The Ultimate List of Questions for Brandon

[Aether he/him]

If a person bonded 2 spren an order apart, e.g. an Order 1 spren and an Order 3 spren, would the overlap give them access to the powers of all 3 Orders (1,2 and 3)?

My guess would be yes, though they wouldn't necessarily get the quirks, such as a Windrunners ability to bond more and more powerful squires, or a Lightweaver's mnemonic abilities.

[Moash]

Could a shardblade pierce through someone like Steelheart who has invulnerability? Could it hurt him if it pierced him regardless of his weakness being exposed or not?

[Shaggai]

Shardblades can be stopped by sufficiently strong materials, such as half-shards. Whether or not Steelheart qualifies would certainly be an interesting question. However, if he was harmed it would certainly hurt him. Shardblades sever the soul. Nothing can prevent that.

[Eri she/her]

Probably a RAFO-bait, but is Rysn becoming a Dustbringer?

[Moogle]

Probably a RAFO-bait, but is Rysn becoming a Dustbringer?

 

That's an interesting question. What makes you guess Dustbringer?

[Sabrina Stormshard she/her]

My guess would be yes, though they wouldn't necessarily get the quirks, such as a Windrunners ability to bond more and more powerful squires, or a Lightweaver's mnemonic abilities.

 

Is the whole windrunners-bonding-squires thing confirmed/ WoB'd/ RAFO'd or is it just speculation?

 

Also, a question I'd like to see answered, can KR be RECRUITED (I'm thinking [wor spoiler]

when Nalan/nalanimpersonater picks up Szeth for the Skybreakers and basically says 'yeah you'd fit with us'

is there a process to recruit members and get them a spren or is it only ever spontaneous like the cases we've seen?

Edited April 17, 2014 by Sabrina Stormshard

[Aether he/him]

Take a look at the Squire related List thing in my signature for all the information I've been able to find on it. (Having some trouble with my browser, and I can't seem to access the Thread myself)

[ROSHtaFARian2.0]

Was Braize once known by another name, not including Damnation?

[AerionBFII he/him]

Was Braize once known by another name, not including Damnation?

In a WOB Brandon said all of the planets already had names before the Shards scattered around the Cosmere and settled in their own planets

Hope this helps

[Asperity he/him]

Will FTL travel have anything to do with the Alcubierre drive? http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/Alcubdrive.html

(Mainly because no theoretical horribly dire consequences to the crewmembers.)

[ROSHtaFARian2.0]

In a WOB Brandon said all of the planets already had names before the Shards scattered around the Cosmere and settled in their own planets

Hope this helps

 

Oh, no, I know that.  If he does ever answer this question, I'm more looking to his reaction to the question itself for clues, as I'm working on a theory that Braize was formerly known as Yolen.

[Eri she/her]

That's an interesting question. What makes you guess Dustbringer?

Personality traits. Not how she feels, but what she does. She is very brave (jumping from the island-thing) and obedient (to her babsk). Seems the right kind of person for a Dustbringer, unless I'm mistaking the orders.

[skaa he/him]

I hope this one hasn't been tackled yet: If a person on a Shardworld other than Scadrial (say, someone on Roshar) used Hemalurgy, will Sazed (or Ati, pre-HoA) be able to communicate with him?

 

The purpose of that question is to determine whether a Shardholder on one planet can influence people who use his form of Investiture on other planets. I guess a similar question would be whether Endowment can Return a non-drab Nalthian who died on Sel (for example).

Edited April 23, 2014 by skaa

[Oudeis he/him]

If a window knows what beauty is (Emperor's Soul), why doesn't Nightblood know what Honor is?

[Kurkistan he/him]

If a window knows what beauty is (Emperor's Soul), why doesn't Nightblood know what Honor is?

 

You might be off on your basic premise here, Outis. Suffice it to say that there is room to interpret whether the window actually knows (or cares) what "beauty" is. Myself I would say it just happens to know what a stained glass window is.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Kurkistan

[LiquidBlue]

If a misting were to ingest a Lerasium alloy that corresponded to a different allomatic art, would they be able to use both their original power as well as the new one, or would the new power replace their original misting power?

[Eri she/her]

If a misting were to ingest a Lerasium alloy that corresponded to a different allomatic art, would they be able to use both their original power as well as the new one, or would the new power replace their original misting power?

IIRC WoB says that it would overrite his powers.

[Oudeis he/him]

You might be off on your basic premise here, Outis. Suffice it to say that there is room to interpret whether the window actually knows (or cares) what "beauty" is. Myself I would say it just happens to know what a stained glass window is.

 

Sorry, a mistake on my part, I hadn't meant to talk about the window, though the window provides nice supporting evidence for my real point. The mural.

 

"If you were the wall, what would you rather be? Dreary and dull, or alive with paint?"

"Walls can't think!"

"That doesn't stop them from caring."

 

 

And again I put to you. If a wall can know there is some inherent benefit to being painted colorfully, if a window can prefer to be beautiful (and however much Shai admits that might be her being romantic, she still admits it's possible), why can't a metal sword know what 'evil' is?

[Moogle]

And again I put to you. If a wall can know there is some inherent benefit to being painted colorfully, if a window can prefer to be beautiful (and however much Shai admits that might be her being romantic, she still admits it's possible), why can't a metal sword know what 'evil' is?

 

Because evil is a word which is not a part of empirical language. We cannot measure evil, we cannot define it nicely, and people disagree on what it is or whether an action is evil. How can a sword possibly tell? Nightblood has a rough heuristic of what Shashara found evil (people who would take it and sell it for profit, or use it to murder, that sort of thing), but it would make no sense for it to know what evil is.

 

A stained glass window is a physical thing that people can look at and find joy in. A window that is seen by multiple people who find it beautiful comes to understand that it is beautiful (at least in general; some people might not like it). It makes sense that such a thing would want to return to that if it became broken and viewed as ugly and sad, at least if we assign objects a vaguely humanish personality (which was the case for the stick and Wind's Pleasure).

 

It seems likely that Forging runs into the same problems as Soulcasting: if an object doesn't want to change, it resists your stamp. A window that wants to return to being beautiful will not resist a stamp, and so Shai can do it with ease. The whole 'plausibility' limitation of Forgery can be seen in this light.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Moogle

[Oudeis he/him]

Because evil is a word which is not a part of empirical language.

 

...

 

A stained glass window is a physical thing that people can look at and find joy in. A window that is seen by multiple people who find it beautiful comes to understand that it is beautiful (at least in general; some people might not like it).

 

...

 

It seems likely that Forging runs into the same problems as Soulcasting: if an object doesn't want to change, it resists your stamp. A window that wants to return to being beautiful will not resist a stamp, and so Shai can do it with ease. The whole 'plausibility' limitation of Forgery can be seen in this light.

 

You're espousing a double standard. Beauty is no more empirical than evil. If simple popular opinion defines "beauty" well enough for a wall to decide, "I want to be beautiful," why doesn't Nightblood simply default to the popular concept of evil? The terms are alike in nebulousness. Why are you asserting that beauty is more empirical than evil? By what unit do we decide that one painting is more inherently beautiful than another? How many units more beautiful is this song than that statue? Why shouldn't the popular definition of evil be as acceptable as the popular definition of beauty? You suggest that the wall accepts the Forgery simply because it's influenced by the concept of beauty as seen by the Rose Empire as a whole. Nightblood was forged at the height of power of a militant theocracy, the Cult of the Returned. Popular definitions of "evil" would have been defined, strong, and pervasive, almost axiomatically more than the Rose Empire's concept of beauty. Why isn't that clear enough for Nightblood to default to?

 

Saying that objects "want" to change is, as my chemistry professor used to say, like saying that Hydrogen's electrons "want" to join Oxygen. It isn't a matter of want. It's simply a matter of what is inevitable by the laws of physics. If the bonding ever fails it won't be because Oxygen somehow offended Hydrogen, or because Neon snuck over and changed Hydrogen's mind. Shallan's stick didn't say, "I want to be a stick," it simply said, "I am a stick."

 

Does anyone on this thread have a real answer they'd like to share, or can we accept that it's a question for Mr. Sanderson?

[Kurkistan he/him]

Sorry, a mistake on my part, I hadn't meant to talk about the window, though the window provides nice supporting evidence for my real point. The mural.

 

 

And again I put to you. If a wall can know there is some inherent benefit to being painted colorfully, if a window can prefer to be beautiful (and however much Shai admits that might be her being romantic, she still admits it's possible), why can't a metal sword know what 'evil' is?

 

Hmmm. I have some preexisting commitments that stop me from agreeing with you on this, but that's no reason not to ask the question. The wall "knowing" beauty is certainly more plausible in the text than the window, and that was my main concern.

 

An answer to any of the question's components could be interesting, at the very least.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Kurkistan

[Moogle]

You're espousing a double standard. Beauty is no more empirical than evil. If simple popular opinion defines "beauty" well enough for a wall to decide, "I want to be beautiful," why doesn't Nightblood simply default to the popular concept of evil? The terms are alike in nebulousness. Why are you asserting that beauty is more empirical than evil? By what unit do we decide that one painting is more inherently beautiful than another? How many units more beautiful is this song than that statue? Why shouldn't the popular definition of evil be as acceptable as the popular definition of beauty? You suggest that the wall accepts the Forgery simply because it's influenced by the concept of beauty as seen by the Rose Empire as a whole. Nightblood was forged at the height of power of a militant theocracy, the Cult of the Returned. Popular definitions of "evil" would have been defined, strong, and pervasive, almost axiomatically more than the Rose Empire's concept of beauty. Why isn't that clear enough for Nightblood to default to?

 

I believe I was unclear, for which I apologize. There is a difference between an object knowing it is perceived as beautiful and an object knowing what beautiful is. This is why Nightblood cannot know what evil is, but an object can be perceived as beautiful and want to return to this (as with the stained glass window). I'm perfectly fine with people perceiving objects as 'evil'.

 

There's also a difference between an object knowing how it itself is perceived and knowing how other objects are perceived. Nightblood cannot do the latter, perhaps because the minds of Physical beings are special or something and they are the ones who determine how things are perceived. (This is most likely why Syl cannot attract spren - she's not Physical enough to count). Fortunately for Nightblood's peace of mind, he's got a decent heuristic: the sword's power takes a glance at whether or not any given person thinks of themself as evil, and if they think that they are, then they are compelled to commit suicide with Nightblood.

 

This is covered (indirectly) in these annotations.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Moogle

[Meg]

I dare throw in some thoughts on this, though I'm not sure I can express what I want to tell. And, as well, I would not claim if I understood your problem right, Outis.

I think the main point is that the wall or window, that should be changed, itself is not in any way sentient (neither sapient). It's view of itself depends on how it's perceived by their contemplators (for more easy phrasing: people), who are themselves sapient and sentient. So the wall adepts how it's seen by people.

Nightblood is himself (IIRC) gained sentience (I don't remember at the moment if one could say he's sapient, too). But his "memories" and sentience are not really his own, they were given to him, though Vasher told us that Nightblood made progress. He doesn't really have a conscience nor an own sense of morality. He just "regurgitates" what was told to him when he was made.

And though he was "taught" to destroy evil, he wasn't told exactly, what this "evil" is. Thus he struggles about what "is evil".

He can't get an experience about being evil himself, because he's not viewed as evil.

As a result I'd say he lacks the "mental" experience and possibility to know what "is evil" because of how he was made and what he is now.

Is this understandable? Please apologize if not; if asked I'll try to explain my thoughts further.

[WeiryWriter he/him]

Would Rock consider Lift to be alaii'iku?

[Shaggai]

Saying that objects "want" to change is, as my chemistry professor used to say, like saying that Hydrogen's electrons "want" to join Oxygen. It isn't a matter of want. It's simply a matter of what is inevitable by the laws of physics. If the bonding ever fails it won't be because Oxygen somehow offended Hydrogen, or because Neon snuck over and changed Hydrogen's mind. Shallan's stick didn't say, "I want to be a stick," it simply said, "I am a stick."

Except that this is Realmatic stuff. That means that yes, objects can want to be something or something else. As for the Stick: Would you say "I want to be human"? No, you'd say "I'm human". Wanting to be something and being something are two different things. The stick didn't want to be anything else. It was a stick.