[OB] Clue to Odium's Imprisonment? (Spoilers)

[Calderis he/him]

1 hour ago, cometaryorbit said:

So Odium may be unable to leave the Rosharan system simply because he's Invested in Braize.

It's got to be more than that. 

Mistborn spoilers. 

Spoiler

Ruin couldn't leave because he and Preservation literally created Scadrial. He was far more heavily invested then Odium could be just from being present. 

So yes, he can't leave because he is invested into Braize, but there has to be something actively keeping him from divesting. 

If that were the extent of it, he would be able to pull out, and only lose the investiture he'd put into splinters like the Unmade and voidspren. 

In most circumstances, if a Shard leaves, they'll even take their perpendicularity with them. 

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=1178#8

Quote

QUESTION

If a Shard were to divest itself from a planet, would the perpendicularity there disappear?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Normally the shardpool would cease to exist, but there are circumstances that could prevent the shardpool from disappearing.

 

[cometaryorbit]

On 6/13/2017 at 0:20 PM, ZenBossanova said:

 I used 1500-800 years as a rough guess based on how long it takes legends to develop. That is the amount of time ago that King Arthur (late 5th century) and Robin Hood (late 12th century) happened. 

Legends don't take nearly that long. Arthur's time was 1500 years ago to us, but he was already a legend in the 10th century if not earlier, and it had lost almost any connection to potential real history by the 12th century.

But it can be much quicker than that. El Cid had an epic poem written about him within about a century of his death. The old stories about George Washington (throwing a silver dollar across the Potomac, chopping down a cherry tree, never lying) are from shortly after he died. Davy Crockett was legendary really fast too. There were fictional, exaggerated stories about Kit Carson's adventures being published while he was actually out on the frontier doing stuff.

IMO "just long enough for legends to develop" probably means beyond living memory but not distant history - say more than 50-60 years but no more than a couple of centuries.

[cometaryorbit]

2 hours ago, Calderis said:

If that were the extent of it, he would be able to pull out, and only lose the investiture he'd put into splinters like the Unmade and voidspren. 

 

I don't think so - a Shard's Investiture pervades all three Realms on a planet when they Invest there, I believe. I think it's a lot more than just the actual Splinters, even outside Scadrial (for example, on Nalthis, Endowment's Splinters are Divine Breath, but at least every human and quite probably every living thing* contains some of her BioChromatic Investiture).

*since Vasher's lifesense can detect grass

I'll agree Odium hasn't Invested as much as the Scadrian Shards did, but I'm not sure that's the issue, anyway.

I don't think it's a case of "they can leave but lose whatever amount of power they've Invested into the planet"; I think they simply can't leave without something major happening

Secret History

Spoiler

like Ruin destroying the planet. I'm not saying outright destroying the planet is the only option, at least for Shards that didn't create that planet, but I think it's a rather larger deal than losing a probably rather insignificant (on their scale) quantity of Investiture.

Kelsier is also bound - he can get to the Ire but not all the way to another planet - and he hasn't created anything. I think it's a Connection thing.

That WOB says that if they 'divested themselves' the Perpendicularity would probably go away; that doesn't necessarily mean they can do that any time they want.

[Calderis he/him]

4 hours ago, cometaryorbit said:

That WOB says that if they 'divested themselves' the Perpendicularity would probably go away; that doesn't necessarily mean they can do that any time they want.

Eh, I see what you're saying, but I took the word "normally" at the beginning of his answer, and the fact that he said circumstances could allow to leave without taking the pool, to mean it's perfectly possible. 

[AbsentKeeper he/him]

5 hours ago, cometaryorbit said:

That WOB says that if they 'divested themselves' the Perpendicularity would probably go away; that doesn't necessarily mean they can do that any time they want.

 

1 hour ago, Calderis said:

Eh, I see what you're saying, but I took the word "normally" at the beginning of his answer, and the fact that he said circumstances could allow to leave without taking the pool, to mean it's perfectly possible. 

I don't see why it needs to be one way or the other in this specific scenario.

It makes sense to me that it's within the power of a Shard to divest themselves at pretty much any time (provided that they aren't directly trapped like Ruin was), but that doesn't mean that it would be in their best interest.

In the case of Odium though, if his desire to travel the Cosmere splintering Shards is connected to his Intent (I think most agree it is) it may actually be impossible for him to consider weakening himself by giving up any amount of his Investiture. We have a WoB that says all Shards were equal in power before they started investing planets and stuff, so if Odium were to give up any of his power, he wouldnt be strong enough to splinter any more Shards.

This kinda ties in with many other theories that I've seen on here that suggest Odium is trapped at least partially by his own Intent, and the idea has always seemed likely to me.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Cowmanthethird
Capitalization, 2nd time for clarification

[Calderis he/him]

13 minutes ago, Cowmanthethird said:

In the case of Odium though, if his desire to travel the Cosmere splintering Shards is connected to his Intent (I think most agree it is) it may actually be impossible for him to consider weakening himself by giving up any amount of his investiture. We have a WoB that says all Shards were roughly equal in power before they started investing planets and stuff, so if Odium were to give up any of his power, he wouldnt be able to continue his goals.

I agree he's trapped partially because of his intentbecause of his intent. I think that has more to do with Cultivation's whole state rather than weakening himself though. 

For most Shards, I think the problem with divesting has more to do with an unwillingness to destroy the magical ecosystem that relies on them than it does with weakening themselves. 

I doubt Odium would have any qualms with that, or with destroying his creations to recover his investiture. 

[AbsentKeeper he/him]

2 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I agree he's trapped partially because of his intentbecause of his intent. I think that has more to do with Cultivation's whole state rather than weakening himself though. 

For most Shards, I think the problem with divesting has more to do with an unwillingness to destroy the magical ecosystem that relies on them than it does with weakening themselves. 

I doubt Odium would have any qualms with that, or with destroying his creations to recover his investiture. 

I pretty much agree with all of this, but I am a bit hesitant about Cultivation. Until we get more information though, it could be either one, a combination of the two, or there could be 20 other things as well.

With Sanderson, who knows?

[Calderis he/him]

12 minutes ago, Cowmanthethird said:

I pretty much agree with all of this, but I am a bit hesitant about Cultivation.

In what way? 

[AbsentKeeper he/him]

26 minutes ago, Calderis said:

In what way? 

Exactly what I said. Odium being bound to Roshar because he hasn't been able to destroy Cultivation seems likely, and it ties well into Hoid calling her 'Slammer', even if she is only imprisoning him indirectly. My problem with all of this is that we know it can only be part of what's holding him in the Rosharan system, because of all the WoBs talking about the Oathpact and such.

I'm starting to believe that he's going to be bound by lots of stuff in the Rosharan system, just based on the nature of Investiture there. Which bond is actually keeping him in the system though, we won't know until later.

[Calderis he/him]

@Cowmanthethird ah OK. I didn't mean to imply that Cultivation was the extent of it, just the part related to Odium's intent. 

Time has invested him, he wants her splintered, she's doing something to make him less powerful on Roshar, and he's still effected by whatever part of the Oathpact he was inadvertently draw into. 

That's my opinion anyway. 

[aemetha he/him]

I wouldn't draw too many conclusions about Odium being trapped from mistborn

Spoiler

I don't think preservation and ruin being trapped was so much due to investing and divesting so much as their shardic intent. Preservation can't leave because he is required to preserve scadrial, ruin can leave, but only after he ruins scadrial. Odium has no such absolute restriction trapping him, his intent allows him more flexibility in achieving his goals.

 

[Mason Wheeler]

On 8/21/2017 at 2:14 AM, cometaryorbit said:

Legends don't take nearly that long. Arthur's time was 1500 years ago to us, but he was already a legend in the 10th century if not earlier, and it had lost almost any connection to potential real history by the 12th century.

But it can be much quicker than that. El Cid had an epic poem written about him within about a century of his death. The old stories about George Washington (throwing a silver dollar across the Potomac, chopping down a cherry tree, never lying) are from shortly after he died. Davy Crockett was legendary really fast too. There were fictional, exaggerated stories about Kit Carson's adventures being published while he was actually out on the frontier doing stuff.

IMO "just long enough for legends to develop" probably means beyond living memory but not distant history - say more than 50-60 years but no more than a couple of centuries.

It depends on exactly what is meant by legend.  The Wheel of Time famously used a very interesting phrase: "legend fades to myth."  At some point, we as a society collectively lose track of the details of what happened in the past, replacing it with a glossed-over version of the high points, generally twisted to fit current conceptions in some way.  And that point can be pinned at about 300 years:

Quote

History must be curved, for there is a horizon in the affairs of mankind.  Beyond this horizon, events pass out of historical consciousness and into myth.  Accounts are shortened, complexities sloughed off, analogous figures fused, traditions “abraded into anecdotes.”  Real people become culture heroes: archetypical beings performing iconic deeds.  (Vansina 1985)

In oral societies this horizon lies typically at eighty years; but historical consciousness endures longer in literate societies, and the horizon may fall as far back as three centuries.  Arthur, a late 5th cent. war leader, had become by the time of Charlemagne the subject of an elaborate story cycle.  Three centuries later, troubadours had done the same to Charlemagne himself.  History had slipped over the horizon and become the stuff of legend.

In AD 778, a Basque war party ambushed the Carolingian rear guard (Annales regni francorum).  Forty years later, Einhard, a minister of Charlemagne, mentioned “Roland, prefect of the Breton Marches” among those killed (“Hruodlandus Brittannici limitis praefectus,” Vita karoli magni).  But by 1098, Roland had become a “paladin” and the central character,  the Basques had become Saracens, and a magic horn and tale of treachery had been added (La chanson de Roland).  Compare the parallel fate of a Hopi narrative regarding a Navajo ambush (Vansina, pp. 19-20). 

This suggests that 17th century history has for the bulk of the population already become myth.  Jamestown is reduced to “Pocahontas,” and Massachusetts boils down to “the First Thanksgiving.”  And the story of how heliocentrism replaced geocentrism has become a Genesis Myth, in which a culture-hero performs iconic deeds that affirm the rightness of Our Modern World-view. 

 -- Summary, The Great Ptolemaic Smackdown

So if the Scouring has become legendary, but not mythical, that puts it at less than 300 years, probably significantly less.