I like to tease him because he loves them, and say it doesn’t really make sense to have a fixed price for Breaths and it doesn’t make sense that if you give it away when you’re young, and his claim was that somewhere in the book it talks about how the Breath actually gets weaker as you get older.

Brandon Sanderson

So, dying Breaths can be much weaker, but not middle aged ones. So, you have a legitimate thing, my counter to you is, having listened to a ton of Freakonomics, economic people do not do what is logically economic, particularly in a closed system. You might find that Breaths sell for different things, or are treated differently, in other countries.

Questioner

In the Warbreaker world.

Brandon Sanderson

But I do think about these things.

Questioner

Oh no, it’s obvious you do. It’s pretty clear when you start looking at it, and that's not something...

Brandon Sanderson

Here’s the thing, there are fantasy writers who are actually economists, L.E. Modesit is the most famous one, and he-- I’ve been on panels where he’s complained about how writers, fantasy writers ignore economics, basic economics, all the time. So I try to listen at his feet a bit.

However, they do get to keep their Breath most of their life.

Young adulthood seems better, as you're stronger by that time and better able to choose for yourself. You might end up notably weaker for a time, but if society is prepped for people giving Breath at this time it's probably manageable. 

It's not weaker for a time, it a permanent stat reduction across the board.  They'll live crappier lives, be more prone to disease, physical and mental illness, etc and most likely die much earlier.  It'd be a magical version of living with extreme malnourishment in a polluted slum, with the quality of life and life expectancy reduced across the board.  

If it's going to be Mandatory for society, it'll have to be late in life or even at the extreme end of it regardless of a breath investiture strength reduction. They'd still accumulate quite a bit over generations, especially if they focus on achieving Heightening's over active (& costly) Awakening.  

Otherwise it'll force an extreme Drab class stratification, and some other group will be the repositories instead of the ones required to give them up.    Which could still work if they did it like the better parts of Runelords and those that Received the Breaths would be expected to provide care for all those that donated their essence to strengthen their leader.  If getting new Breaths meant you were agreeing to provide and care for the Drabs you were creating for their whole lives to ensure they didnt suffer from the lack, they'd be less likely to treat the drabs as disposable. 

[Trusk'our he/him]

26 minutes ago, Quantus said:

It's not weaker for a time, it a permanent stat reduction across the board.  They'll live crappier lives, be more prone to disease, physical and mental illness, etc and most likely die much earlier.  It'd be a magical version of living with extreme malnourishment in a polluted slum, with the quality of life and life expectancy reduced across the board.  

Sorry, I meant to say it in regard to your immune system being magically bolstered for a time before giving up your Breath, so if young adults all gave up their Breath at the same time you might cripple your primary work force until their immune systems learn to deal with threats without Investiture. 

26 minutes ago, Quantus said:

Otherwise it'll force an extreme Drab class stratification, and some other group will be the repositories instead of the ones required to give them up.    Which could still work if they did it like the better parts of Runelords and those that Received the Breaths would be expected to provide care for all those that donated their essence to strengthen their leader.  If getting new Breaths meant you were agreeing to provide and care for the Drabs you were creating for their whole lives to ensure they didnt suffer from the lack, they'd be less likely to treat the drabs as disposable. 

Hmm, that sounds like a cool dynamic. You have a class of Awakeners which are expected to use their Investiture to care for those who are recorded giving up their Breath to them and/or their descendants. 

If it was properly expected by the Drab class, the expectation might transfer along with the Breath, pushing the Awakeners to serve more diligently. Kind of like how Vahr got greater determination to topple the Hallandren government from his fellow rebels' Breath (though that took many hundreds, so it depends on how many they get).

Edited January 16, 2025 by Trusk'our

[Argenti he/him]

14 hours ago, Trusk'our said:

Been thinking on this one lately, but if a society required everyone to give up their Breath at a certain age, which age would be best?

Younger Breaths are stronger and more vibrant, but young children have less ability to choose responsibly, leading to more moral complications. Plus, you'd lose most of your life having it around, and your immune system isn't fully developed until your late teens/early adulthood. 

An elderly person would give weaker Breath, not to mention that their already compromised immune system would mean giving their Breath would probably kill them shortly thereafter.

  Reveal hidden contents

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/9-calamity-philadelphia-signing/#e7593

Questioner

I teach economics at Rutgers and in general I love the books but *inaudible* I like to tease him because he loves them, and say it doesn’t really make sense to have a fixed price for Breaths and it doesn’t make sense that if you give it away when you’re young, and his claim was that somewhere in the book it talks about how the Breath actually gets weaker as you get older.

Brandon Sanderson

So, dying Breaths can be much weaker, but not middle aged ones. So, you have a legitimate thing, my counter to you is, having listened to a ton of Freakonomics, economic people do not do what is logically economic, particularly in a closed system. You might find that Breaths sell for different things, or are treated differently, in other countries.

Questioner

In the Warbreaker world.

Brandon Sanderson

But I do think about these things.

Questioner

Oh no, it’s obvious you do. It’s pretty clear when you start looking at it, and that's not something...

Brandon Sanderson

Here’s the thing, there are fantasy writers who are actually economists, L.E. Modesit is the most famous one, and he-- I’ve been on panels where he’s complained about how writers, fantasy writers ignore economics, basic economics, all the time. So I try to listen at his feet a bit.

However, they do get to keep their Breath most of their life.

Young adulthood seems better, as you're stronger by that time and better able to choose for yourself. You might end up notably weaker for a time, but if society is prepped for people giving Breath at this time it's probably manageable. 

I'm thinking, in a modern society it would probably be retirement around, 63-67. Since life post retirement is less stressful, your immune system should be less screwed up.

[Quantus he/him]

3 hours ago, Trusk'our said:

Sorry, I meant to say it in regard to your immune system being magically bolstered for a time before giving up your Breath, so if young adults all gave up their Breath at the same time you might cripple your primary work force until their immune systems learn to deal with threats without Investiture. 

Hmm, that sounds like a cool dynamic. You have a class of Awakeners which are expected to use their Investiture to care for those who are recorded giving up their Breath to them and/or their descendants. 

If it was properly expected by the Drab class, the expectation might transfer along with the Breath, pushing the Awakeners to serve more diligently. Kind of like how Vahr got greater determination to topple the Hallandren government from his fellow rebels' Breath (though that took many hundreds, so it depends on how many they get).

To be fair that other story had a very practical enforcement of that care-giving: if the donor died the recipient lost the Boon, giving them a personal vested interest in their donor class.  Endowment is very fundamentally a "No Strings Attached" intent so I dont think it would allow that level of lingering Connection.  

 

As a Side Note: I wonder if it's possible to make a device that would capture a person's Breath at the moment of their Death, so there wouldnt be as much loss over the generations. If you could make some sort of awakened device or [SA Magic]

Spoiler

fabrial

or something that would capture and hold the Breath's investiture in bulk storage (ideally in a form that strips the Identity of the Breath so anyone can recover it), you could give energy DnD style soulstones to wear that would catch the lost breaths from when non-drabs die before giving their stores away.  

[Argenti he/him]

17 minutes ago, Quantus said:

or something that would capture and hold the Breath's investiture in bulk storage (ideally in a form that strips the Identity of the Breath so anyone can recover it), you could give energy DnD style soulstones to wear that would catch the lost breaths from when non-drabs die before giving their stores away.  

Warhammer 40k  spirit stones?

Cosmere

Spoiler

Sunhearts?

 

Edited January 16, 2025 by Argenti

[Trusk'our he/him]

42 minutes ago, Quantus said:

As a Side Note: I wonder if it's possible to make a device that would capture a person's Breath at the moment of their Death, so there wouldnt be as much loss over the generations. If you could make some sort of awakened device or [SA Magic]

  Reveal hidden contents

fabrial

or something that would capture and hold the Breath's investiture in bulk storage (ideally in a form that strips the Identity of the Breath so anyone can recover it), you could give energy DnD style soulstones to wear that would catch the lost breaths from when non-drabs die before giving their stores away.  

I've been thinking that Nalthis will want some kind of way to obtain more Investiture in the future, given their more limited resources, but few options available to their system feel realistic. 

This one, however, I think could be accomplished with some tinkering. You'd still need to weigh the cost of Awakening it initially over the amount of Breaths you save with it, but it might prove useful. 

Or, I suppose using them on actual Awakeners to prevent their unexpected (but likely inevitable) deaths from affecting their pool of Breath would be more effective. 

[alder24]

On 1/16/2025 at 3:11 AM, Trusk'our said:

Been thinking on this one lately, but if a society required everyone to give up their Breath at a certain age, which age would be best?

Younger Breaths are stronger and more vibrant, but young children have less ability to choose responsibly, leading to more moral complications. Plus, you'd lose most of your life having it around, and your immune system isn't fully developed until your late teens/early adulthood. 

An elderly person would give weaker Breath, not to mention that their already compromised immune system would mean giving their Breath would probably kill them shortly thereafter.

  Reveal hidden contents

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/9-calamity-philadelphia-signing/#e7593

Questioner

I teach economics at Rutgers and in general I love the books but *inaudible* I like to tease him because he loves them, and say it doesn’t really make sense to have a fixed price for Breaths and it doesn’t make sense that if you give it away when you’re young, and his claim was that somewhere in the book it talks about how the Breath actually gets weaker as you get older.

Brandon Sanderson

So, dying Breaths can be much weaker, but not middle aged ones. So, you have a legitimate thing, my counter to you is, having listened to a ton of Freakonomics, economic people do not do what is logically economic, particularly in a closed system. You might find that Breaths sell for different things, or are treated differently, in other countries.

Questioner

In the Warbreaker world.

Brandon Sanderson

But I do think about these things.

Questioner

Oh no, it’s obvious you do. It’s pretty clear when you start looking at it, and that's not something...

Brandon Sanderson

Here’s the thing, there are fantasy writers who are actually economists, L.E. Modesit is the most famous one, and he-- I’ve been on panels where he’s complained about how writers, fantasy writers ignore economics, basic economics, all the time. So I try to listen at his feet a bit.

However, they do get to keep their Breath most of their life.

Young adulthood seems better, as you're stronger by that time and better able to choose for yourself. You might end up notably weaker for a time, but if society is prepped for people giving Breath at this time it's probably manageable. 

Why would they care about people living as Drabs in a society where giving up Breaths is mandatory? If they took steps to take the choice away from people on this matter, it means they don't care about them, they care only about Breaths. They would force them to become Drabs the moment people can say the words "my Breath to yours" with an intent - as a small kid. This would be also beneficial for the ruling class as most people wouldn't even remember their lives with Breaths and they wouldn't know what they are missing. They would think living as a Drab is normal and would be brainwashed to think having a single Breath doesn't make any difference. Minimizing the damage caused by "drabism" and having mandatory transfer of Breaths doesn't really go hand to hand.

[Quantus he/him]

 

18 hours ago, Argenti said:

Warhammer 40k  spirit stones?

Cosmere

  Reveal hidden contents

Sunhearts?

 

Honestly I was thinking back to an old DnD setting (Arcanis) where the Dwarves were actually cursed Giants forbidden the afterlife, so they all carried Stones to catch their Souls when they died, to be stored in the giant crystal in the center of their city. 

17 hours ago, Trusk'our said:

I've been thinking that Nalthis will want some kind of way to obtain more Investiture in the future, given their more limited resources, but few options available to their system feel realistic. 

This one, however, I think could be accomplished with some tinkering. You'd still need to weigh the cost of Awakening it initially over the amount of Breaths you save with it, but it might prove useful. 

Or, I suppose using them on actual Awakeners to prevent their unexpected (but likely inevitable) deaths from affecting their pool of Breath would be more effective. 

Personally I think a means to convert other Investiture into Breaths would basically be the holy grail of Cosmere economics, so for Doylist reasons alone I assume it'll be both difficult and complex, and probably requiring several different magic systems working together.   Or, you know, a Nightblood Sibling with a really specific Command. Maybe a Mask awakened with "Grant Breath" that would consume non-specific Investiture like Nightblood or a Larkin and metabolize them into more traditional Breaths.  

The only other way I could envision the Nalthian's manufacturing Breaths without off-world aid would be doing something funky with Endowment's Shardpool to convert Shard-Juice into Shard-Gas.  They are already (presumably) using it for worldhopping at least, so there's interaction and experimentation happening.    

 

[Trusk'our he/him]

6 minutes ago, Quantus said:

Personally I think a means to convert other Investiture into Breaths would basically be the holy grail of Cosmere economics, so for Doylist reasons alone I assume it'll be both difficult and complex, and probably requiring several different magic systems working together.   Or, you know, a Nightblood Sibling with a really specific Command. Maybe a Mask awakened with "Grant Breath" that would consume non-specific Investiture like Nightblood or a Larkin and metabolize them into more traditional Breaths.  

Yeah, you might have to start involving off world Investitures if you want to generate artificial Breath, as Awakening generally doesn't add extra properties to an item beyond its innate abilities. 

Spoiler

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/472-jordancon-2021/#e14944

Oudeis

(Disclaimers so that you can't say, like, "well if a Shard...") If a regular Awakener, just a mundane Awakener with nothing more than a few hundred Breaths and not any other outside influences, is there some Command they could give a blanket to get the blanket to turn warm? Generate heat; is that a normal thing you can Command?

Brandon Sanderson

Not in just a normal situation. I mean, technically, you could tell the blanket "start rubbing one part against another part" or something like that, or "set yourself on fire," right? But that's not what you're asking. For Awakening to work, you have to work within the intrinsic properties of the matter you're making, except it can move around a bit and with a few little other things it can do.

It's not outside the realm of possibility you could activate those Breaths as Investiture to do something else, but you would need more than just the simple magic system of Awakening. 

For Nightblood's creation I'm betting some extra shenanigans had to happen, considering its unique abilities. 

But regardless, I'm thinking you'd normally have to do more than hold a lot of Breath and give a Command to create an item that converts/generates Breath.

10 minutes ago, Quantus said:

The only other way I could envision the Nalthian's manufacturing Breaths without off-world aid would be doing something funky with Endowment's Shardpool to convert Shard-Juice into Shard-Gas.  They are already (presumably) using it for worldhopping at least, so there's interaction and experimentation happening.    

I just worry that Endowment wouldn't appreciate that too much. It might go against her perceived Interest, taking instead of giving. 

Maybe you could get away with it if the process were less direct, like distilling the Tears of Edgli for Edglium perhaps?

[Green Hoodie Mistborn he/him]

I feel like whatever the related Retirement age might be for Nalthis (roughly)

If many Nalthians retire in their 50s, then 50's. If it's later, then later. I think the breaths would be still strong enough at that point and the person going into retirement would be able to live a more subdued life in retirement anyway

[Duxredux he/him]

Bit late to the party.

We're talking mandatory relinquishing a chunk of soul to the government?  Looking at some of today's cultures and governments, I'd put the low end around the same age if not a bit after the age a country might set a military draft (which for some coincides with voting). Risking life and limb for the country isn't all that different from giving up a piece of soul for the country. If someone is drafted into the military, fighting and traveling without a compromised immune system seems pretty important - and if your buddy gets killed in combat the one-to-one Breath to Lifeless Command could be really handy in the field. For that matter, I could see giving up Breath as a way to opt out of military service by supplying the resources to make a Lifeless fight in your place should the need arise. Considering what Lifeless can do for the economy and military, I'm not actually convinced that a country requiring giving up Breaths will be solely exploitative. 

On the note of exploitation, I personally would advocate banning the sale of the Breaths of children since that opens a huge can of worms. When a child's Breath can support a family for a year, nefarious adoption, kidnapping, and coercion become much more viable methods to get a lot of money.

On the upper end, retirement is a product of developed country with the industrialization, medical, and agricultural advancements that permit a significant unemployed populace. Not sure where Nalthis will land on that since Lifeless will skew so much of that, but retirement for the general population is a luxury afforded by developed countries. If we're looking to optimize for quality of life with the Breath while retaining as many Breaths as possible, then we'd probably look at putting the age at the median of life expectancy or retirement, whichever comes earlier. Not average, median. Giving up the Breath at retirement only works if a significant portion of the population consistently survives to retire - otherwise the system you're describing is "mandatory give up your Breath if you happen to live long enough to not need it anymore" which is a different proposal.

This is different from Mistborn spoilers:

Spoiler

Spook's recommended initative asking the elderly or terminally ill Metalborn to sacrifice themsevles to create spikes in that the transfer of power was only thought possible at the end of life. Since the transfer of power was only possible at death, it obviously isn't the same scenario as preserving Breaths.

 

Edited April 20, 2025 by Duxredux