Dakhor Sacrifices

[Jondesu he/him]

And yet for some reason, when the aon fails, it actually goes about halfway and then messes up like a misdrawn aon, instead of simply doing nothing like everything else missing the chasm line.

Unless the Shaod actually defaults to zombie state or something. Shaod is weird.

Still though, wasn't Elantris supposed to predate Arelon? Something is definitely up with it. Why does the distance decay become so drastic for Arelon alone?

I suspect some of the weirdness comes from whatever happened when Devotion and Dominion were shattered. We don't know when that happened exactly, but I believe there was something saying early Arelish people stumbled on the city, already built but uninhabited, as if it had been abandoned. Then it wasn't for another generation or two that the Shaod began taking them. That implies to me that someone had been able to harness it before to build Elantris, but were killed or driven off, probably during whatever lead to the shattering IMO.

What if they were the first settlers in Threnody, fleeing there through the Cognitive?

jW

Edited April 22, 2016 by Jondesu

[Nashan’Elin he/him]

Unless the Shaod actually defaults to zombie state or something. Shaod is weird.

Well, the Shaod didn't start happening until people settled in Elantris. I just had an idea. What if, built into Elantris, was some sort of Aon formula that transforms Elantrians? Possibly based off of Aon Ien, but since it was missing one fundamental line, it had an effect similar to the misdiagnosed Ien that happened to Dilaf's wife?

[Voidus]

Well, the Shaod didn't start happening until people settled in Elantris. I just had an idea. What if, built into Elantris, was some sort of Aon formula that transforms Elantrians? Possibly based off of Aon Ien, but since it was missing one fundamental line, it had an effect similar to the misdiagnosed Ien that happened to Dilaf's wife?

But then they wouldn't be able to use Aons at all, Aons without the chasm line don't have a small effect, they don't have any effect at all.

 

 

Citation?

For Elantrians still using Aons before fixing Elantris? The last third or so of Elantris has quite a few examples.

[Nashan’Elin he/him]

But then they wouldn't be able to use Aons at all, Aons without the chasm line don't have a small effect, they don't have any effect at all.

Okay, now this makes me wonder. Why did an Aon Ien that was missing one of the fundamental lines caused a partial effect, while Aons missing the Chasm line have no effect? Weird.

[Voidus]

Okay, now this makes me wonder. Why did an Aon Ien that was missing one of the fundamental lines caused a partial effect, while Aons missing the Chasm line have no effect? Weird.

Did it have a partial effect? I don't remember it doing anything other than freezing her like an Elantrian.

[Oudeis he/him]

No, for your assumption that Elantris doesn't create the effect. The part of your statement wholly unsubstantiated, though I see how you could choose to confuse my meaning in an attempt at obfuscation.

[Voidus]

No, for your assumption that Elantris doesn't create the effect. The part of your statement wholly unsubstantiated, though I see how you could choose to confuse my meaning in an attempt at obfuscation.

Because when it's non-functional the effect still happens. And as you yourself pointed out, someone had to use AonDor to create Elantris in the first place, which doesn't make sense if Elantris itself is what creates it.

[Yata he/him]

If I am remember right, there is a theory about Elantris as an AonDor's Hack... The City takes the Dor and instead to spread in the same way with all the possible Connected people, "evolves some of the popolation" (the Shaod) and pushes the Dor only through them.

 

If this is true or at least possible, would mean that before Elantris was "easier" to performe AonDor (maybe like Forgery or Bloodsealing) but of course the power output was lower, the User less Invested and the "more Invested and more you find easy to use Magic" will not applied.

 

Then they decide to artifical boost the AonDor power through Elantris, in the whole population a genius may arise to discover more the AonDor mechanics.

 

I probably though about Dakhor Monk as a similar "hacking" of every Magic Effect naturally present on Fjorder

Edited April 25, 2016 by Yata

[Oudeis he/him]

What Yata said, and also, I never "pointed out" that AonDor must've been used to make Elantris, that I can recall. If my choices are between you not attributing your "facts" at all, and you misattributing them to make it sound like I support you, I think I'd prefer option A.

[Voidus]

What Yata said, and also, I never "pointed out" that AonDor must've been used to make Elantris, that I can recall. If my choices are between you not attributing your "facts" at all, and you misattributing them to make it sound like I support you, I think I'd prefer option A.

I'm not trying to do anything other than state the facts as I see them, if you need a particular reference feel free to ask but I think most of my points are established solidly enough that they don't really need citation. It's a central plot of the entire book that Aons still work before they fix Elantris itself, it provides the main hurdle for the story up until the Dhakor show up.

If you want me to cite something I can, I just need to know what you don't believe/know so I can provide citations.

On attributing you that was purely a mistake, I was going off of memory and confused you for natc, apologies but there was no malicious intent or anything, just a mistake.

 

If I am remember right, there is a theory about Elantris as an AonDor's Hack... The City take the Dor and instead to spread in the same way with all the possible Connected people, "evolve some of the popolation" (the Shaod) and push the Dor onlu through them.

 

If this is true or at least possible, would mean that before Elantris was "easier" to performe AonDor (maybe like Forgery or Bloodsealing) but of course the power output was lower, the User less Invested and the "more Invested and more you find easy to use Magic" will not applied.

 

Then they decide to artifical boost the AonDor power through Elantris, in the whole population a genius may arise to discover more the AonDor mechanics.

 

I probably though about Dakhor Monk as a similar "hacking" of every Magic Effect naturally present on Fjorder

On this: If I understand right that would need to target the entire population, not just Elantrians, otherwise you couldn't remove the magical abilities from the rest of the population, which means everyone would be targeted by the Aon and so would all suffer the same fate when the chasm line became necessary.

Mistborn spoilers:

For instance when the mists start snapping people who wouldn't otherwise snap (Essentially giving them extra investiture) that doesn't make other Mistings weaker.

[Yata he/him]

On this: If I understand right that would need to target the entire population, not just Elantrians, otherwise you couldn't remove the magical abilities from the rest of the population, which means everyone would be targeted by the Aon and so would all suffer the same fate when the chasm line became necessary.

Well in the end it all depends on "how the Elantris's Aon works" because if it something like:

main Elantris routine {

    - Drain all the avaliable Dor

    - Push it and change some factor in the Dor, to make it compatible only with Superuser */*

    - every some hours on when some event happens runs  the subroutine

}

subroutine Shaod {

    - Everyday test some connected people (unknow criteria, I know)

    - if the they passes the test, turn them in to superuser

}

 

The missed line have the effect to made this program very less efficient but still work (maybe do the fact, that this Aon was there from millenia...some kind of "persistent effect" or maybe some influence of a Cognitive Shadow or Shardpool), just  the "*/*" part suffer of this and the Elantrian recive an Amount of Dor below their need and the Superuser status was bugged.

 

Of course I have no proofs 

Edited April 24, 2016 by Yata

[Voidus]

Well in the end it all depends on "how the Elantris's Aon works" because if it something like:

main Elantris routine {

    - Drain all the avaliable Dor

    - Push it and change some factor in the Dor, to make it compatible only with Superuser */*

    - every some hours on when some event happens runs  the subroutine

}

subroutine Shaod {

    - Everyday test some connected people (unknow criteria, I know)

    - if the they passes the test, turn them in to superuser

}

 

The missed line have the effect to made this program very less efficient but still work (maybe do the fact, that this Aon was there from millenia...some kind of "persistent effect" or maybe some influence of a Cognitive Shadow or Shardpool), just  the "*/*" part suffer of this and the Elantrian recive an Amount of Dor below their need and the Superuser status was bugged.

 

Of course I have no proofs 

Given that there were no modifiers whatsoever I'd find it a bit hard to believe that the base Aon Rao would have such a complex effect, including targetting specific people. Also once it wasn't working properly even if there was some weird lingering effect from before that was somehow unique to Aon Rao the rest of the Dor should flow back to everyone else, the whole problem was that the Dor had no release.

[Yata he/him]

Given that there were no modifiers whatsoever I'd find it a bit hard to believe that the base Aon Rao would have such a complex effect, including targetting specific people. Also once it wasn't working properly even if there was some weird lingering effect from before that was somehow unique to Aon Rao the rest of the Dor should flow back to everyone else, the whole problem was that the Dor had no release.

You have right, just ...have we some kind of WoB about the absence of Modifiers hidden in Elantris structure (or below) ?

 

And anyway maybe I went too far in the off Topic... Sorry 

Edited April 24, 2016 by Yata

[Voidus]

You have right, just ...have we some kind of WoB about the absence of Modifiers hidden in Elantris structure (or below) ?

 

And anyway maybe I went to far in the off Topic... Sorry 

Not that I know of, I don't think anyone's asked.

We did a bit didn't we? Well it's somewhat related I suppose, knowing how Elantris works might provide some insight into Dhakor.

[Yata he/him]

We did a bit didn't we? Well it's somewhat related I suppose, knowing how Elantris works might provide some insight into Dhakor.

Yeah, in the last time I began to think that Brandon tricked us all for years, at least in some series, and push us to think about what we saw as Magic System like "pure" Magic System while probably we saw Magic System+Hack.

But we try to find an explaination without thinking that something may be "out of parametres" (and I think is what it's going on Sel with Aondor and Dakhor).

 

It's at least a week that I want to write a post in Cosmere theory about, but it's University exams period to me -.-

Edited April 24, 2016 by Yata

[Oudeis he/him]

Voidus: Try to accept that all these assumptions you make which seem totally obvious to you, are, in fact, not. No modifiers? What about the Ela in the middle of Rao? What about all the buildings, and all of Raoden's comments on how weird it is to have a low wall curving in a random spot to no apparent purpose?

 

Look, see? A reference to something from the books, proving wrong the thing you think is so obvious, it couldn't possibly need a citation. This is why we reference things. I applaud your ability to just state your guesses and faulty memory so firmly and confidently, but considering how many time in this conversation you've been proven so utterly wrong, it might be time to take a step back and re-assess whether or not you really have grounds to stand on to continue claiming that you can just say a thing, and we should all assume it's correct.

[Voidus]

Voidus: Try to accept that all these assumptions you make which seem totally obvious to you, are, in fact, not. No modifiers? What about the Ela in the middle of Rao? What about all the buildings, and all of Raoden's comments on how weird it is to have a low wall curving in a random spot to no apparent purpose?

 

Look, see? A reference to something from the books, proving wrong the thing you think is so obvious, it couldn't possibly need a citation. This is why we reference things. I applaud your ability to just state your guesses and faulty memory so firmly and confidently, but considering how many time in this conversation you've been proven so utterly wrong, it might be time to take a step back and re-assess whether or not you really have grounds to stand on to continue claiming that you can just say a thing, and we should all assume it's correct.

Again, if you think any aren't obvious just ask for a reference for one in particular. Just saying there are no references in general isn't very helpful if I don't know where the disconnect is between what I think is obvious and what you do.

A separate Aon is not the same thing as a modifier, it's separate entirely. And it's doubtful that that Aon does anything other than provide ELAntris with its name since no chasm line was added to it and Elantrians still function perfectly. SO no I don't think it proves wrong anything. Again if there's one part you don't remember being supported by books just ask, I'm perfectly happy to cite whatever people need cited I just need to know what it is that they need cited.

 

 

 

 I applaud your ability to just state your guesses and faulty memory so firmly and confidently,

Passive aggressive insult not appreciated.

As for "how many time in this conversation you've been proven so utterly wrong" 

To my knowledge that would be none, I mixed up two people once but I'd barely call that being wrong let alone 'utterly' wrong. I'm welcome to opposition as always though if you think you can prove I am. This isn't about me or you or who 'wins' here, I'm just interested in a sincere discussion about the magic. We don't need to resort to attacking each other or insulting one anothers memory, sarcastically or sincerely in order to have that discussion.

[Oudeis he/him]

No, you absolutely are not interested in a real discussion. And as for "just ask for clarification," every single post I have made in this thread has asked for one or more specific instances where you simply say something as true, even though the books tend to indicate they aren't. Literally everything you say but don't cite is either actually wrong, or certainly in contention. Check literally every post I have made in this thread for numerous specific examples.

 

Ela not being a functioning Aon: First, aons can modify other aons. This is stated multiple times in books, W's-o-B, and supporting documents. Rao itself is typically added to an aonic equation as a power builder, as is Omi. I believe Ene is listed as being used to indicate in what order a series of aons should "fire" in an aonic equation. Second, how can it give Elantris its name when no one even knew that Elantris was an Aon, let alone that it had a second one hidden in its streets? Third, WoB has said that only the base Aon needs the chasm line to function, but that they'd work better if you added the chasm line more times, like if a single aon has multiple copies of the "basic lines" or if the second aon is modifying the first. Do I really need to go on?

 

I'm not interested in getting caught up in minutae; it takes you a lot less time to just say whatever you think off the top of your head than for me to go through and point out to you how each and every one of them is wrong. You're utterly convinced that everything you say it totally accurate, despite the fact that I've proven you wrong over and over, every single point I've had the time to do so. I am not going to take the hours it would require to disprove literally every single thing it took you a minute to write in this thread. Just accept that, as a whole, you are not able to simply claim a thing and have it be accepted as "obviously true." You're attempting to unduly shift the burden of proof; even if I hadn't shown time and again that the things you state are false, it's a weak debate tactic to just say a thing and tell everyone else, "I am right until someone else takes the time to prove me wrong."

[Eagle of the Forest Path he/him]

From the Worldbuilders AMA:

 

Q: Brandon, the updated Elantris map (from the anniversary edition) includes a city map, and the interior of Elantris looks awfully like Aon Ela. Was it indeed designed so the streets for Ela, and if so - does this merely augment/support the giant Aon Reo, or does it have a separate effect?

A: This was designed this way! It is separate from the shape of the city itself.

Q: But does it have an actual effect, or is it just aesthetic?

A: It doesn't have an effect at the moment. It might once have.

 

 meaning Ela is not used as modifier for Rao, or vice versa

Edited April 26, 2016 by EagleOfTheForestPath

[Voidus]

No, you absolutely are not interested in a real discussion. And as for "just ask for clarification," every single post I have made in this thread has asked for one or more specific instances where you simply say something as true, even though the books tend to indicate they aren't. Literally everything you say but don't cite is either actually wrong, or certainly in contention. Check literally every post I have made in this thread for numerous specific examples.

Please don't tell me what I am or am not interested in, I am uniquely suited to knowing what I am interested in and you are attempting to divine the motives of someone half a world away based on a few short messages.

No, every post you've complained that I'm not citing, you haven't requested anything specific in a single post as far as I can see, other than the first post you made which I promptly responded to with a reference. Other than that, the closest you came was when you said I was trying to get you to agree with what I was saying by misquoting you, which I noticed and subsequently apologized for and did indeed cite where the confusion arose. Also, please stop passive aggressively using the term literally, it's both insulting and demonstrably inaccurate.

 

 

Ela not being a functioning Aon: First, aons can modify other aons. This is stated multiple times in books, W's-o-B, and supporting documents. Rao itself is typically added to an aonic equation as a power builder, as is Omi. I believe Ene is listed as being used to indicate in what order a series of aons should "fire" in an aonic equation. Second, how can it give Elantris its name when no one even knew that Elantris was an Aon, let alone that it had a second one hidden in its streets? Third, WoB has said that only the base Aon needs the chasm line to function, but that they'd work better if you added the chasm line more times, like if a single aon has multiple copies of the "basic lines" or if the second aon is modifying the first. Do I really need to go on?

Yes they can, but they're different from actual modifiers, you can use one in an equation sure but it still needs to be a functioning Aon.

Because the people who built Elantris obviously did know? And because given that it took a Sharder approximately a day to realize what it was I doubt that centuries of inhabitants failed to recognize the similarity even if they didn't know the significance? And Ela is a base Aon, you wouldn't need to add multiple chasm lines to an Ela but you would at least need to add it to the base Aon Aon in the middle still. So I suppose yes you do go on since you didn't provide a single valid objection.

 

I'm not interested in getting caught up in minutae; it takes you a lot less time to just say whatever you think off the top of your head than for me to go through and point out to you how each and every one of them is wrong. You're utterly convinced that everything you say it totally accurate, despite the fact that I've proven you wrong over and over, every single point I've had the time to do so. I am not going to take the hours it would require to disprove literally every single thing it took you a minute to write in this thread. 

And it takes no time at all to just insult people rather than actually contributing to a topic. And no I'm not utterly convinced of much of anything, let alone that I'm universally accurate. I have one of my first theories listed in my sig that was confirmed to not be true reminding me of that fact with every post. I'm just convinced that the evidence supports my current position since you've provided neither alternatives nor faults with my reasoning. You haven't 'proven' anything, you've insulted me, said I keep not providing citations despite the fact that I have and have spent more time complaining about me personally than you have the actual issue at hand.

How can you have proven me wrong multiple times but also not have the time to prove me wrong again? I've only raised one point that you've addressed.

 

Just accept that, as a whole, you are not able to simply claim a thing and have it be accepted as "obviously true." You're attempting to unduly shift the burden of proof; even if I hadn't shown time and again that the things you state are false, it's a weak debate tactic to just say a thing and tell everyone else, "I am right until someone else takes the time to prove me wrong."

I'va always accepted that, that's why I don't do that. I'm a student of science and its methodologies, test, reference and objectively measure before you come to any conclusions and always be open to change them when new data comes in.

No, I'm not shifting the burden to anyone, I have not asked you to prove a single thing, have provided citations when requested and am intimately familiar with logical fallacies. (A few you might want to look up: Straw man, Ad Hominem, red herring). Incidentally you haven't proven me wrong once except that you didn't type something I thought you typed, let alone time and again. Again, I've only made one statement for you to disprove even if you were successful.

Yes, I agree that's a weak tactic, good thing no one here is employing it. Well, other than all those times you did about my beliefs, motivations and aspirations but they're ultimately subjective anyway so we can let those slide.

[Oudeis he/him]

I have contributed over and over. I have referenced and cited the book and WoB. Your contributions have been "I just thought of it, so I'm going to state it, say that it's obvious, and claim that everything I come up with is true until someone else puts way more effort into proving it false than I put into assuming it true."

 

How about this. I'll stop misusing "literally" when you stop misusing "obvious." Yes, I am insulting you in my free time, and no, it doesn't take very long. Prolly about the same time it takes you to think of a thing and assume you're right, when you're demonstrably not. However, that's not the sum total of my posts. The vast majority of my posts have been actual work and effort, looking things up, referencing them, in order to support the things I'm saying. Nothing I've written can be proven false, because I've backed it up. I'm solid. Nothing you've said yet has been solid, and when you're challenged on it, your excuse is, "I'm right just because I'm right, if you disagree, you're the one who has to put effort into proving me wrong."

 

Which I have done. Often enough that I'm refusing the onus any further.

 

To be clear, I'm not really speaking to you. Talking to you over these months has shown me that you have no interest in an open discussion. (If you claim you are interested, then you deserve an Academy Award for your portrayal of someone who just wants to say something and be viewed as a genius.) You just state a thing, and get angry with anyone who takes the time to prove that you're making a faulty assumption. The logical fallacies that riddle your posts could be in a textbook under "ways not to argue if you want a real discussion."

 

The people I'm talking to are people, maybe some of them new, who come to this thread. You are far, far better at appearing very confident than you are at knowing what you're talking about. I worry that impressionable people will come to this thread, read over everything you've written, and actually think you're right. I know I'm not going to change your mind. I'm picking up on the fact that you view the inability to change your mind as one of your best traits. I'm not trying to. I just want to make sure that when someone new comes to this thread, they don't confuse your arrogance for accuracy. I want to make sure they hear a dissenting opinion, someone who backs up the things he says with references and facts, so that they walk away from this knowing that while you're confident, you aren't correct.

 

You say you want a real discussion. Prove it. Protip: It's gonna be a LOT harder than just saying "I want a real discussion," which so far has been 100% of the indications that you do. In a real discussion, you don't get to shift the burden of proof. I could go through everything you've said, and I could prove it all wrong, but that would be a mistake because for one thing, it would be me spending hours of effort to counter a few minutes of rambling on your part, but mostly because it would buy into the line you're trying to sell. Your basic assumption is, "Anything I say is simply true until proven otherwise," and that is antithetical to a real discussion. You are not the teacher. You are not the professor. You are not some genius, a scholar of Sanderson. You don't have the assumption of being right. You want to discuss? Then do it properly. You want to pose a theory? Support it. Show us where in the work it says, "Aon Rao is unmodified." Show us where it says any of the things you say. You can sit there and say, "I'm here for a real discussion." But literally nothing else you've said has supported that. If you want a real discussion, than start really discussing. Don't say a thing, and then say "point out exactly what you don't think is true." You have to start, from scratch, proving the things you say. Yata and I have both proven you wrong often enough, just in this thread, that even if you had the assumption in the first place that you knew what you were talking about (which you didn't) you have certainly lost it.

 

It's called the burden of proof, and you don't get to foist it on other people. You don't have the right to a double-standard. You can't just say, "This is right," and if someone responds, "No, it isn't," tell them, "You have to prove me wrong, and until you do, I'm still right." You can't make other people dissect your words, and nitpick. You can't try to lose an argument in pointless minutiae. You want a real discussion? Then don't just say you want a real discussion. Really discuss.

[Stormgate he/him]

Can we stop talking about this? People are getting upset, and the number of situations where that is okay can be counted on Lopen's missing hand. It's getting to the point where I think the best way to diffuse the situation is to simply stop the argument.

[Voidus]

Yeah this has gotten way out of hand and off topic, Oudeis if you have some problem with me personally just mention it in a PM. I do my best to provide posts that I believe are accurate and helpful, if you want to actually refute a point or request clarification on it, by all means do so. But please don't derail a thread with some personal tirade, feel free to contact another mod or admin if you feel the issue needs moderation, but let's handle personal issues elsewhere and let the thread actually stay on topic.

 

Yeah, in the last time I began to think that Brandon tricked us all for years, at least in some series, and push us to think about what we saw as Magic System like "pure" Magic System while probably we saw Magic System+Hack.

But we try to find an explaination without thinking that something may be "out of parametres" (and I think is what it's going on Sel with Aondor and Dakhor).

 

It's at least a week that I want to write a post in Cosmere theory about, but it's University exams period to me -.-

Yeah I think something weird is going on with Sel, it might stem from the unique situation of the Dor being unguided but it seems like it could be something more too, especially with the Dhakor since they don't seem to have as many locality issues. I do like Nashan's original theory though, I hope we can get some more WoB on them but that's probably not likely til we get the sequel. I look forward to your week long post too

[Chaos he/him]

The admin team will be dealing with this shortly. Please carry on with respectful discussion.

[Chaos he/him]

Also, I would like to state that this argument is really freaking stupid and participants need to chill out.