Lemons Posted May 10 Posted May 10 TL;DR I propose that the 16 Shards of Adonalsium can each be uniquely described by four independent binary axes — two from the Dawnshards, two from the four aspects of Adonalsium: Change / Exist (Dawnshard) Focus / Connect (Dawnshard) Intellect / Emotion (Adonalsium aspect) Impersonal / Personal (Adonalsium aspect) Every Shard has exactly one structural complement — all four values flipped — which naturally produces the confirmed opposing pairs (Ruin/Preservation, Honor/Odium, Devotion/Dominion) and predicts five more. All sixteen Shards are placed with reasoning given for each. Six placements are anchored by confirmed lore; ten are derived and open to challenge. Dragonsteel will presumably settle it. Overview The idea of using binary yes/no axes to categorise the Shards rather than simple groups of four has been touched on before by multiple people both here and elsewhere on the Internet. These typically propose that the Dawnshards operated in a primary/secondary hierarchy to produce sixteen Shards from four. What I want to propose here is a more systematic version of that approach, with a key structural difference. Those models attribute the full structure to Dawnshard action alone. This leaves an unresolved problem: Shards that share the same Dawnshard signature feel radically different from each other. Ruin and Cultivation would be in the same group; so would Honor and Preservation. A Dawnshard-only model has no mechanism for explaining that variation. I propose that Adonalsium's own four aspects contribute an independent second axis. The result reflects both what Adonalsium was and how it was cut — neither alone is sufficient. This means we should be considering the 16 shards as a result of a 2⁴ split rather than 4² — the structure is nested binary pairs all the way down, not a simple grid. It is common in psychology and philosophy to describe personality or character using graphs with two independent axes of opposing characteristics — for example introvert/extrovert vs thinking/feeling. I propose the four aspects of Adonalsium work exactly this way: Emotional vs Rational — whether a Shard's fundamental nature operates through feeling or intellect Personal vs Impersonal — whether a Shard's power is directed toward specific individuals and relationships, or operates universally without regard for particulars. This distinction often manifests in magic systems as internal vs external I propose the Dawnshards have the same opposing pair symmetry: Change vs Exist — the most fundamental opposition, between transformation and continuity. Change Shards reshape reality; Exist Shards maintain and persist within it Focus vs Connect — the perpendicular axis. Focus is self-referential power: intensifying, amplifying, bringing something to its fullest expression independently. Connect is relational power: reaching outward, forming bonds, operating through networks and relationships between things. A fire burning brighter vs a fire spreading. These two are pure speculation based on summetry observations while experimenting with this theory. Combining two pairs of two gives 2⁴ = 16 unique combinations — exactly one per Shard. The Address System Each Shard can be described by its unique position on these four axes — one value from each pair. Rather than writing out all four values every time, we can express this as a four-digit shorthand, where 0 represents the first option and 1 the second in each pair. We'll call this the Shard's address. So a Shard that is Change/Focus/Intellect/Impersonal becomes 0000, while Exist/Connect/Emotion/Personal becomes 1111. The four bits are: B1: Change(0) / Exist(1) B2: Focus(0) / Connect(1) B3: Intellect(0) / Emotion(1) B4: Impersonal(0) / Personal(1) Every Shard has exactly one structural complement — all four bits flipped. This produces eight complementary pairs. It is worth noting that Sanderson has confirmed not all Shards have a directly paired opposite intent in the way Ruin and Preservation do. This is consistent with our framework: we used Shards with diametrically opposed intents to anchor the logic, and it stands to reason these would have opposite binary addresses. However, not all opposite-address combinations would be expected to produce the same antagonism. Two Shards maximally different in structural composition may simply have nothing to say to each other rather than actively pulling against each other — particularly where one combination of axes leads toward apathy or disconnection rather than active opposition. Devotion and Dominion are a particularly instructive example. They are confirmed structural complements — maximally different addresses — yet on Sel they cohabited rather than clashing. This is because their intents are not inherently antagonistic: you can be devoted to an empire. Love and control can be deeply complementary rather than opposed. A devoted subject and a dominating ruler need each other. Compare this to Ruin and Preservation, whose relationship was defined by active tension — Sazed finding Harmony genuinely difficult to wield precisely because those intents pull against each other. Notably, even in death Devotion and Dominion's investiture cooperates as the Dor rather than fighting, which is exactly what we would predict from a non-antagonistic structural complement pair. Methodology We anchored the system using three confirmed opposing pairs from the text: Ruin / Preservation Honor / Odium Devotion / Dominion We assigned addresses to our three anchor pairs by reasoning from their confirmed Intents: Dominion(0000): Change/Focus/Intellect/Impersonal — impersonal control imposed through systems and force. Skaze seeking political dominion without personal investment in specific outcomes. Ruin(0001): Change/Focus/Intellect/Personal — Ati's corruption was deeply personal. Ruin whispered to specific individuals, manipulated specific people. Entropy with a personal touch. Odium(0010): Change/Focus/Emotion/Impersonal — impersonal passionate transformation through intensification. Honor(1101): Exist/Connect/Intellect/Personal — oaths are fundamentally intellectual constructs between specific individuals. Preservation(1110): Exist/Connect/Emotion/Impersonal — Leras maintaining everything equally, the mists preserving all of humanity without distinction, investiture distributed universally. Warm but undirected. Devotion(1111): Exist/Connect/Emotion/Personal — directed love toward specific things is fundamentally personal. Seons bonded to specific individuals, love that persists and connects. Proposed Shardic Alignments Shard Address B1 C/E B2 F/C B3 I/Em B4 Im/P Confidence Dominion 0000 Change Focus Intellect Impersonal high Ruin 0001 Change Focus Intellect Personal high Odium 0010 Change Focus Emotion Impersonal high Virtuosity 0011 Change Focus Emotion Personal high Invention 0100 Change Connect Intellect Impersonal medium Cultivation 0101 Change Connect Intellect Personal medium Mercy 0110 Change Connect Emotion Impersonal low Endowment 0111 Change Connect Emotion Personal medium Autonomy 1000 Exist Focus Intellect Impersonal medium Ambition 1001 Exist Focus Intellect Personal low Whimsy 1010 Exist Focus Emotion Impersonal low Valor 1011 Exist Focus Emotion Personal low Reason 1100 Exist Connect Intellect Impersonal medium Honor 1101 Exist Connect Intellect Personal high Preservation 1110 Exist Connect Emotion Impersonal high Devotion 1111 Exist Connect Emotion Personal high Structural Complements Dominion / Devotion Confirmed opposing but not high friction Ruin / Preservation Confirmed maximally opposing Odium / Honor Confirmed opposing intents Virtuosity / Reason Structural complements — derived, but common to oppose art and reason Invention / Valor Structural complements — derived Cultivation / Whimsy Structural complements — not necessarily antagonistic Mercy / Ambition Structural complements — supported by Threnodite battle Endowment / Autonomy Structural complements — derived Notes on individual Shards Autonomy — does not promote individual autonomy. Operates through cold hierarchical structures, proxies and isolation. The Shard is autonomous rather than, in general, promoting autonomy in others. Mercy — passive compassion would place Mercy in Exist. But active intervention — stopping the Ambition/Odium conflict — places it in Change. Whimsy — almost certainly a reductive translation. Possibly closer to Wonder, Emergence, or Spontaneity — the capacity for reality to produce the unexpected. Odium — claimed by Rayse to actually be Passion rather than Hatred. The name is a hostile translation of something more like undirected intense emotion. Interesting Implications Rayse vs Odium — Rayse's targeting of Ambition was likely personal rather than structural. Odium's true structural opposite is Honor. The Ambition fight being so costly makes sense — Rayse was fighting from personal motivation rather than structural advantage. Mercy/Ambition at Threnodite — not coincidence. Opposing pairs being drawn to the same conflicts may be a structural feature of the system. The Dor — Devotion and Dominion's combined power being a polarised storm is exactly what you'd expect from two maximally different Shards' investiture forced together. Reason hiding — perfectly consistent with Exist/Connect/Intellect/Impersonal. A Shard that simply persists without acting. Cultivation's plan failing — a Change/Connect/Intellect/Personal Shard playing a long personal game against a Change/Focus/Emotion/Impersonal opponent. Odium operates on completely different axes, making Cultivation's miscalculation structurally legible. Whimsy declining to help Roshar — Harmony described the response as troubled rather than simply unhelpful. If Whimsy is Exist/Focus/Emotion/Impersonal — spontaneous, undirected, fundamentally not oriented toward personal intervention — then helping would require directed action toward a specific outcome, which is structurally contrary to Whimsy's nature. A Shard of pure impersonal spontaneous emotion has no investment in outcomes; good and bad are equally surprising, equally interesting. Harmony would find it troubling that Whimsy didn't decline out of indifference but out of something closer to detached amusement — finding the entire Cosmere conflict genuinely entertaining rather than alarming. Caveats The four axis names are working shorthands, not claimed to be Sanderson's actual terminology, particularly the focus/connection axis - finding a good descriptive linguistic pairing is hard for this concept. Some shard names are taken to be deliberately misleading - which fits what we see with their actions for some shards like Autonomy. Six strong placements, five reasoned placements and five from names alone. The system predicts specific things that could be falsified. Dragonsteel will presumably either validate or demolish this entirely! Conclusion I feel like looking at it as a dawnshard split and an adolnasium split has some interesting structures that would help explain the symmetries and oppositions that we see. Exactly placements and splits are a first attempt - but I'd be very interested what everyone thinks of the overall theory. Thanks for reading! 5
Schizoposting Posted May 10 Posted May 10 To be honest, I am pretty skeptical about these ultra complicated theories that map the Shards on to the Dawnshards: when Brandon came up with all of this, he probably relied more on the rule of cool than on some precise framework. That's not to say that there's no relation between the two, but I think that it's a lot looser than what's being suggested.
Trusk'our he/him Posted May 10 Posted May 10 40 minutes ago, Lemons said: Every Shard has exactly one structural complement — all four values flipped — which naturally produces the confirmed opposing pairs (Ruin/Preservation, Honor/Odium, Devotion/Dominion) and predicts five more. I have a problem with this part. Both Preservation and Ruin, Dominion and Devotion appear to be very opposite- so much so that their raw Investiture will rip into each other when left to its own devices, much as Investiture and Anti-Investiture would. We don't see this happen naturally with Voidlight and Stormlight, and Taravangian doesn't appear to have much issue holding both Honor and Odium at this time. I think there will be more issues and incongruencies in the future between the two Intents, but I really don't think they're that opposite of each other.
Lemons Posted May 10 Author Posted May 10 That's a solid point, I think I might have misremembered a WoB when I placed those two as opposites, looking at the ones I can find suggest you're right in them not being. Odium could easily sit in Whimsey's slot, and Whimsey would sit as a structural opposite to Honor (this is one of the issues with the categories being so speculatively named at this point, often several combinations could fit a single shard). Honestly Brandon has stated that not all shards have strong opposites - I was thinking this could be the origin of the 16 shards and the symmetry we see in them. Exact behaviour of any shard and it's investiture is going to be very much down to emergent intent, vessel, and as mentioned, rule of cool! Any thoughts on the if the overall structure and it's origin holds up even if specific shards are debatable? 1
PanLin they/he Posted May 11 Posted May 11 Oh yeah, Shard mapping is my jam. 19 hours ago, Lemons said: Change / Exist (Dawnshard) Focus / Connect (Dawnshard) Intellect / Emotion (Adonalsium aspect) Impersonal / Personal (Adonalsium aspect) I know you said the specific names aren't final, but can I ask how you came to the conclusion of these specific pairings? For the Dawnshards, did you try to fill out the blank two first and then work toward the Shards, or did you group the Shards and work backward to see what was missing? And where did Adonalsium's aspects come from? It kind of feels like you just picked some that would work alongside the Dawnshards as personality mappings, and not like a cohesive, comprehensive framework for the overall personality of God. 18 hours ago, Lemons said: Every Shard has exactly one structural complement — all four values flipped — which naturally produces the confirmed opposing pairs (Ruin/Preservation, Honor/Odium, Devotion/Dominion) and predicts five more. All sixteen Shards are placed with reasoning given for each. Six placements are anchored by confirmed lore; ten are derived and open to challenge. Starting with a criticism (sorry!). It's been mentioned a few times that Preservation and Ruin are kind of unique in how perfectly they mirror each other, and that all the Shards don't have 'true' opposites. WoBs: Spoiler Shardbound Do all Shards have a direct paired opposite intent... Brandon Sanderson No, I would say no, they do not all have a directly paired opposite intent. Oathbringer London signing (Nov. 28, 2017) Spoiler Chaos (paraphrased) Are Shards all paired? Does Endowment have a counterpart? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) RAFO. Also, yes and no. Not all Shards have perfect counterparts like Ruin and Preservation. Questioner (paraphrased) Why were Ruin and Preservation linked together? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) Because they're such perfect opposites. Basically it's just an opposites attract thing. Ancient 17S Q&A (May 1, 2010) Now, that doesn't necessarily mean the Shards didn't start as a perfect mapping like you propose, and it's just that they've drifted over time due to Intent, Identity and perception. Personally, I think it does imply that they've never been a perfect mapping, and that (who'd've thunk it) killing a god and sharing its power among a group of people is pretty messy work. Also, Honor and Odium definitely aren't opposites. Harmony is constantly fighting to keep both of his Shardic Intents happy and balanced; if he doesn't want to become Discord, he basically just has to not interfere or do anything at all. Retribution carries no such turmoil (as far as we've seen), and it seems perfectly acceptable to warmonger while keeping both Honor and Odium happy. Some quotes from the end of Wind and Truth below; they pretty strongly imply that the two Shards can synergise and amplify each other as long as Taravangian manages them properly, which is very different to Sazed's experience with Preservation and Ruin. Spoiler “Honor wanted desperately to follow it—and Taravangian had to be careful lest the power rebel against him. As he determined to do so, Honor swelled inside him, and more fully bonded into Retribution.” “Retribution would keep his promises. Oaths were important. And Retribution would destroy anyone who believed differently.” EDIT: I see you addressed this anyway: 18 hours ago, Lemons said: It is worth noting that Sanderson has confirmed not all Shards have a directly paired opposite intent in the way Ruin and Preservation do. This is consistent with our framework: we used Shards with diametrically opposed intents to anchor the logic, and it stands to reason these would have opposite binary addresses. However, not all opposite-address combinations would be expected to produce the same antagonism. Two Shards maximally different in structural composition may simply have nothing to say to each other rather than actively pulling against each other — particularly where one combination of axes leads toward apathy or disconnection rather than active opposition. Valid, I'm on board, but I still don't think Honor and Odium can be called opposites by any stretch. Odium is pure emotion; if it did have a true opposite, I'd expect it to be something like Virtuosity or Reason. 18 hours ago, Lemons said: It is common in psychology and philosophy to describe personality or character using graphs with two independent axes of opposing characteristics — for example introvert/extrovert vs thinking/feeling. I propose the four aspects of Adonalsium work exactly this way: So we're Myers-Briggs-ing the Shards? Spoiler Spoiler Potentially a tangent and not what you intended, hence the spoiler tag to save space, but it does seem uncannily close, especially if I assume focus/connect maps to S/N and impersonal/personal maps to I/E: Shard Myers-Briggs Archetype Summary Dominion ESTP Adventurer/Persuader Energetic Problem-Solver, spontaneous. Ruin ISTP Mechanic/Crafter Logical Pragmatist, quiet observer. Odium ESFP Entertainer/Performer Enthusiastic Improviser, lively. Virtuosity ISFP Artist Versatile Supporter, gentle and creative. Invention ENTP Visionary/Debater Enterprising Explorer, curious and logical. Cultivation INTP Engineer/Thinker Objective Analyst, analytical and innovative. Mercy ENFP Dreamer/Champion Imaginative Motivator, enthusiastic. Endowment INFP Idealist/Mediator Thoughtful Idealist, guided by values. Autonomy ESTJ Governor/Director Efficient Organizer, traditional. Ambition ISTJ Worker/Inspector Responsible Realist, methodical. Whimsy ESFJ Cheerleader/Caregiver Supportive Contributor, social. Valor ISFJ Carer/Protector Practical Helper, warm and protective. Reason ENTJ Commander Decisive Strategist, born leader. Honor INTJ Strategist/Mastermind Conceptual Planner, logical and strategic. Preservation ENFJ Leader/Giver Compassionate Facilitator, teacher. Devotion INFJ Campaigner/Advocate Insightful Visionary, compassionate. And honestly, I don't really have any issues with this approximation. 19 hours ago, Lemons said: Devotion and Dominion are a particularly instructive example. They are confirmed structural complements — maximally different addresses — yet on Sel they cohabited rather than clashing. This is because their intents are not inherently antagonistic: you can be devoted to an empire. Love and control can be deeply complementary rather than opposed. A devoted subject and a dominating ruler need each other. Compare this to Ruin and Preservation, whose relationship was defined by active tension — Sazed finding Harmony genuinely difficult to wield precisely because those intents pull against each other. Notably, even in death Devotion and Dominion's investiture cooperates as the Dor rather than fighting, which is exactly what we would predict from a non-antagonistic structural complement pair. Can I just ask where this is confirmed, please? Would love to read up on it. I agree pretty wholeheartedly with this. Preservation and Ruin wanted completely antithetical things, but Dominion and Devotion both essentially seem to want the same thing (Unity), and just have different thoughts on how to get there. Even further, I think they both carry a similar thread of "sacrifice self for the greater good", they mostly just differ on whether people should be able to choose that sacrifice or not. On individual Shards: Spoiler 19 hours ago, Lemons said: Autonomy — does not promote individual autonomy. Operates through cold hierarchical structures, proxies and isolation. The Shard is autonomous rather than, in general, promoting autonomy in others. I think it's both, and we just don't know enough about Autonomy or her true motives to say for sure. She spreads her Investiture more than other Shards to empower people across the Cosmere to do their thang, and she rewards those who pursue their own ends and make decisions, BUT she also uses the Trellium spikes (that allow hemalurgically enhanced people to hide from Harmony) to take direct control of people spiked with them. Evidence both ways, for now. 19 hours ago, Lemons said: Whimsy — almost certainly a reductive translation. Possibly closer to Wonder, Emergence, or Spontaneity — the capacity for reality to produce the unexpected. Agreed, and I really expect Whimsy to be a bit of a wildcard Shard when we eventually see it (similar to the Bard class in Homestuck, if you're familiar). Tbh this is probably the one on your list that I have most issue with, but I can see the argument for placing it as Cultivation's opposite. 19 hours ago, Lemons said: Rayse vs Odium — Rayse's targeting of Ambition was likely personal rather than structural. Odium's true structural opposite is Honor. The Ambition fight being so costly makes sense — Rayse was fighting from personal motivation rather than structural advantage. Hard disagree, sorry. Honor and Odium are not opposites. Rayse specifically targeted Ambition as he recognised it as potentially the biggest threat to his plans (and never intended to get stuck on Roshar), so it very much was a case of structural advantage. WoB: Spoiler Argent Some of the few Shards Rayse Splintered included Ambition, I believe, Dominion, and Devotion. Brandon Sanderson Yes. Argent And those were all way back, in the history. So, we know that the Shards' personalities overrides the Vessel's personality over time? Brandon Sanderson Strongly influence, and depending on the individual, override. Argent Okay. So did Rayse choose those Shards because-- Brandon Sanderson He went after Ambition first, but didn't find Ambition until after going after Devotion and Dominion. But Ambition was number one on his hit list. Argent Was it because of the Shard or because of the Vessel? Like did he hate the person? Brandon Sanderson In this case it was the Shard, primarily, that drove him-- Argent Oh, he was maybe afraid the Shard would grow too powerful and take over-- Brandon Sanderson He was afraid that this Shard that would rival him. And so he's like "This one is number one on the hit list. We're taking down Ambition." But then he got trapped in the Rosharan system. Arcanum Unbounded Chicago signing (Dec. 6, 2016) 17 hours ago, Lemons said: Odium could easily sit in Whimsey's slot, and Whimsey would sit as a structural opposite to Honor (this is one of the issues with the categories being so speculatively named at this point, often several combinations could fit a single shard). Whimsy as Honor's opposite is a much cleaner pairing imo! But yeah like you say, it's hard to say anything with full conviction until we see what Whimsy is actually like in-text. 18 hours ago, Schizoposting said: To be honest, I am pretty skeptical about these ultra complicated theories that map the Shards on to the Dawnshards: when Brandon came up with all of this, he probably relied more on the rule of cool than on some precise framework. That's not to say that there's no relation between the two, but I think that it's a lot looser than what's being suggested. 17 hours ago, Lemons said: Honestly Brandon has stated that not all shards have strong opposites - I was thinking this could be the origin of the 16 shards and the symmetry we see in them. Exact behaviour of any shard and it's investiture is going to be very much down to emergent intent, vessel, and as mentioned, rule of cool! On both of these points, I think there's probably a bit of both going on. We know that Sanderson intentionally set it up so cognitive Perception has a real, tangible effect on the universe. Even if the Shattering created 16 perfectly spaced Shards of 8 pairs of opposing Intents, they've since been taken on by a range of different people with a range of different backgrounds and a range of different ideas about what it means to be a god. Further, like we've seen with spren and other Shardic Splinters, they will have been warped even further over the last few millenia by the perceptions of everyone in the Cosmere; stories, myths and legends all have tangible effects on entities like the Shards. Which is all to say: I concede that, even though it's confirmed that Preservation/Ruin is the only true opposite now, that doesn't mean there weren't more true opposites when the Shards originally ascended. Personally, I think the Intents and perceptions of the to-be-vessels messed the whole system up the moment they killed Adonalsium, but that's kind of moot until we learn more about the Shattering. 1
Schizoposting Posted May 11 Posted May 11 1 hour ago, PanLin said: Personally, I think the Intents and perceptions of the to-be-vessels messed the whole system up the moment they killed Adonalsium, but that's kind of moot until we learn more about the Shattering. We do have conformation that it's possible for a different number of Shards, and different intents, to have emerged from the shattering, so the configuration that we got is a lot more contingent than "shard mapping" would imply. It's likely that the Dawnshards provide a thematic influence, but I strongly doubt that there's some exact formula that allows you to derive every Shard. The Cosmere's mechanics are a lot softer than what most fans think. By the way, Odium's "opposite" is considered to be Devotion—the former and Honor are actually attracted to each other.
earthexile Posted May 14 Posted May 14 Honor and Odium are frightfully compatible, I think that's how the people who worshipped them could fully switch religions and forget. They're both obsessive, relentless, and rigid. They both have no chill at all. Tanavast trashed his Connection to Honor largely through pretty reasonable choices, although that one thing was pretty gross. Honor and Odium are both things that can keep people at war forever. 1
Qianweilian He/him Posted May 14 Posted May 14 9 minutes ago, earthexile said: Honor and Odium are frightfully compatible, I think that's how the people who worshipped them could fully switch religions and forget. They're both obsessive, relentless, and rigid. They both have no chill at all. Tanavast trashed his Connection to Honor largely through pretty reasonable choices, although that one thing was pretty gross. Honor and Odium are both things that can keep people at war forever. I mean, you see this IRL all the time. Religions, causes, ideals, beliefs, often turn from instruments of peace to instruments of hate.
PanLin they/he Posted May 14 Posted May 14 On 5/11/2026 at 1:59 PM, Schizoposting said: We do have conformation that it's possible for a different number of Shards, and different intents, to have emerged from the shattering, so the configuration that we got is a lot more contingent than "shard mapping" would imply. It's likely that the Dawnshards provide a thematic influence, but I strongly doubt that there's some exact formula that allows you to derive every Shard. The Cosmere's mechanics are a lot softer than what most fans think. Yeah exactly, my current headcanon is that the Dawnshards split Adonalsium into four protoShards representing the Dawnshards, then the vessels organised themselves so each group of four would look after one protoShard; when taking a chunk of that power, each vessel coloured the protoShard with their personal perception of what it means (eg: Leras was part of the 'Exist' group, and his understanding of 'Exist' as something stable and unchanging created the Shard Preservation from that power). On 5/11/2026 at 1:59 PM, Schizoposting said: By the way, Odium's "opposite" is considered to be Devotion Can I ask, considered by whom? Love and hate aren't opposites; Odium is even known as Passion by a lot of people.
alder24 Posted May 14 Posted May 14 38 minutes ago, PanLin said: Can I ask, considered by whom? Love and hate aren't opposites; Odium is even known as Passion by a lot of people. Rayse wanted to be known as Passion, but the Shard resisted this change. Even Venli noted that Odium is devoid of things such as love and care. Plus this WoB: Spoiler Jason Paas Are Odium and Devotion opposites? Brandon Sanderson One could make that argument. General Twitter 2016 (Feb. 1, 2016) RoW ch 83: Quote She remembered love. Family. Grandparents, cousins. How had she forgotten? As a child, ambition and love had been like two sides of her face, each with its own vibrant pattern. To the sound of Odium’s rhythms, one side had shone, while the other withered. She had become a person who wanted only to achieve her goals—not because those goals would help others, but because of the goals themselves. It was in that moment that Venli saw for herself the depth of his lies. He claimed to be of all Passions, and yet where was the love she’d once felt? The love for her mother? Her sister? Her friends? For a while, she’d even forgotten her love for Demid, though it had helped to awaken her. 2
earthexile Posted May 14 Posted May 14 The Shards are not merely superlative expressions of their Intent, it also matters that they are out of context. Each of the Shards is a piece of a whole, so they're all incomplete. Honor is separated from Mercy, or Ambition, or Preservation. It's one million percent focused on doing what you said you would do and behaving how you promised to behave. Leaving an abusive relationship bothers it, showing up to a duel and killing a guy pleases it. We like the idea of honor, but without all the other things, it's just a kind of stubbornness. I think that's what makes Odium's "Passion" something different from love. Without the context of those other parts, raw raging emotion isn't really good for anything, it's not constructive or sustainable. I can crave and enjoy things just fine, that's a part of life and it can exist in balance with the others. But without the others? No sense of honor, no call to grow and change, no drive to preserve, no devotion, no reason, no whimsy? You couldn't love anyone or anything properly like that. What a hollow, pointless way to be. Truly a void, despite feeling so intense at first. 1
Schizoposting Posted May 14 Posted May 14 10 hours ago, PanLin said: Can I ask, considered by whom? Love and hate aren't opposites; Odium is even known as Passion by a lot of people. I'm too lazy to look it up, but in a WoB, Brandon says that you can consider them to be opposed. And we know from WaT that Rayse specifically targeted Devotion. So, it's a perfectly viable interpretation.
Master_Moridin he/him Posted May 17 Posted May 17 Brandon saying one could make the argument that Odium and Devotion are opposites is not the same as him saying he considers them opposites. 1
PanLin they/he Posted May 19 Posted May 19 On 5/14/2026 at 2:57 PM, alder24 said: Rayse wanted to be known as Passion, but the Shard resisted this change. Even Venli noted that Odium is devoid of things such as love and care. Ah I don't think I was clear enough, apologies. I'm not trying to say that Odium contains love and care, I'm saying that the emotion odium is itself a passionate emotion, and that people have a tendency to misinterpret the concept of passion. 'Passion' doesn't just mean 'love'; it can refer to any heightened emotion, particularly one that overrides someone's normal decision-making (which is pretty on-brand for Odium). The word even comes from the Latin word for 'suffering'. Sure, the Shardic Intent was adamant in retaining the hateful focus of Odium, but it's a big leap of logic to assume that means Passion would've been a 180 flip. Rayse also still preferred the term Passion, regardless of whether he could convince the Shard to agree. Devotion is also a form of passion—losing oneself entirely to the object of one's devotion. One could make the argument that Odium and Devotion are opposites in the same way that one could make the argument that Preservation and Endowment are opposites, simply because one maintains a status quo while the other changes it (and by that logic, one could basically argue that any of the Shards could be a candidate for Preservation's opposite). There are, imo, much better candidates for opposites to Odium and Devotion; for example: Odium <-> Virtuosity; loss of self to emotion vs absolute control and perfection of self Devotion <-> Autonomy; prioritising a goal or relationship vs prioritising the self On 5/15/2026 at 12:16 AM, Schizoposting said: And we know from WaT that Rayse specifically targeted Devotion. Did he? Or did he prioritise Sel and Roshar as multi-Shard systems (and therefore a greater potential threat to him), as implied by these WoBs: Spoiler Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) Odium locked the Selish Shards in the Cognitive Realm to keep them from achieving sentience or someone Ascending. Footnote: taken from General Q&A Arcanum Unbounded Hoboken signing (Dec. 3, 2016) Spoiler Paladin Brewer Out of all the Shards, why does Odium go for Devotion and Dominion? Brandon Sanderson He targets people with two kinds of ideas. Number one, he can argue they're breaking the rules they set out. And two, people he thinks are a good match for him, or a challenge, or a danger. Oathbringer Houston signing (Nov. 18, 2017) Spoiler Valhalla (paraphrased) Did Odium Splinter all the Shards for the same reason? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) No. Some Shards he Splintered because he feared the Shard itself, and some Shards he targeted because he feared the Vessel. He was working his way down his list in order of the Shards and Vessels he felt would be most dangerous to his plans until he got stuck on Roshar. Idaho Falls signing (Dec. 29, 2016) Spoiler Argent Some of the few Shards Rayse Splintered included Ambition, I believe, Dominion, and Devotion. Brandon Sanderson Yes. Argent And those were all way back, in the history. So, we know that the Shards' personalities overrides the Vessel's personality over time? Brandon Sanderson Strongly influence, and depending on the individual, override. Argent Okay. So did Rayse choose those Shards because-- Brandon Sanderson He went after Ambition first, but didn't find Ambition until after going after Devotion and Dominion. But Ambition was number one on his hit list. Argent Was it because of the Shard or because of the Vessel? Like did he hate the person? Brandon Sanderson In this case it was the Shard, primarily, that drove him-- Argent Oh, he was maybe afraid the Shard would grow too powerful and take over-- Brandon Sanderson He was afraid that this Shard that would rival him. And so he's like "This one is number one on the hit list. We're taking down Ambition." But then he got trapped in the Rosharan system. Arcanum Unbounded Chicago signing (Dec. 6, 2016) Spoiler Questioner Is Odium mad about Sazed having two Shards? Brandon Sanderson Yes, and scared. Salt Lake City Comic-Con 2014 (Sept. 4, 2014) Spoiler Questioner You've mentioned before that Odium is scared of Harmony. Is it only because of the raw power of the two Shards? Or is he scared of what Harmony represents? (Meaning the possibility of merging two Shards.) Was he aware that this was possible? Brandon Sanderson He, on one level, was aware. But it was more of awareness of this as a possibility. It actually happening is part of what has him scared. It's the idea of the two merging Shards both being more powerful and finding a harmony. (Which Sazed is actually having way more trouble doing than Odium realizes.) Those two things really have Odium scared. Because, partially, this means he has to find a way to destroy or split Harmony without taking up a second Shard himself, because Odium knows if he takes up a second Shard, terrible things will happen. And so he doesn't want to do that. (Terrible things as he views them.) And so he's gotta find a way to split this apart, or somehow otherwise defeat. Now, the more he learns about Sazed's actual state, the less afraid he'll probably be. But that's an advantage that Sazed has right now. San Diego Comic-Con@Home 2020 (July 23, 2020) On 5/14/2026 at 2:57 PM, alder24 said: Plus this WoB: On 5/15/2026 at 12:16 AM, Schizoposting said: Brandon says that you can consider them to be opposed Like others have pointed out, I think people are putting too much stock in the wording of 'one could make that argument'. If Sanderson intended for Odium and Devotion to be true opposing forces, that answer would either have been 'yes' or 'RAFO'. The Cosmere is rife with people 'making the argument' that, for example, all kinetic Investiture is Surgebinding, or that there are only 10 allomantic metals, or that (Emberdark spoilers) Spoiler it's impossible for a technologically immature civilisation to navigate the Emberdark. Because of a mixture of the normal muddiness when trying to find the complete, objective 'truth' of historical events, and because of the very tangible effect that perception and Intent have in the Cosmere, I really don't think that one WoB is enough for us to conclude that Odium and Devotion actually are opposites.
alder24 Posted May 19 Posted May 19 46 minutes ago, PanLin said: I'm not trying to say that Odium contains love and care, I'm saying that the emotion odium is itself a passionate emotion, and that people have a tendency to misinterpret the concept of passion. 'Passion' doesn't just mean 'love'; it can refer to any heightened emotion, particularly one that overrides someone's normal decision-making (which is pretty on-brand for Odium). The word even comes from the Latin word for 'suffering'. Sure, the Shardic Intent was adamant in retaining the hateful focus of Odium, but it's a big leap of logic to assume that means Passion would've been a 180 flip. Rayse also still preferred the term Passion, regardless of whether he could convince the Shard to agree. Yes, I do agree with that description of Passion which is even supported by what Dalinar felt in OB, but he's not all emotions which was what Rayse claimed to be. However, because Rayse wasn't successful in fully changing Odium's intent to Passion, Devotion fits as a clear opposite of Odium. OB ch 57: Quote It was the scream of a thousand warriors on the battlefield. It was the moment of most sensual touch and ecstasy. It was the sorrow of loss, the joy of victory. And it was hatred. Deep, pulsing hatred with a pressure to turn all things molten. It was the heat of a thousand suns, it was the bliss of every kiss, it was the lives of all men wrapped up in one, defined by everything they felt. 52 minutes ago, PanLin said: Devotion is also a form of passion—losing oneself entirely to the object of one's devotion. It doesn't seem this way to me, esspecially considering Devotion's description from Elantris ch 61: Quote THE WATER HELD Raoden in a cool embrace. It was a thing alive; he could hear it calling in his mind. Come, it said, I give you release. It was a comforting parent. It wanted to take away his pain and sorrows, just as his mother had once done. Come, it pled. You can finally give up. It's a gentle care and love of a comforting mother, not an overwhelming feeling described by Odium. Love doesn't have to be passionate. Even WaT confirms all Shards lack the sense of love and compassion, which was specifically assigned to Devotion. Odium/Passion simply cannot have love within him (which is what Venli saw). WaT ch 124: Quote IN THAT MOMENT, I UNDERSTOOD THE DEPTHS OF OUR STUPIDITY—FOR IN SHATTERING ADONALSIUM, WE HAD REMOVED THE DIVINE SENSE OF LOVE AND COMPASSION FROM THE OTHER SHARDS. THAT ONE HAD GONE TO AONA, AMONG THE BEST OF US, AND THEREFORE AMONG THE FIRST RAYSE HAD SOUGHT OUT TO KILL. 57 minutes ago, PanLin said: One could make the argument that Odium and Devotion are opposites in the same way that one could make the argument that Preservation and Endowment are opposites, simply because one maintains a status quo while the other changes it (and by that logic, one could basically argue that any of the Shards could be a candidate for Preservation's opposite) Yes, that's kind of true. Brandon even said that not all Shards have a perfectly opposite pairing, and some Shards can have several opposite ones. Honor and Autonomy fit well as opposites, just like Preservation and Cultivation and you can make many more pairings. Opposites attract each other just like Ruin and Preservation do, but their interaction, fight and perception of people and self can polarize them even more making them better fit opposites in the process. I would argue Honor and Odium became stronger opposites because of this effect and Brandon even said they aren't necessarily opposite, but they do attract each other well. Spoiler Shardbound Do all Shards have a direct paired opposite intent... Brandon Sanderson No, I would say no, they do not all have a directly paired opposite intent. Oathbringer London signing (Nov. 28, 2017) Spoiler Questioner What Shard is the opposite of Odium in the sense of the *inaudible* Brandon Sanderson There are several that could be considered opposites-- Questioner I mean in the assimilation sense, you’ve said that Odium doesn’t want to absorb any of the other ones but which one would want to? Brandon Sanderson Oh, which one would want to join with him? Questioner Or any of them. Brandon Sanderson I think that if personalities had been different, Honor and Odium, there would have been a very natural pairing, not that they’re opposites but they would have attracted. [...] Calamity Seattle signing (Feb. 17, 2016) Spoiler Chaos (paraphrased) Are Shards all paired? Does Endowment have a counterpart? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) RAFO. Also, yes and no. Not all Shards have perfect counterparts like Ruin and Preservation. Questioner (paraphrased) Why were Ruin and Preservation linked together? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) Because they're such perfect opposites. Basically it's just an opposites attract thing. Ancient 17S Q&A (May 1, 2010) Spoiler Nashan'Elin (paraphrased) Could Honor and Autonomy be considered opposites, like, Autonomy freeing from Honor's oaths? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) Yes, you could definitely think of it that way. Those two are more likely to be opposed than some others. Calamity Denver signing (Feb. 19, 2016) Spoiler Argent (paraphrased) Ruin and Preservation were often represented in the Mistborn trilogy in terms of black and white. Is this imagery limited to that series, or do other Shards also have an associated hue? Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased) This (Ruin & Preservation's colors) was because of the specific world and their perception of the world and themselves. Essentially, because of the dynamics of the interplay between Ruin and Preservation, they "chose" to view themselves as black and white respectively, so that's how they were represented. Also, because the only two Shards on Scadrial, and their natures were opposites, after the long period of time they spent on the same planet, they kind of "polarized." If similar thing happened on another world, similar coloring effect could happen. Steelheart Chicago signing (Oct. 1, 2013) 1 hour ago, PanLin said: Did he? Or did he prioritise Sel and Roshar as multi-Shard systems (and therefore a greater potential threat to him), as implied by these WoBs Yes, Odium has specifically targeted Devotion because she is the divine sense of love and was held by one of the best of all the Vessels. Look up the quote from WaT ch 124 above. 1 hour ago, PanLin said: Like others have pointed out, I think people are putting too much stock in the wording of 'one could make that argument'. If Sanderson intended for Odium and Devotion to be true opposing forces, that answer would either have been 'yes' or 'RAFO'. The Cosmere is rife with people 'making the argument' that, for example, all kinetic Investiture is Surgebinding, or that there are only 10 allomantic metals, or that (Emberdark spoilers) Hide contents it's impossible for a technologically immature civilisation to navigate the Emberdark. Because of a mixture of the normal muddiness when trying to find the complete, objective 'truth' of historical events, and because of the very tangible effect that perception and Intent have in the Cosmere, I really don't think that one WoB is enough for us to conclude that Odium and Devotion actually are opposites. You asked "considered by whom" so I showed you there are those who would consider Devotion and Odium to be an opposite pairing. Brandon didn't say just yes, because not all Shards have as clear opposites as Ruin and Preservation are. Some don't have them at all, others can have several and Odium is one of those. I do believe that Devotion is a fitting pairing for Odium, just like Honor is and Reason also seems like a good opposite to Odium (emotions vs logic). 1
Schizoposting Posted May 19 Posted May 19 4 hours ago, PanLin said: Did he? Or did he prioritise Sel and Roshar as multi-Shard systems (and therefore a greater potential threat to him), as implied by these WoBs: I'm sorry, but this is just wrong: Spoiler In that moment, I understood the depths of our stupidity—for in shattering Adonalsium, we had removed the divine sense of love and compassion, from the other shards. That one had gone to Aona, among the best of us, and therefore among the first Rayse had sought to kill. (WaT Chapter 124) In western culture, at least, love and hatred are widely considered to be opposites. Maybe you disagree, but the way the Cosmere is written, it's a perfectly valid interpretation.
Frustration Posted May 19 Posted May 19 9 minutes ago, Schizoposting said: I'm sorry, but this is just wrong: Reveal hidden contents In that moment, I understood the depths of our stupidity—for in shattering Adonalsium, we had removed the divine sense of love and compassion, from the other shards. That one had gone to Aona, among the best of us, and therefore among the first Rayse had sought to kill. (WaT Chapter 124) In western culture, at least, love and hatred are widely considered to be opposites. Maybe you disagree, but the way the Cosmere is written, it's a perfectly valid interpretation. That's what Tanavast thinks, but Odium did target Devotion and Dominion because they were on the same world Spoiler Paladin Brewer Out of all the Shards, why does Odium go for Devotion and Dominion? Brandon Sanderson He targets people with two kinds of ideas. Number one, he can argue they're breaking the rules they set out. And two, people he thinks are a good match for him, or a challenge, or a danger. https://wob.coppermind.net/events/175/#e8358
Jult Posted May 19 Posted May 19 I always viewed Rayse's targeting of Aona and Skai as convenience more than anything else. He was looking for Ambition first and just happened upon them breaking the agreement that the Shards made and settling the same planet. It gave him an excuse to attack them without provoking the other Shards. A tactic that worked based on Edgli's response (OB Epigraphs 37, 39-41) and the fact that no one came after him. Quote You mustn't worry yourself about Rayse. It is a pity about Aona and Skai, but they were foolish--violating our pact from the very beginning. No good can come of two Shards settling in one location. It was agreed that we would not interfere with one another, and it disappoints me that so few of the Shards have kept to this original agreement. As for Uli Da, it was obvious from the outset that she was going to be a problem. Good riddance. Regardless, this is not your concern. You turned your back on divinity. If Rayse becomes an issue, he will be dealt with. And so will you." It's probably why he went to Roshar too. Kor and Tanner also broke the rules. So, he would have been "justified" in removing them. Don't forget his goal was to take out all of the other Shards. I don't think he had a special interest in removing Devotion in particular - he just found himself in a position where he knew he could get away with it.
Schizoposting Posted May 19 Posted May 19 4 hours ago, Frustration said: That's what Tanavast thinks, but Odium did target Devotion and Dominion because they were on the same world Reveal hidden contents Paladin Brewer Out of all the Shards, why does Odium go for Devotion and Dominion? Brandon Sanderson He targets people with two kinds of ideas. Number one, he can argue they're breaking the rules they set out. And two, people he thinks are a good match for him, or a challenge, or a danger. https://wob.coppermind.net/events/175/#e8358 Both can be true. While Tanavast is not infallible, we should take his views seriously, given that he has Shardic powers and knowledge.
Through the Living Potato He/Him Posted May 19 Posted May 19 10 hours ago, PanLin said: Odium <-> Virtuosity; loss of self to emotion vs absolute control and perfection of self Virtuosity comes from virtuoso not virtue. Maybe you knew this? Quote Jofwu Can you elaborate on why you picked the name Virtuosity? As in, what does it mean to you and how does it fit in to the Cosmere? Brandon Sanderson So Virtuosity is specifically relating to artistic talent and artistic sense. I actually was just debating between Artistry and Virtuosity, and I settled on Virtuosity after a decently long debate; it's one of the reasons I haven't canonized this one yet. It is the last big hole. (I know there is one I haven't revealed that you guys kind of know what that one's general Intent is so this is the last big one to reveal, as I believe. I think there is only one, and I think you know part of that one. Maybe I am wrong. I'll have to go back and see; it's hard to remember what you guys know and what you don't know sometimes.) I wanted to get this one into the Cosmere so that we basically have all sixteen, now. The big decision was: what do I call them? And at the end, Virtuosity just rang to me in the same way Odium did, and so I picked that one. This is the Shard of artistic intent, and artistic talent, and artistic appreciation. Secret Project #3 Reveal and Livestream (March 22, 2022) 1
PanLin they/he Posted May 21 Posted May 21 (edited) On 5/19/2026 at 1:26 PM, alder24 said: It's a gentle care and love of a comforting mother, not an overwhelming feeling described by Odium. Love doesn't have to be passionate. Even WaT confirms all Shards lack the sense of love and compassion, which was specifically assigned to Devotion. Odium/Passion simply cannot have love within him (which is what Venli saw). WaT ch 124: Sure, and Honor can't contain the entropy assigned to Ruin, and Autonomy can't contain the binding connection assigned to Dominion. On 5/19/2026 at 5:16 PM, Schizoposting said: we had removed the divine sense of love and compassion, from the other shards. That one had gone to Aona, among the best of us, and therefore among the first Rayse had sought to kill. Nothing here says that Devotion only contained that one type of love. If anything, the wording implies that Aona had other aspects too. Devotion contains the gentle care and love of a comforting mother, but the Shard's name is Devotion, not Care or Support or Maternity. If so much effort has been put into the text to show us that Odium refused being named anything other than Odium, even to something as closely related as Passion, then we can't just dismiss the definition of a Shard's name, especially when that Shard has been dead for millennia. The interactions we've seen with what remains of Devotion shouldn't be used as safe evidence that we fully understand her Intent. On 5/19/2026 at 5:16 PM, Schizoposting said: I'm sorry, but this is just wrong: Hide contents In that moment, I understood the depths of our stupidity—for in shattering Adonalsium, we had removed the divine sense of love and compassion, from the other shards. That one had gone to Aona, among the best of us, and therefore among the first Rayse had sought to kill. (WaT Chapter 124) In western culture, at least, love and hatred are widely considered to be opposites. Maybe you disagree, but the way the Cosmere is written, it's a perfectly valid interpretation. An interpretation, sure, but one I disagree with. I don't think there's enough here to straight up say my interpretation is wrong. There's also this unrelated WoB highlighting how Sanderson uses the phrase 'you could argue': Spoiler Kael_the_Adventurer Did Nightblood's Awakening transform it into a God Metal? Brandon Sanderson *hesitant* Yes, you could say that. Adam Horne Was that a permanent change, or was that just while... Brandon Sanderson You can argue that Nightblood is a God Metal. Is he? You could argue otherwise as well. How about that? YouTube Spoiler Stream 4 (June 16, 2022) On 5/19/2026 at 10:39 PM, Schizoposting said: Both can be true. While Tanavast is not infallible, we should take his views seriously, given that he has Shardic powers and knowledge. Agreed! Although I would argue again that the wording of this quote: Spoiler In that moment, I understood the depths of our stupidity—for in shattering Adonalsium, we had removed the divine sense of love and compassion, from the other shards. That one had gone to Aona, among the best of us, and therefore among the first Rayse had sought to kill. (WaT Chapter 124) implies that Odium's target was Aona, not necessarily Devotion. Honor says that Aona was among the best of them. Tbh, multiple things can be true at once, and actually work together to answer why Odium went to Sel: Multi-shard systems are a bigger threat than mono-shard systems Devotion's emotional purview threatened Odium's (which I think is more evidence that they aren't opposites) Dominion's Intent somehow clashed with Odium's Rayse knew that Aona was one of the best among the vessels and would therefore not sit back and let him continue his crusade On 5/19/2026 at 10:47 PM, Through the Living Potato said: Virtuosity comes from virtuoso not virtue. Maybe you knew this? I sure do! I don't think I implied anything to with 'virtue' in my suggestion? None of the Shards are 'good' or 'evil', and they all consider different things to be virtues. My argument in proposing Odium and Virtuosity is because: Odium represents Identity loss He fully removes or supercharges people's emotions, sometimes against their will He created the Fused, immortal beings that have to forcibly override others' Identities to continue living Odium as an emotion is usually an extreme hate/disgust as a response to something, ie: letting external factors override your normal judgement and self-control He's constantly manipulating people to override their wants and needs with his own Virtuosity represents a form of Identity mastery A virtuoso becomes one after a great deal of dedicated training and self-control Investiture related to Virtuosity is attracted to self-expression, as well as the Fibonnaci sequence—a mathematical pattern that repeatedly shows up in nature Virtuosity as a concept is purely an internal goal, training a skill to perfection regardless of any external factors Odium (or even Passion) is a loss of control over your sense of self, where Virtuosity is the trained self-discipline required to understand and express one's sense of self perfectly. Edited May 23 by PanLin 1
Through the Living Potato He/Him Posted May 22 Posted May 22 12 hours ago, PanLin said: I sure do! I don't think I implied anything to with 'virtue' in my suggestion? Ah, sorry. The way you phrased it led me to think on the lines of “virtue.” My mistake!
PanLin they/he Posted May 22 Posted May 22 8 hours ago, Through the Living Potato said: Ah, sorry. The way you phrased it led me to think on the lines of “virtue.” My mistake! No worries! 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now