Taravangian Wasn't Entirely Lying: A Taln Identity Theory

[Blaze1616 he/him]

For comparison, I'm going to point out Taln, as we're discussing in another thread. In his Interlude, he's described as being barely legible, with only a few words making actual sense, and his accent is thick and sounds Norther Alethi. Then when Shallan talks to him, she understands every word, and he has no trace of an accent.

 

Then, at the end of the book, Amaram is in his presence. He doesn't flat-out state whether or not he can understand Taln, we only have confirmation that he makes out two words, and he says nothing on the accent.

 

By your reasoning, which is it? Since he doesn't say "he has an accent" should we assume he has an accent, or since he doesn't say "he doesn't have an accent" should we assume he has an accent?

 

If you want to believe it yourself, that's fine. But you cannot reasonably contend that something must be one way because it's not expressly described as another way, without the burden of proof that it would have been totally weird for him to describe it another way. Kalak has seen this Blade hundreds, maybe thousands of times, it doesn't currently have his attention, it's non-anomalous, and other, much much bigger and more important things are going on in his life just at the moment. There is absolutely no reason to find it suspicious that he doesn't say, "Jezrien summoned his own Blade, which looked very very different from the others." It's just Jezrien's blade. Every so often, someone interact with Shallan without thinking to themselves, "My, her hair is red," and that's, if anything, far more unique among the Warcamps than one Blade out of eight.

 

Though I certainly understand your point, I find the two situations drastically different. Your Taln example involves different PoVs, from characters with very different heritages. Meanwhile, both of the excerpts I provided above are from a single PoV. Moreover, though I certainly agree that Kalak may have easily not been thinking about Jezrien's blade given the other issues in his life at the moment, let us remember that he did take the time to note how ornate the other blades were just moments earlier. In any other situation I would tend to agree with you, and obviously hard stated proof is better than having to come to conclusions, but yes, in this situation I'm going to disagree with you.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Blaze1616

[ParadoxicalZen he/him]

On the Honourblade(s) looking different

 

 

Interview: Mar 21st, 2014

 

WOR Signing Table Q&A (Verbatim)

RIT

Alright, glowing Shardplate and retractable helmets. Is that a similar origin of the Shardblades—

Brandon Sanderson

There's a similarity, but they are also very different.

RIT

Yeah, I noticed they do seem like advanced fabrials, because Adolin just keeps going on and on about how they're all interchangeable and how they all feel comfortable after a while, and it doesn't have the same kind of thing with the Shardblades.

Brandon Sanderson

No, it doesn't. Though a Shardblade, used for a long time, will change shape slightly.

Emphasis mine. It appears that, given Honourblades are Shardblades' template (and are technically Shardblades), this effect could extend to them.

perhaps similarly to how Returned are able to alter their appearances

Edited July 16, 2015 by ParadoxSpren

[hoser he/him]

With all due respect and no desire to insult the poster, I want to go off on a particular post.  Please forgive me if some part of my post seems offensive to the Blaze1616, as that is not my intention. 

 

The post offers quotes from source documents, which I love.  However ...

 

This doesn't outright state that Jezrien's Blade has changed, it heavily hints at the fact.

This seems totally wrong to me. 

1. That Jezrien's blade changed is not a fact, it is baseless speculation.
2. The quote does not hint at Jezrien's sword changing at all, much less heavily.  It merely states that it is different. 

So, considering that Jezrien's Blade got lumped in during the observation in the prelude, It's a reasonable train of logic to assume Jezrien's Blade has changed.

Likewise this:

1. Jezrien's blade was explicitly not lumped in at all, the quote even explicitly says "Seven" where Jezrien's and Kalak's blades make eight and nine respectively. 
2. It is not logical at all to assume that Jezrien's Blade has changed.  That is a pure assumption.  Please cite me the logical guideline that would lead one to this conclusion. 
3. If the spike blade that "Taln" showed up with is an Honorblade (which is the presumption of the OP), then that would be proof that not all the Honorblades are ornate or similarly sized. 

The fact that Kalak doesn't remark on how Jezrien's Blade is different is what convinces me that his sword originally looked like the others. That would then inherently imply a change in the Blade's appearance.

Cool.  Kalak doesn't describe either his own or Jezrien's Blade.  You assume that that means that it looks like the others and so it must have changed.  Fine.  Someone else could see how Szeth describes Jezrien's and assume based on the fact that we don't know of any Honorblades changing that it has always been that way.  Also fine. 

 

People can believe whatever they want.  What I have a problem with is people stating unsupported beliefs as fact.  I also hold staff and people with high reputation to a higher standard.  That Moogle, whose posts have provided me with so much enjoyment, states this assumption as fact will be taken as more authoritative than if a relative novice such as myself were to make it. 

 

Another pet peeve I have is that I hate illogic that masquerades as logic.  I really appreciate the way Moogle prefaced this theory:

... a foundation of sand. However, despite just how incredibly lacking the evidence is, I do hold this as my current favored theory of explaining "Taln". (Not that I find it likely, just that I like it the most.)

At least we know where we stand.  The post I am having problems with seems opposite to me.  Someone carelessly reading it may think there is some substance there, where I see none. 

 

Once again, I want to clarify that my issue is with this post, not Blaze1616 and his many wonderful contributions to our shared obsession. 

 

Edit:  Thanks to you ParadoxSpren!  That is real evidence! 

 

While it makes sense for Sprenblades to change as their spren change, Brandon does not explicitly exclude Honorblades, so this cannot be discounted, in my opinion.  Likewise, the notable difference in size of Jezrien's might not constitute a "slight change," but since "slight" is an imprecise phrasing, people can interpret it as they will. 

Edited July 16, 2015 by hoser

[Oudeis he/him]

 in this situation I'm going to disagree with you.

 

Cool... Just to clarify, you do understand that this is a choice you personally are making, yes? You're not disagreeing that I'm correct that you have failed to meet the burden of proof required to say that it should be logically assumed that Jezrien's Blade was one huge and glorious and has changed. You're simply saying that you, personally, in your own head!canon, have decided this is the case. Yes?

 

Keep in mind, I'm not arguing the other side. I'm not saying, the Blade has clearly never changed. I'm just saying, from what we've been given so far, there's absolutely no way to know for sure. What you want to believe is one thing, but you can't decide that in a more objective sense, your head!canon trumps actual logical conclusions.

 

@hoser: As someone who has bugged Moogle more than once on this issue before, even I have to say that his OP handles the entire thread pretty well. It was a thorough and full disclaimer, and cites valid reasons why it's tiresome to try to remember to write "I think" on every specific post. While I can see  your point that someone hopping into the middle and seeing only the one post wouldn't have read the disclaimer... well, if someone's going to start reading posts out of context, there's a limit to what the rest of us can do to try and help them debate more rationally.

[ParadoxicalZen he/him]

Taln's Swapped Blade

As we've discussed elsewhere, Taln's Blade was swapped. I think most assume he was wielding an Honorblade, and I think I must reluctantly agree. Here is the scene from the end of WoK:

Outside the gates, standing on the dark stone roadway, was a solitary man with dark skin. His hair was long and matted, his clothing nothing more than a ragged, sacklike length of cloth wrapping his waist. He stood with head bowed, wet, ratty hair hanging down over his face and mixing with a beard that had bits of wood and leaves stuck in it.

His muscles glistened, wet as if he’d just swum a great distance. To his side, he carried a massive Shardblade, point down, sticking about a finger’s width into the stone, his hand on the hilt. The Blade reflected torchlight; it was long, narrow, and straight, shaped like an enormous spike.

 

Something I think no one has brought up before: Taln's body is wet. Roshar has very very few natural rivers, and even if Taln had come from one, he should be dry by this point. What if "Taln" is wet because he was Surgebinding, and the frost covering him melted?

 

I will avoid bringing up issues of eye color for the moment (but if I were, I can totally explain things, I swear!), and simply wonder what Surge he was using. Szeth only is covered in frost when he expends great amounts of Stormlight; just taking it in is not enough.

 

How about the Surge of Transportation? If we look at the chart, we can see that Kalak's Blade's hilt looks roughly like a spike. It could be that.

 

 

In regards to his appearance, he apparently just walked up to gates then fell

 

Interview: Sep 24th, 2013

Steelheart Release Party (Verbatim)

Question

At the end of The Way of Kings, it was probably clear enough but I didn't understand it, with Wit, was it the actual Herald or was it someone else.

Brandon Sanderson

The Herald is the one that collapsed on the ground all shaggy haired with a shardblade. He claimed to be Talenel, who is the one they were talking about in the Prelude, whether or not he actually is is yet to be seen.

Question

Did he just collapse or did he form out of the air?

Brandon Sanderson

No, he walked up and fell down.

 

 

However, it could be that the closest he could get in his state was just outside the walls and could have been using a Surge prior to arriving. Or perhaps given his raggedness and exhaustion, he may have just tripped and fell in a puddle.

 

Emphasis mine. I'd say that (mainly because i couldn't remember if it had been argued elsewhere f he was something else entirely or not, so technically old news) definitely confirms the man is actually a Herald

Edited July 16, 2015 by ParadoxSpren

[hoser he/him]

Cool...

@hoser: As someone who has bugged Moogle more than once on this issue before, even I have to say that his OP handles the entire thread pretty well. It was a thorough and full disclaimer, and cites valid reasons why it's tiresome to try to remember to write "I think" on every specific post. While I can see  your point that someone hopping into the middle and seeing only the one post wouldn't have read the disclaimer... well, if someone's going to start reading posts out of context, there's a limit to what the rest of us can do to try and help them debate more rationally.

While I took pains to acknowledge my delight in the presentation of the OP, the assertion in question is not in the OP, and seems unequivocal to me. 

The Honorblades have changed appearances over the years (Jezrien's used to be extremely ornamented)

The first part could easily include a "may."  The parenthetical remark is a total fabrication, as far as I can tell.  In context, the acknowledgements regarding the basis of the theory do not seem to apply to the subsequent post, which just seems to be asserting background information. 

 

Overall, with regard to the OP theory, I was offering support in the post that Moogle was responding to.  My point was that the Shardblade in question could have been either Kalak's or Taln's, as neither of them seems to have been described.  With the OP suggesting that it was Kalak's, I thought the unknown appearance was supportive of the OP.  So I fear this whole digression came about because of my inability to communicate effectively.  With this clarification and mea culpa, I am attempting to rerail the discussion. 

[Blaze1616 he/him]

No offense taken my friend   And even if you were to have said something offensive, I have thick skin.
 
 

• That Jezrien's blade changed is not a fact, it is baseless speculation.

 
I'm not sure where you're from, but the phrase "hints at the fact," at least where I'm from, doesn't actually mean it's a fact. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused.
 
 

Likewise this:

• Jezrien's blade was explicitly not lumped in at all, the quote even explicitly says "Seven" where Jezrien's and Kalak's blades make eight and nine respectively. 

 

 
That one's my fault. I had intended to delete that and apparently missed it before posting. I'll edit it out. 
 
 

 

• It is not logical at all to assume that Jezrien's Blade has changed.  That is a pure assumption.  Please cite me the logical guideline that would lead one to this conclusion. 

 

 
The train of logic I spoke of is as follows:
1.) Kalak describes 7 of the Honorblades as ornate and highly decorated.
2.) Kalak does not speak to his, nor Jezrien's, blades being any different than the previously noted other 7.
3.) We know from WoB that ParadoxSpren kindly provided that Shardblades do change in appearance.
4.) ParadoxSpren also pointed out that it is reasonable to assume Honorblades do the same, as spren based their sword forms off of Honorblades.
5.) There is another WoB that Shardblades are huge because they are intended for use against large opponents (search "jedi" on Theoryland. I can grab it if you'd like). This would imply that, even if not ornately designed, Jezrien's Blade should be large like other Blades.
6.) Szeth's comment in the prologue about his Blade being smaller than most Blades, to me, leads to the conclusion that the Blade has changed.
 
Obviously not everyone need to subscribe to this train of thought, but to me that's "logical."
 
 

I also hold staff and people with high reputation to a higher standard.  That Moogle, whose posts have provided me with so much enjoyment, states this assumption as fact will be taken as more authoritative than if a relative novice such as myself were to make it.

 
Though I can see why you do so, neither of those factors should cause you to hold anyone to a higher standard. Reputation is meaningless, and certainly not an indicator of how well versed one is with the Cosmere, nor their skill with phrasing arguments. Being staff also says nothing to either of those two concepts. A staff member should have the same ability to theorize with us, as anyone else does. Just because Moogle, and now Kurkistan (congrats again), are the only two who have done so recently does not mean they are exceptions to some unspoken rule. Those who interpret the stated assumptions as fact simply because the member is staff, or has high rep, are merely misinformed as to what being staff or having high rep means.
 
Edit: In response to Oudeis:
 

Cool... Just to clarify, you do understand that this is a choice you personally are making, yes? You're not disagreeing that I'm correct that you have failed to meet the burden of proof required to say that it should be logically assumed that Jezrien's Blade was one huge and glorious and has changed. You're simply saying that you, personally, in your own head!canon, have decided this is the case. Yes?
 
Keep in mind, I'm not arguing the other side. I'm not saying, the Blade has clearly never changed. I'm just saying, from what we've been given so far, there's absolutely no way to know for sure. What you want to believe is one thing, but you can't decide that in a more objective sense, your head!canon trumps actual logical conclusions.

Yes, I definitely understand that I have not satisfied the burden of proof. Though I would like to note that not all theories will be able to satisfy the burden of proof, given that they are indeed theories. If all theories satisfied the burden of proof, they wouldn't be theories, but rather uncontested facts.

 

Also, I wouldn't say my head!canon trumps logical conclusions, but rather than my head!canon follows a train of thought that I, personally, find logical. Were there to be proof that the Blade objectively either changed or not, my head!canon would adjust accordingly.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Blaze1616

[Oudeis he/him]

While I took pains to acknowledge my delight in the presentation of the OP, the assertion in question is not in the OP, and seems unequivocal to me. 

 

Ah, I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about the general tone. No, you're right. In that instance, Moogle stated something as flat-out true when it's speculation, at best.

 

Blaze: That's not... an actual train of logic, that's just a series of points in support. 1 and 2 have some connection, but as I've pointed out, point 2 is a fallacy of argument from silence. A few other points also connect in pairs, but there's not a syllogism from "this is a hard, established fact" along a chain of conclusions, or even very compelling arguments, to an ultimate statement of fact. You just have a theory, and a few reasons why the theory might be true. And you're absolutely right, on that score. Your theory is one that holds merit and, frankly, one I happen to believe. But by no academic standard could it be considered as anything more conclusive as "supported".

 

Though Jezrien's blade isn't directly commented on in the prelude, I feel it's a reasonable train of logic to assume Jezrien's Blade has changed given Kalak doesn't speak to the blade not being similar to the other 7.

 

If all you said was that something "hints at the fact" that would be one thing, but here you're flatly stating that you find the assumption reasonable. That's the point where you increase your own burden of proof. It's a reasonable theory; it's not a reasonable assumption.

[hoser he/him]

Thanks for your graceful acceptance of my criticism of your post. 

No offense taken my friend   And even if you were to have said something offensive, I have thick skin.

 

I'm not sure where you're from, but the phrase "hints at the fact," at least where I'm from, doesn't actually mean it's a fact. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused.

This was me being overly contentious.  I apologize.  If it weren't for the other issues, I wouldn't have mentioned it, but that does not excuse my boorishness. 

 

The train of logic I spoke of is as follows:

1.) Kalak describes 7 of the Honorblades as ornate and highly decorated.

2.) Kalak does not speak to his, nor Jezrien's, blades being any different than the previously noted other 7.

3.) We know from WoB that ParadoxSpren kindly provided that Shardblades do change in appearance.

4.) ParadoxSpren also pointed out that it is reasonable to assume Honorblades do the same, as spren based their sword forms off of Honorblades.

5.) There is another WoB that Shardblades are huge because they are intended for use against large opponents (search "jedi" on Theoryland. I can grab it if you'd like). This would imply that, even if not ornately designed, Jezrien's Blade should be large like other Blades.

6.) Szeth's comment in the prologue about his Blade being smaller than most Blades, to me, leads to the conclusion that the Blade has changed.

 

Obviously not everyone need to subscribe to this train of thought, but to me that's "logical."

I was not aware of the quote that ParadoxSpren found when making my post.  Were you aware of it when you made the post that I took exception to?  Had you mentioned it therein, it would have greatly strengthened your argument in my eyes, 

If you were not aware, and since you didn't mention it in the challenged post, I question it's post facto inclusion in the "logical" chain as steps 3 and 4. 

Likewise step 5 is new information and possibly irrelevant.  Jezrien's blade is described as long and small.  "Logically," it is not as wide or as thick as other blades.  If it is as long or longer, it could be as effective against large opponents. 

My challenge was to the word "logic."  It was a reasonable chain of thought or suppositions.  One can follow the reasoning, which fits for a common meaning of "logic."  When I challenged your statement that it is "logical to assume,"  I wanted some more rigorous logical principle like modus ponens or Occam's Razor that Spock would appreciate, rather than a vague series of possibilities mashed together with some information that was previously not mentioned or irrelevant.  

 

Though I can see why you do so, neither of those factors should cause you to hold anyone to a higher standard. Reputation is meaningless, and certainly not an indicator of how well versed one is with the Cosmere, nor their skill with phrasing arguments. Being staff also says nothing to either of those two concepts. A staff member should have the same ability to theorize with us, as anyone else does. Just because Moogle, and now Kurkistan (congrats again), are the only two who have done so recently does not mean they are exceptions to some unspoken rule. Those who interpret the stated assumptions as fact simply because the member is staff, or has high rep, are merely misinformed as to what being staff or having high rep means.

I claim that stating assumptions as fact is not helpful, but rather misleading.  Period.  If status and reputation are not significant, then why are they included with every post?  It is human nature to accept certain authorities.  As such, I believe staff and high reputation posters have a responsibility to be careful.  My experience has been that they generally are.  Of course, they can theorize with the rest of us, but if they make misleading posts, I think the misleadings will be taken more seriously than the misleadings of those who lack their reputation and status. 

[Moogle]

My apologies on the Jezrien Blade thing; that was a genuine mistake on my part.

 

I follow Blaze's train of thought. I also present the the fact that the Windrunner's Honorblade has an actual in-world representation (or... out of world representation, I'm not sure what chapter images count as), as do a number of other Honorblades (traced by Awesomeness Summoned from the 'Part Xs' of the novels here).

 

Now, it is not guaranteed in any fashion whatsoever, and it was still a dumb mistake on my part to state the Jezrien thing as fact, but I am inclined to believe there was truth to these images of the Honorblades. Kaladin creates something looking like the glyph forming the base of the Windrunner Honorblade on his own at the end of WoR (note: it may not be the exact same shape, but I think on balance it is more likely than not, as it is described as looking like 'wings'). Note, too, that the Windrunner blade (the blue one) depicted here is long and thin, which matches Szeth's description of its shape.

 

I think it more likely than not that Jezrien's Blade was ornamented, and that changed over the centuries.

 

Again, I apologize. I will go edit my post to fix it.

 

I do wish I could have my staff status hidden. I don't agree that a staff's opinion should count for more for theories, but I can imagine some people at least will take it that way.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Moogle

[Lirins hand]

It seems to me that the Honorblades being "a masterly work of art, flowing in design, inscribed with glyphs and patterns" does not necessarily mean they are ornate or ornamented, as the Shardblades are described usually.

The ornateness of the Shardblades seems to be in the things added on to make them individually unique.  These seem to me to be described as what you'd typically see as the Fantasy version of the two-handed greatsword with flare and bling added, making it functionally unusable except for the fact that they are much lighter than they should be.

The Honorblades would make much more sense to be more utilitarian, in my mind.  The traditional katana is a masterly work of art per most sword-smiths but is elegant in its simplicity, even when inscribed and decorated.

The Shardblades were based on the idea of the honor blades but that doesn't mean they looked alike.  The way they are consistently described makes me think they are like the bionic man (or spren in this case): "we can make it bigger, faster, better."

[Moogle]

To further expand on wondering which Honorblade, if it is indeed an Honorblade, Taln may have had, I am again looking over the six maybe-known Honorblade shapes.

 

Taln's Blade is described as long, narrow, and straight, shaped like a spike. This sort of describes Kalak's Blade, but Kalak's Blade does not appear to be thin. The Elsecaller Blade is also not very thin. This rather soundly argues against the usage of Transportation.

 

It might be Nalan's Blade, but his doesn't seem entirely straight, even if it is long, narrow, and sort of spikey.

 

Blades we have not seen in the image above are:

• Edgedancer
• Stoneward
• Bondsmith
• Truthwatcher

Looking at the hilts we can actually see Taln's hilt is really really spikey (he's the tan top-left one). This makes me more inclined to believe this is actually Taln.

[Kelek's Breath he/him]

Kalak refers to Jezrien wearing ruined finery in the Prelude. I'd guess no. I don't see why Odium would bother giving them any clothes after burning their flesh repeatedly. My money is on them either wearing what they had when they went to Damnation, or returning stark naked and Soulcasting themselves a few clothes and using some Lightweaving to hide their nakedness in the interim.

Sadly, I was RAFO'ed when I asked the clothing question in the AMA. I still think they retain clothing they went to Damantion with, and it doesn't get damaged from the fires (or it does since Jezrien's fine clothing was burnt). And we won't know until possibly the 2nd cycle of books. Hopefully we'll know who Taln is by then.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/2ytg2h/im_novelist_brandon_sanderson_ama/csfjn09

 

Q.1)... 2)When the Heralds return to Roshar, do they appear like Schwarzenegger in Terminator (nude) or do they appear with the clothing they wore when they signed up for the Oathpact? 3)...

A.I have to RAFO questions along the lines of what you're asking. These are things that are relevant to books 6-10, which probably won't even be written for a decade. Talking about them too much now would be counter-productive, I feel. Sorry.

[ccstat he/him]

To further expand on wondering which Honorblade, if it is indeed an Honorblade, Taln may have had, I am again looking over the six maybe-known Honorblade shapes.

Taln's Blade is described as long, narrow, and straight, shaped like a spike. This sort of describes Kalak's Blade, but Kalak's Blade does not appear to be thin.

What do you mean by sort of? To me the Willshaper blade (that's the second from the left, correct?) looks quite thin, and a great match for the long spike description. Obviously the image is stylized, but this looks like a big point in your favor here.

I agree with Lirins Hand that ornate/ornamented is not necessarily implied in the description of Honorblades as "masterly works of art."

[Moogle]

What do you mean by sort of? To me the Willshaper blade (that's the second from the left, correct?) looks quite thin, and a great match for the long spike description. Obviously the image is stylized, but this looks like a big point in your favor here.

I agree with Lirins Hand that ornate/ornamented is not necessarily implied in the description of Honorblades as "masterly works of art."

 

The second from the left is Nalan's. The purple one on the right is Kalak's (it's very wavy).

 

We also know a Herald retrieved their Blade, and the evidence points in the direction of Nalan (since he was glowing slightly when chasing Lift). So even if Nalan's is a very good match (I don't agree it's straight due to the thing at the end), it doesn't seem likely that Taln had it.

 

---

 

If Taln had one of the non-pictured Blades, the Surges he could have had are:

• Adhesion and Tension via Bondsmith
• Growth and Abrasian via Edgedancer
• Illumination and Growth via Truthwatcher
• Cohesion and Tension via Stoneward

None of these would have allowed Taln to go from Shinovar -> Kholinar with any ease, nor would they obviously be used to such a degree that Taln should be covered in frost which melted.

 

If, perhaps, Nalan did not go back for his Blade, it could be that Taln has it, which allows for the use of Gravity, at least. But I think it most likely that a confused Herald would get their own Blade and not another person's (WoB is that it was rare for Heralds to use other's Honorblades, which implies to me that they would not be too good at the Surges of other orders), or else get one of the two Blades that let them use the Stoneward Surges (Bondsmith + Willshaper).

 

In summary... I'm still pretty confused. But it doesn't seem like there's any obvious uses of Surges that would have left "Taln" covered in frost (which seems more and more unlikely). Given the Blade was swapped, it seems like whoever did it must have had reason to believe Taln was an actual Herald... which suggests he may have did something showy with a Surge. But what?

 

The following ways "Taln" could get an Honorblade are:

• From the Shin's cache (frankly, they should be really well guarded, so I can't imagine an insane Herald being competent enough to actually steal one... but such is this thread's theory).
• He could have went back for it (one male Herald did in fact do this) right after giving it up.
• He could be Taln and never have given it up.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Moogle

[ParadoxicalZen he/him]

He could have went back for it (one male Herald did in fact do this) right after giving it up.

 

Moog, can you provide the citation/WoB for this? I don't think i've seen it and am now intrigued

[Moogle]

Moog, can you provide the citation/WoB for this? I don't think i've seen it and am now intrigued

 

It came from a personalized book. http://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/4883-new-info-on-honorblades/?p=80001

[Oudeis he/him]

 I wanted some more rigorous logical principle like modus ponens or Occam's Razor that Spock would appreciate,

 

...You think Occam's Razor is a rigorous logical principle? That's not even terribly rigorous in real life, let alone in a narrative.

[ccstat he/him]

 

The second from the left is Nalan's. The purple one on the right is Kalak's (it's very wavy).

Ah, my mistake. This small screen on my phone led me astray.

[ParadoxicalZen he/him]

It came from a personalized book. http://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/4883-new-info-on-honorblades/?p=80001

 

Hmm, interesting. On that topic, i think it might have been Nalan (storms, it could have been any of the other 5 male Heralds). (and the urge to ?necroulate? that thread and Argent's Fallen Heralds is Strong >.>)

 

Slight tangent: It might be a good idea to ask Brandon if breaking the Oathpact had an effect on the Honorblades in someway (the recreance seemed to dim the glow/radiance, and the glyphs maybe, that came from the Blade and Plate, so perhaps this ornamentation/decal is no longer present, explaining why the (albeit limited) description of Jezrien's Blade as it is wielded by Szeth is rather bland/unnoteworthy. After all, we've only seen the Blades described at Aharietiem and not since

Edited July 17, 2015 by ParadoxSpren

[Moogle]

I was despairing of the wet Taln thing, but as it turns out Kholinar is right next to not one, but two rivers. So the water thing may actually be pretty mundane.

 

---

 

And, to continue my exploration of the Honorblade thing... I'm not actually 100% sure that Nalan's Blade is not Taln's.

 

Gaze at the three Honorblades at the bottom of this.

 

Does the middle one really match the Skybreakers, like the previous image I posted implies? For reference, the black symbol at the top right here.

 

Here are another two versions of the symbols, too: Stoneward and Skybreaker.

 

It seems conceivable to me that the bottom middle one is actually the Stoneward Honorblade. (For reference, a larger version of the Honorblade in question can be found on Part 2 of the Way of Kings.)

 

If so, it is really darn spikey. And if it is, then that heavily heavily heavily implies that the Herald is in fact Taln.

 

Anyone want to help me in the interpretation of this image?

[Twenty@20 he/him]

I was despairing of the wet Taln thing, but as it turns out Kholinar is right next to not one, but two rivers. So the water thing may actually be pretty mundane.

He he, I was planning to point out this since I was pouring over the Alethkar map few days back in another thread.

Anyways I thought maybe there is another explanation for "Taln's" wetness. What if he was drenched in sweat due to physical exertions during his journey. The fluid loss resulting from sweating can also account for his exhaustion in the same scene.

[hoser he/him]

Okay.  I'll bite. 

I was despairing of the wet Taln thing, but as it turns out Kholinar is right next to not one, but two rivers. So the water thing may actually be pretty mundane.

 

---

 

And, to continue my exploration of the Honorblade thing... I'm not actually 100% sure that Nalan's Blade is not Taln's.

 

Gaze at the three Honorblades at the bottom of this.

 

Does the middle one really match the Skybreakers, like the previous image I posted implies? For reference, the black symbol at the top right here.

 

Here are another two versions of the symbols, too: Stoneward  (<-this link doesn't get me to an image)

   and Skybreaker.

 

It seems conceivable to me that the bottom middle one is actually the Stoneward Honorblade. (For reference, a larger version of the Honorblade in question can be found on Part 2 of the Way of Kings.)

 

If so, it is really darn spikey. And if it is, then that heavily heavily heavily implies that the Herald is in fact Taln.

 

Anyone want to help me in the interpretation of this image?

The Skybreaker blade is one of those that Kalak described as "magnificent works of art."  If it resembles the glyph, I am beginning to doubt Kalak's abilities as an art critic    . 

I would not describe the middle blade as:

long, narrow, and straight, shaped like an enormous spike.

Sanderson, Brandon (2010-08-31). The Way of Kings (The Stormlight Archive) (p. 1002). Tom Doherty Associates. Kindle Edition.

The middle blade seems to widen toward the end, which is not how I see a spike.  The glyph from the endsheet could be described as a spike, but that is not how I see the middle blade. 

 

Edit:  This is an imprecise science, but the way I read the tea leaves, the middle blade could only be for orders 3-8.  The glyphs for orders 9, 10, 1, 2 do not widen toward the end. 

Edited July 17, 2015 by hoser

[Blaze1616 he/him]

 

I was not aware of the quote that ParadoxSpren found when making my post.  Were you aware of it when you made the post that I took exception to?  Had you mentioned it therein, it would have greatly strengthened your argument in my eyes, 

If you were not aware, and since you didn't mention it in the challenged post, I question it's post facto inclusion in the "logical" chain as steps 3 and 4. 

Likewise step 5 is new information and possibly irrelevant.  Jezrien's blade is described as long and small.  "Logically," it is not as wide or as thick as other blades.  If it is as long or longer, it could be as effective against large opponents. 

My challenge was to the word "logic."  It was a reasonable chain of thought or suppositions.  One can follow the reasoning, which fits for a common meaning of "logic."  When I challenged your statement that it is "logical to assume,"  I wanted some more rigorous logical principle like modus ponens or Occam's Razor that Spock would appreciate, rather than a vague series of possibilities mashed together with some information that was previously not mentioned or irrelevant.  

 

Yes, I was aware of the WoB ParadoxSpren quoted. My apologies in not including it, I had taken it a given we all knew it, which was a major error on my part. And though it seems the conversation has moved on, I do consider step 5 relevant, but it's because when Szeth calls his sword "smaller than most", I understood it to mean the Blade's length is shorter than most. This has caused confusion in other discussions as well, and I've yet to see WoB stating it's one or the other, length vs. width.

 

Lastly, as you've pointed out, I was using the term "logical" in the common meaning. It seems this discussion would have been avoided had we been on the same wavelength 

 

 

Blaze: That's not... an actual train of logic, that's just a series of points in support. 1 and 2 have some connection, but as I've pointed out, point 2 is a fallacy of argument from silence. A few other points also connect in pairs, but there's not a syllogism from "this is a hard, established fact" along a chain of conclusions, or even very compelling arguments, to an ultimate statement of fact. You just have a theory, and a few reasons why the theory might be true. And you're absolutely right, on that score. Your theory is one that holds merit and, frankly, one I happen to believe. But by no academic standard could it be considered as anything more conclusive as "supported".

 

Right. I was under the impression that I was arguing my point "supported", not "proven". I apologize for any disconnect in the discussion due to this, particularly because it was likely my language which caused the disconnect 

 

---

 

In regards to the new direction of the discussion, I agree with your analysis Moogle. It would certainly seem that the man at the end of WoK was holding Taln's blade. That still doesn't answer whether the man is Taln or not, though, merely that he holds Taln's Blade.

[hoser he/him]

...You think Occam's Razor is a rigorous logical principle? That's not even terribly rigorous in real life, let alone in a narrative.

Sure, Occam's Razor is not rigorous. With further apologies to Blaze, I experience Occam's Razor as more rigorous than the bulk of his/her argument.

 

And though it seems the conversation has moved on, I do consider step 5 relevant, but it's because when Szeth calls his sword "smaller than most", I understood it to mean the Blade's length is shorter than most. This has caused confusion in other discussions as well, and I've yet to see WoB stating it's one or the other, length vs. width.

I don't get this. 

 

We have two descriptions of the blade:

• Szeth describes it as long and relatively small
• Kaladin doesn't comment on it's length, but calls it "thin," "silvery" and "unornamented"

Yet people persist in claiming that it is short when the only reference to it's length states explicitly that it is long.  Even the Windrunner glyph portrays a narrow blade.  This seems to me to be another canard. 

Oh well, time to edit my title. 

Edited July 17, 2015 by hoser