jturner Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 OKay, revision then: he has an atium spike (hemmalurgy). There has to be a couple of those floating around from dead inquisitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oudeis Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 It all depends on whether or not you consider someone a Misting whether they Snapped their powers normally or got it via spike. Recent WoB suggests that Mr. Sanderson at least (in this instance) considered someone a Mistborn if they got all their allomantic power from hemalurgy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jturner Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 I am not sure exactly the point you are making. Are you saying that Brandon said, essentially, that Inquisitors are mistborn? I don't think that makes sense. And certainly someone can get one power from a spike (lestibournes), or augment a power they already have (Vin) with a spike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oudeis Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 I think he's saying that "mistborn" is just a word people use, not a scientific term. If it means, "a person who can burn all the metal allomantically," then an Inquisitor fits the description. My point was, we now he's not an atium misting. You seemed to be asking, well what if he got the power to burn atium allomantically via hemalurgy? If by 'atium Misting' Mr. Sanderson simply meant "a person who can allomantically burn atium," then no, Bloody Tan did not have a spike to get allomantic atium. If he meant "a person naturally Snapped as a Seer," then it's still an option. I am pointing out that he has said that someone with a lot of spikes could be considered Mistborn, so while it's only a point of data, it does seem to indicate that he thinks of 'misting' as someone who can burn the metal, regardless of how they got the power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jturner Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 (edited) Aha! I see what you are saying now. I read the Q+A you linked to, and it looks like he said they would be called mistborn. However, there are several things to consider. First, there are no full mistborns anymore. They are now 'legend', so if someone appeared burning all the metals, I think they could be called mistborn by 'modern' folks (what was once a 'scientific' term now becomes a colloquialism). Mistborn definitely meant someone who could burn all the metals in the first three books; it also meant someone who was not an inquisitor because the mists pull away from hemalurgically spiked individuals. And, of course, we know that metal burning is of preservation and hemallurgy is of ruin. So to say that a creature empowered purely by hemallurgy is 'mistborn' seems to be the kind of mistake that an average person on Scadrial observing someone using the powers might make if they didn't know what we know (which, of course, they don't). I take your point though. I just think that Brandon's answer (or really the interpretation I read, I didn't watch the video) was evasive enough that I wouldn't throw away something related to atium yet (or the preservation metal). What do you think about my other stuff? The two powers together creating an 'effect'? Odium creating a God Metal? Or one of the uknown alloys? It there are 32 other alloys available if Harmony gave up a little God Metal... Edited October 13, 2015 by jturner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oudeis Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 The mists pulled away from Vin... did that mean she stopped being Mistborn? Mistborn was never a 'scientific' term, it was always colloquial. There weren't very many natural philosophers in those days, certainly not enough to have codified a system of nomenclature. Your assumption that 'Mistborn' means 'not an Inquisitor' is unfounded. Even if true, it's certainly never confirmed in the books, and is therefore speculation. Beyond which, you're still circling the central point. If the 'average scadrian' would call someone mistborn, wouldn't that same person call Tan an atium misting? So, like I said in the first place, it all depends. If, when he answered the question, Mr. Sanderson considered people with hemalurgically granted allomantic atium to be "atium mistings", then no. If he did not, then maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts