How Strict are Skybreaker Ideals?

[Conure1243 He/Him]

Say a person in modern day became a Skybreaker. They swear themselves to certain laws, but how strictly do they have to follow those laws?

Could they break their oaths by jaywalking, for example? Could somebody change the law to make a Skybreaker accidentally break their oaths?

[Through The Living Grub He/Him]

11 minutes ago, Conure1243 said:

Say a person in modern day became a Skybreaker. They swear themselves to certain laws, but how strictly do they have to follow those laws?

Could they break their oaths by jaywalking, for example? Could somebody change the law to make a Skybreaker accidentally break their oaths?

If they intentionally broke the law they were sworn to, then they may have issues with their spren. It is important to note that the Skybreakers understand that the law is flawed, and instead try to work towards the ideal law.

Coppermind:

Quote

Before the Recreance, the Skybreakers were merciful and understood that the law is not perfect. They viewed the law as an ideal to strive towards.

If the Order was how it was during OB, then there would absolutely be repercussions. The version of it before the Recreance probably wouldn't have cared too much as long as no one was hurt, and probably be used as a teaching moment.

WoB:

Spoiler

These is only the important pieces:

Quote

the Skybreakers (at their best) were not merciless...Note that the current incarnation, led by the Herald Nale in his madness, is more rigid than the ancient order, which understood that the law was not perfect, but instead represented an ideal to try to reach over time. Anyone believing in finding true justice, in defending the innocent, and in punishing the guilty would be welcome in the Order.

 

Hope this helps.

[Returned he/him]

I think it depends on what counts as breaking one of the oaths, but what evidence we have suggests that they need to follow relevant laws exactly.

We see Nale go to a lot of trouble to follow existing, formally established procedure in every way (following the strict letter of the law), such as having the proper paperwork to kill Lift but immediately stopping when a new emperor pardons her. He also scolds a recruit for killing to keep a promise (which the recruit thought was necessary to honor) but in a way that was illegal for where they were. So evidence suggests that they need to follow the law exactly, but the consequences for being loose with it are unclear.

At the same time, it's clear that they have a lot of leeway in determining their actions and what laws might be relevant. Nale was set on killing Lift and the laws he respected while trying to carry that out were more of a formality than anything, even though he took them seriously. His decision that the legally correct thing to do was to side with Odium and the Singers seems to have been a product of his own judgement, superseding laws that otherwise might have applied because the people who made them did not have valid authority to impose them (based on that judgement he made).

There is an obvious limitation on knowing the laws to be followed, but it seems as though a Skybreaker has an obligation to be aware of all laws relevant to where they are operating. I'm not sure how that would work in practice. I imagine the assessment of their spren is what would count in such a case, and that's probably not something that can be generalized to the whole order.

Edited January 15 by Returned

[Schizoposting]

Oaths are determined by the perception of the sadiant and spren, although there're limits to how far this can go. So, it depends on the person and spren making the oath; the regular Skybreakers would probably focus on following the letter of their code (note, they don't necessarily have to swear to follow the law), whilst the dissidents would probably care more about the following the spirit.

Also, the dissident Skybreakers have their own ideals—so this may affect things—although we don't know what they are.