An argument for Bonds as Roshar's focus.

[Calderis he/him]

Just now, Radiant_Jaeger said:

Either the Soulcaster itself or the gems it uses contains them (spren) so yes. I think that would be interesting

I don't think the gems contain spren. I think ancient fabrials work on a completely separate principle to modern fabrials, and that's why artifabrians have failed completely at reproducing them. 

As far as the Soulcaster itself as a spren... What drew that spren into the physical and trapped it in that form? Why aren't they indestructible like Shardblades? I don't like it. I don't think it fits 

[Calderis he/him]

@Extesian figure I would bump this thread to start up this conversation rather than further derail the other two threads. 

You mentioned being stumped as far as why color is needed for soulcasting. I think it again goes back to bonds as the focus on Roshar. 

The main issue I have with the Spren theory is how it doesn't account for issues such as this, and when people argue against Bonds they always seem to underestimate/under value the possible complexity of bonds as the focus. 

In the instance of gem color and soulcasting, I think that the perception of gem colors being linked to the Ten Essences has created a bond that soulcasting exploits to enact the change in the Cognitive Realm. I don't think they are truly necessary as almost any change is possible. Jasnah states that soulcasting one of the Essences is simple, despite the relative complexity of some of the Essences themselves (blood for instance).

I think that they are simple because of a conceptual bond created between the gem colors, the essences, and Soulcasting itself. The requirement for gemstones of the correct color is a side effect of the conceptual bond that makes these instances of soulcasting so much simpler. 

[+Extesian he/him]

Thanks @Calderis, good idea. Yeah things firm up a bit with the Sydney WoB

Quote

Darkness: Further on in that… do different gemstones hold a different flavour, or different ‘frequency’ of Stormlight?

Brandon: Umm…. Nnnnnnnnooooooo… But kind of? Here’s the thing: So with the gemstones on Roshar… scientifically some of these gemstones are just really close to one another. Like chemical formula and whatever. But, their cognitive selves and their spiritual selves are gonna be very different because of human perception, right? (sure) And so, the answer is both a no and a yes because of that. So people’s perception has sort of changed how the magic works, to an extent… but it’s the same amount of investiture, just with slightly different flavourings.

So would your argument be that soulcasting without the right gem is always possible but the right gem makes it easier? Or that it was once possible but the system has changed to match the essences and since that change you must have the right gem? I could believe either. 

[Calderis he/him]

8 minutes ago, Extesian said:

Thanks @Calderis, good idea. Yeah things firm up a bit with the Sydney WoB

So would your argument be that soulcasting without the right gem is always possible but the right gem makes it easier? Or that it was once possible but the system has changed to match the essences and since that change you must have the right gem? I could believe either. 

First off, @Darkness is awesome for that series of questions and transcription. 

I think that like anything else, if someone understands the structure and composition they could soulcast the essence without the proper gem, but due to the system functioning the way it does they don't need to learn them and therefore don't try.