BasementDwellingRadiant Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 (edited) I've been thinking a lot about the third oath of the Windrunners recently, and Kaladin's progression as of Oathbringer. We've seen that not acting upon the oaths can destroy a spren and the bond. We've also seen Kaladin fail to swear an oath. The thing I'm curious about is... could someone fail to swear the third oath and not destroy the bond? It's fairly straightforward. "I will protect even those I hate, so long as it is right." And, Teft clearly struggled with that one for a while. But... it seems an oddity. Could someone simply not act to protect an individual they hate? Would that be too selfish? Thoughts? EDIT: My apologies for the thread's double post. That was not intentional on my part. I'm not sure what happened(or how to remove the second one). Edited April 12, 2020 by BasementDwellingRadiant
Honorless he/him Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 (edited) I think it would depend on both the Radiant and spren's perception. To some, not acting is the same as acting, making the choice to let something happen. Edited April 12, 2020 by Dreamer 3
discorat she/her Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Dreamer said: I think it would depend on both the Radiant and spren's perception. To some, not acting is the same as acting, making the choice to let something happen. Yeah, as Syl said, its what changes in Kaladin when he doesn't protect Elhokar, not the fact that he doesn't do something about it...so I think its more about how the action (or non-action) changes the person rather than the action itself. 2
Recommended Posts