kaellok

I find Amaram despicable because he is aware of the path that should be walked to be honorable, and he pretends to everyone that he walks this path, but in reality he makes large detours. If he were open about his mistakes and sins, then to me he would be less of a terrible person. As far as his goals, we know that he wants to return Vorinism to the world. What we do not know in detail is why or the end-purpose. Many religious people believe that worship is required for survival or existence in the afterlife. It is possible that Amaram is willing to sacrifice the lives of many in the Physical Realm in order to save them on the Spiritual--is that really worse than what Mr T is willing to do? And what actions did he take or participate in that had any direct effect in the greater scheme of things? Mr T and Szeth plunged the world into chaos; Amaram was a selfish twit who wanted the result that is occurring, but does not appear to have actually helped cause it. We may find out more later on, though, especially depending on what dealings he had with the Parshendi, and with whom. We'll have to agree to disagree here. I do not separate the specific actions of murder, mass-murder, assassination, etc. from the person who is responsible for them. Feeling bad after causing such actions to occur will never, in my mind, result in a person being 'good.' After all, Mr T's plan in a nutshell is to murder people until he is king of everything, so that he can then lead the chosen survivors to survival. He might be interesting, or sympathetic. Hells, he might even be necessary for the survival of the species. That doesn't make him a good person. For comparison, and since I think we come at things from drastically different viewpoints, Kelsier from Mistborn: TFE also wasn't a good person during what we see of his life. I feel that The Lord Ruler was equal parts necessary and monstrous--would you consider him to be a good person as well? (An honest question, as to me, TLR is the end-state of Mr T's Diagram.)

I bolded the part of your post that, to me, makes him an interesting character. I just draw a very distinct line in calling him a 'good' person. I am very much not a subscriber to "ends justify the means" in terms of philosophy because it is so very open to abuse. Even Mr T uses the poor and the desperate as his victims for the death rattles, killing the people that are not likely to be missed, when his supply of deathly ill patients grows too weak. However, since "the ends justify the means" is so incredibly prevalent in all types of stories, media, and real-life, it's good to have that included. I even think that if the Diagram is to be proven false in-world, that the story itself would suffer. I want the Diagram to be a real, valid alternative to the Radiants and Heralds as a way to save humanity from the Desolation. But based on what Mr T has already done, even if he goes on to save all of the rest of humanity along with life on Roshar, it will not make me like him or consider him a good person. Good people should be praised, or emulated, or treated as heroes; even if Mr T saves everyone, he should be, at best, ignored afterward. Perhaps treated with a kind of horrified respect. Edit: I just want to say that one reason that I love the Stormlight Archive books is that they seem to encourage discussion and thought about what is right or wrong, and then we see examples that prove and disprove the answers found, so that there are no neat pat answers. Morality is messy, and the story goes out of its way to prove just how messy it can be. Even a character that I find to be rather loathsome, I can understand where he is coming from and why others think they are great (ie, Szeth and Mr T).

I'm saying that there are things that are evil, and will always be evil, period. For instance, I think killing people is always wrong. There are times when it is wrong to not kill someone. I believe that it is very possible for every action or inaction a person can take to be morally wrong. Life sucks.

@Nathrangking I think that he could back out of the path he is on. Few people know what he has done, or the extent of his actions. If he were to stop dividing nations (in order to conquer them easier later), then he can do that. Worst case scenario will be loyal Diagrammists that speak out against him if he chooses to stop, but how much of the world would blame OR condemn him? After all, he is the kindly but dull king--everyone 'knows' this, even if they're from a backwater state in a kingdom far away. So if those that he is working with reveals the plan, he would be pitied while they would be reviled twice over; first for their actions, second for trying to pin it all on Mr T, and thrice for convincing him that he was responsible. There are almost definitely sections of the Diagram that he could choose to follow or not, as well. Working with Dalinar to unite the kingdoms of the world, instead of assassinating him, comes to mind. He already focused efforts on undermining Jah Keved instead of having the Alethi wipe out the Parshendi. It seems to me that the Diagram is the opposite of a path that you cannot leave once you have started down it; rather, you must continually choose to follow its path. The only reason to feel you have no choice but to continue on the path of the Diagram is because of the terrible atrocities that you have already committed in its name and not seen any good come from them yet. Mr T and Szeth are interesting, but they are very much antagonists at this point in the books, and are likely to remain such simply because they do not believe in acting the way that the protagonists of the story (Kaladin, Shallan, Dalinar, etc.) do, and with a very strong thematic focus on how the actions of a person matter as much as the intent behind them. I mean, that's essentially Kaladin's character arc in WoR.

I strongly disagree your point re: Mr T here. First, he is forced to do nothing. The evil, despicable things that he does are entirely by his own will. Even if the Diagram itself is a creation of some other entity, or was shaped and influenced by some other entity, blindly following it is still his choice. There is NO evidence for coercion or force that I have seen evidence of, or that people have presented. This means he is a legitimately terrible human being. He understands this, and because he believes it is the surest way to preserve humanity he persists. But he is NOT a good person. Wholesale murder is never the answer or response for someone who is good, except for those that have a defined morality that is very opposed to my own. Just because his intent is good does not mean that he is. What I find interesting about his character is that he realizes these things, but persists anyway. There are times when you can choose evil (let people die) or evil (kill some, to attempt to save the rest). I don't find the character himself sympathetic at all, let alone likable. However, he IS interesting and adds a great deal more to the story than being a different type of Sadeas or Straff, who essentially seek power only for the sake of power. Personally, the absolute faith that everyone is placing in the Diagram lets me know that it is doomed to fail. On his other super-intelligent days, Mr T is not allowed to be king because he is wrong; adding significantly more of the attribute disqualifying him from making permanent changes or laws does not seem likely to overcome that fatal flaw. I know there are many who believe that he was so smart on that day that he broke through the barrier, and I certainly believe that Mr T and Crew believe this, but I have not seen anything to convince me of the same. Instead, I see a man who is devoted to chaos, death, and slaughter at a time when the world needs to be perfectly united; a man who knew that the Parshendi needed to be eliminated (according to the Diagram itself! In floorboard 17, from https://coppermind.net/wiki/Diagram) but decided to take over Jah Keved instead.

See, I agree with you here, except that he was obsessed with 'getting Faile back' from basically the day he meets her on the Ferry until the absolute last book (maybe it was second last?) So there's a good 9-10 books in there where I dread every time it's another Perrin scene. Dealing with two novels of him freeing her from the Shaido was enough to absolutely kill any enjoyment I had of him finally coming into his own in Tel'Aran'Rhiod later (which were scenes that I could tell should be awesome and entertaining and enjoyable, but instead I just wanted them to end because I did. not. care.). Still, more enjoyable to read than Elayne.

@Secret Ardent Man and @Crucible of Shards It could very easily be said that, during the Cold War, the US and the USSR both ruled--but neither of them reigned.

A few thoughts: First, remember that the Stormfather tells Kaladin that humans fight all the time because "Odium reigns." (The Way of Kings, hardcover, p.648. First edition, August 2010.) Second, there is a WoB from some years ago that I remember but cannot find again where some question had been asked regarding a Shard's name that we hadn't learned yet, and the answer was essentially that he is very careful and deliberate with the name of the Shard (Preservation and not Life, Odium and not Hate, etc.) and that at times the name that he has imagined for them changes somewhat. So, we know that Odium is the one that reigns, because of in-text using that specific word. But what is the difference between Rule and Reign? That seems to be the root question. A quick Google search gives us a few useful differences. In particular I find the sentence "Reign is also used to indicate something that is predominant or prevalent as in the reign of terror or panic reigned" to be fascinating and mostly appropriate. This seems particularly appropriate given a contrast between what life would be like when Odium reigns vs. Honor; hatred and hostility towards people that are different seems to be closer to the standard nature of people on Roshar, with those that are tolerant being the exceptions. We can see this direct contrast referred to frequently by people who mock Dalinar's adherence to the Codes, especially from Sadeas. Those people who view the Codes as something written after the fact so that the people seemed honorable, rather than a way of life. So this all means, to me, that at one point in time 3 Shards ruled over the planets in the Roshar system, but ever since Odium Splintered Honor and caused Cultivation to retreat into listlessness and passivity, Odium reigns supreme. If the question is more about why Odium is referred to as the Broken One, there's a few options. Again, looking at the definition and synonyms for the word. From dictionary.com, definitions 4 (not working properly; out of order) and 7 (fragmentary or incomplete) or 8 (infringed or violated) seem interesting. Of course, many of these seem to imply that they could be referring to Honor instead. The problem with that is that Honor is dead; the Stormfather watched him die, and then fled. Coming as it does in Words of Radiance, where there are already supposedly dead people returning to life, I really hope this is not another case of "no body, no death" and that Honor is just hiding out somewhere alive, but divested of the vast majority of his power. (Of course, that is an unrelated tangent, since someone without power by definition cannot reign.) End rambling wall of text.

Thanks guys! almost complete with my latest re read, and was seeing things that could have implied that the two were the same. the WoB saying I'm wrong is pretty solid tho, haha

I feel like the grammar of the topic title is wrong, but it's 2am and I'm having troubles fixing it. Anyway. Basically what it says: do we know if the science behind fabrials is actually voidbinding? Anyone know of WoB that specifically differentiates between the two?

If Nightblood wasn't in WOR, I'm not sure that people would have realized that Zahel was Vasher; otherwise, he could have been 'just' a Worldhopper from Nalthis. There were a couple of hints of travelers from Nalthis to Roshar even in WoK (the one I remember most vividly, and perhaps the only one, was the fairy tale of a child using a human-shaped twig to fool the Voidbringers and escape, or something similar). Nalthis Worldhopper that used to hear voices + Nightblood = Vasher. (Although I didn't make the connection myself until I read the idea here, so there's that.)

Just keep in mind that this is very open to being changed, and as I recall, has changed at least once or twice already. There was a planned order for the books which has also already changed. One of Sanderson's greatest strengths as an author is the substantial amount of outlining work he has done for the series and books he writes; another one is how willing he is to change and adapt that outline as he progresses along it. I think that we won't see a book devoted to Adolin if only because he would be stuck giving a POV from events being covered by other characters, which is a major structural problem in most genres of storytelling. For it to happen he would have to be spending much time away from other POV characters, or directly take screen time away from them so that we see the scene from his point of view instead of theirs.

Windrunner. Not really what I would have expected. There seems to be very heavy weight on Question 3: What Ideology is most powerful to you? I might be getting hung up on the use of the word ideology, because I can't even consider four of them as options since they don't fit my interpretation of the word (which might lend itself to me being somewhat inflexible, but thinking Justice is important, which would make me think Skybreaker--which is the MOST wrong). Fun quiz, though, and appreciate the effort that went into making it.

Hey all, Not 100% sure this is the right place for this, apologies if it is not. I was wondering if anyone knows of any authors that have released the outlines that they used for their novels, or even a specific scene, so that it can be compared against the final product. I know that Sanderson has multiple versions of Warbreaker online (which is SUPER USEFUL!!!), but I am looking for one final specific link in the chain of things, if that makes sense.

If you look at Hindu, the goddess triumvirate Tridevi comprises Mahasaraswati to Create, Mahalaxmi to Preserve, and Mahakali to Destroy. Such a triumvirate already exists within a current human religious system, and so I think it fits neatly (given Sanderson's propensity to borrow themes from the real world that fit well within his own)--especially since all 16 Shards have to fit together to create one Deific All-Being. It seems likely to me that there will be at least a few different axes that the Shards would lay upon, and would be the easiest to merge back together. So one axis would be Preservation/Cultivation/Ruin (and probably one other Shard as well). Honestly, in order to try and predict what the unknown Shards are, I would look to polytheistic religions, or religions that have very defined Aspects and Attributes of their deity. The Shards are portions of God, after all Given the strong duality implied by Hero of Ages is easily explained by the fact that only Preservation and Ruin were known about at all in the book. Greater knowledge of the Cosmere and its history are absent.

In response to the OP, though, 50,000 breaths might not be THAT many. Create a culture where the dying donate their Breath before they go, throw in a healthy dash of nationalism, a pinch of fearmongering, and coat it all with the trappings of a pseudo-religion/cult, and depending on the population size it could be done in under a year. Maybe some hero-worship and prioritization of the Champion Savior over the individual or group. There are some similarities to this today already, but on an economic sense. The US military focuses on concentrating a significant amount of power (Breath) onto a relatively small number of Champions (military--specifically, the super-advanced air and naval superiority advantages) to protect the rest of the group. If you think of Breath as just another economic resource (which it is in-world, to an extent) then the more pressing question that I always had was, "Only 50,000? How tiny is that population?"

Hi maxal, I still lurk around, but don't post all that much anymore--most of what I have to say has already been said One thing that I did forget to mention in the last post, though, is that I think it IS important for there to be a solid, relatable hero in the more traditional sense. Roshar is so alien that the majority of readers need to have that something that is normal, to use as a reference point. I'm very eagerly awaiting Oathbringer, where I assume we will get to see a comparison of a traditional hero with an anti-hero (The Blackthorn). Although, that might be a better fit for a different thread.

Cam here to say this. Saw it was already said.

Her actions have been heroic, but she hasn't had a moment of heroism like Kaladin (or Dalinar, or Renarin) have had. In Western culture, and especially for the US (I can't speak for others, so very possibly much more) the concept of a hero is very directly tied in with someone who very physically stands against evil/darkness/the antagonist and does not back down. Shallan's gifts aren't so very strong in this area, and so she has played to her strengths instead. The scenes where she is finding the Gate and activating it and saving everyone could have been written as her moment of badass heroism--but they weren't. On an emotional impact, Adolin's duel in the Storm was stronger, let alone Kaladin's fight with Szeth which stood head and shoulders higher than any other character's climactic arc in SA so far. So people that are already put off by her lies see her essentially running away from the fight, fleeing--while Kaladin the Straightforward meets and kills The Evil while flying in the sky. It will always be hard for any other character to compare with Kaladin as far as how relatable/sympathetic they are simply because of the amount of screen-time that he gets and how integral he is to the series, combined with acting very similarly to how we would expect a traditional hero to act (when he's not being Broody McAngst). Shallan not getting a single scene where she gets to be the unalloyed hero will always make her seem less heroic, and by comparison, not a hero. Dalinar was established as a hero early on when he wrestled with the Chasmfiend to save Elhokar. Renarin entered the pit to save his brother. Adolin has a number of small scenes as well, but perhaps the point where he murders Sadeas is my favorite--he sees that Sadeas being left alive is evil, and so he acts upon it, but then also reacts with horror at what he did. I absolutely love Shallan as a character, and I love Sanderson as an author, but he hasn't done her any favors to readers that aren't predisposed to see someone as a hero for smiling and laughing rather than curling into a ball and crying until the world ends. (Also, holy cow, reading through this thread brought back some memories. And I wrote this response before I re-read any of the posts, so meh if I ended up repeating myself )

I am doing NaNoWriMo this year, too! For those that have had problems in the past, the #1 best way that I have found to stay motivated is through the use of write-ins. These are magical things where people that you may or may not know gather in a neutral setting (like Starbucks, or the mall, or a bar) and spend the time focusing on writing and writing-related issues. One of the common aspects of write-ins is the use of something called a 'word war.' Although you're allowed (and encouraged!) to write throughout the duration of the write-in, during a word-war everyone shuts up and concentrates on just writing, nothing but writing, as fast as they can. These usually last 5-7 minutes. They are fantastic ways to get words on page and ideas written down (and also some of the most epic typos ever. I have a friend who should honestly publish a work of her typos, because it is freaking HILARIOUS.) My user-name is kaellok on the NaNo page, feel free to add me as a writing buddy. And if you're in the Seattle area, I know all the best write-ins with the best people. Oh, and if you're shy or agoraphobic but still want a little bit of the write-in feel, Seattle has an IRC chatroom devoted to just this. Including NaNoBot, who is a single-minded, uncaring machine that forces you to write. You can check out the details at http://nanowrimo.org/forums/usa-washington-seattle/threads/385180.

Please consider my upvote as a hug. And have another one here, too.

To the first: that's my very point. As I understand it, unless he was given a timeframe to work within, then he had courses of action available that would have allowed him to uphold both laws. He chose not to, in order to perfectly uphold the single law of the Shin (obey the holder of the oathstone). Presumably, the Shin have laws against murder as well, so he'd technically be breaking those, too. And, it's this lack/failure that makes it so unlikely for a highspren to have come along to bond with him prior to now. To the second: It's unclear exactly how Nightblood would go about killing a spren. It's possible that Nightblood could cleave through one (I recall a WoB to this effect, but have had trouble finding it again.) It's also possible that the natural Investiture-stealing inherent to Nightblood would spread to any spren that have manifested on the Physical Realm; it seems significantly less likely to affect the Cognitive or Spiritual, although I'm not aware of any WoB specifically referencing this. The Nahel Bond is specifically what happens when a spren bonds with someone to create a Surgebinder. Spren are Splinters; Nightblood is a Splinter. There are certain similarities in how things work, but not necessarily in the outcomes. Edit: found a couple of WoB regarding Nightblood, adding them here just 'cuz they're interesting.

snippity snip! Nale is quite, quite mad--along with probably all of the Heralds. They all seem to have turned into twisted versions of themselves. Also, the group that he's with don't seem to be Radiants at all, but just a collection of people. I do believe that this group, that are not Radiants but calling themselves Skybreakers, would absolutely accept Szeth purely on the say-so of Nale. From the little we see of them, they don't seem to be keen on questioning him, or thinking for themselves, but instead just mindlessly obeying--although this might just be me. I just don't see any group that actually cares about the Second Ideal of the Radiant Skybreakers accepting him because of his actions thus far. (Because words are funny, I don't think that his previous actions will preclude the possibility of joining in the future; I simply think that he has yet to show true devotion to following/upholding the law--especially since he had chances and occasions where it seems that he had occasions where he could have and didn't, didn't even try.) If there's some Law above all the others that this Ideal is referring to, and Szeth happens to accidentally be following it and petty laws of individual nations that include the like of 'murder' and 'assassination' and 'burglary' and 'theft' and 'vandalism' and 'destruction of property' and 'assault' don't count, then maybe you and all of the many, many others that think as you do are right. I'm just not seeing it, though; I'm seeing hints at something much, much deeper. (I mean, it's either that, or a story that doesn't ring true to me and is deeply unsatisfying to me--and Sanderson has yet to do that )

tl;dr: Szeth has been upholding a law at the expense of all others. If this attracted a Highspren, then they aren't nearly as concerned with the law as the Skybreaker's Second Ideal would imply. Let's go with what I think you're saying here for a moment. (Apologies if I have this wrong.) Claim: The law is to obey the holder of the oathstone. Szeth obeys this law. Because Szeth obeys this law, he should/could have attracted a Highspren. Counter: Szeth killed people in Azir. Many, many times. He is referred to as a desolation, as a force of nature. This heavily implies that the killings were not, in any way, lawful. Nalan, while there, has gone through the steps to ensure that his own killings are lawful in nature--which means that it's a possibility that could happen. That there is a route for these to take. That Szeth could have obtained the permission to slaughter the nation's leader through legal channels, and this would have been following the dictates of the holder of his oathstone unless the holder also specifically forbade him to do so. So, we arrive at a conundrum: either Szeth broke the law by not following the law on his own, or Szeth broke the law by following a different law. Either way, Szeth broke the law. It makes zero actual sense for Szeth to be included in a group that believes in upholding the law above all else. Szeth chose which law to uphold and obey, which means he also willfully chose to break others (unless there is some type of magical coercion or compulsion placed upon the oathstone, but there's really no evidence of that being the case.) It doesn't matter that to uphold the one law, he had to break the others--the Skybreakers are concerned with upholding the law, not of dealing with the consequences when it is impossible to uphold the law. It is possible for it to be impossible to uphold the law (this absolutely happens in the real world within just the US; I see no reason for it to be any different in a fantasy world involving multiple nations). The Skybreakers don't seem to be very forgiving to people who break the law, and so should show no mercy towards Szeth. I think he has a very different fate in store. It seems very likely to me that Nalan is continuing to twist and abuse the laws of nations to create circumstances and events that are favorable to his plans (whatever they may be.)