Leyrann

This theory is getting so many upvotes that, even though it most likely isn't true (with that WoB and all), it should be.

17 minutes ago, Calderis said:

It won't? So far, if you boil it down that far, the first three have amounted to "a desolation is coming... Oh, wait it's here." 

It discounts all subplots and twists and unexpected turns. 

It's like boiling era 1 down to "dealing with Ruin" 

The thing is, if the humans and singers are united and the Fused are gone, something else has to cause those sub-plots. And that would then be an enemy we haven't even seen hints of yet.

On 10-10-2018 at 6:22 PM, RShara said:

I think Odium will the the antagonist for the entire series. My personal theory is that book 5 will end with uniting with the Singers and stopping the threat of the Fused once and for all. Then the latter five will be delving into the nature of the bindings on Odium, and stopping him for good.

That won't be enough conflict for 5 SA-sized books. Something else will have to come into play.

19 hours ago, Stormlightning said:

I'm gonna throw a random thing out there that may support the "Broken One is Honor" theory. I made a note of it because I thought of this Death Rattle on a recent reread.

Somewhere, we learn that the words for "death" and "broken" in Alethi are really similar. Maybe when Navani is teaching Dalinar how to read? So, since we know how fond Brandon is of using badly recorded, corrupted, or mistranslated history to confuse us, it's possible that the person actually said "The Dying one reigns" which would make it clearly Honor instead of Odium.

It's fairly meaningless, except that I've come to believe that nothing Brandon writes is ever insignificant so there must be a reason that he included a scene about the confusion of these two words.

I can't remember those two words being similar... Any chance you can find the scene it's part of?

59 minutes ago, Willshaping Crasher said:

1. Do we know for sure that atium is exactly equal to the chunk removed?

Occam's Razor. I see no reason to assume it isn't.

1 hour ago, Willshaping Crasher said:

2. Atium is no longer created. The amount had to be quite small after Kelsier destroyed the Pits of Hathsin.  Vanishingly smaller after the final battle in HOA. How much atium do you believe is still in existance and does this energy not need an outlet?

To our knowledge, the only atium still in existence is the atium owned by Marsh. As for the outlet...

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/105-17th-shard-forum-qa/#e1155

Quote

rags

How is Harmony balanced when a part of Preservation's power is expended on human sentience? Isn't that what caused all the trouble to begin with?

Brandon Sanderson

Indeed. Hm... What could Sazed be doing with that extra power...

To my knowledge we don't actually know. There's a bunch of theories around though.

10 hours ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

(or at least the lust associated with romantic love)

This is, imo, the important distinction. To me, love isn't lust, but care. That certainly is the love of god the bible speaks about, which no doubt has been an influence for Brandon.

10 hours ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

I would argue that ambition is almost synonymous with passion viewed in a certain way. If you’re ambitious about something, it’s something you’re passionate about. 

I disagree.

Passion is personally valuing something even if it may not actually be of value; I'm very passionate about (real-time example) the League of Legends World Championship, but there's absolutely zero ambition involved in that anywhere.

Ambition, on the other hand is the drive to reach a 'better' place, often in a social context, like a higher-ranking job. Often, there's not a lot of passion required; you just try to be the best and advance. One might have the ambition to play a big role in politics for example. You don't actually need to be passionate about it; I think we can all name some politicians that we don't believe are passionate (we might name different ones though, so lets not actually do it), yet their ambition still brought them to their position.

What I dislike about this theory is that it feels too... random. I mean, they're all viable ideas that might occur, but there's no reason why this would occur, and not something else. Compare (WHEEL OF TIME SPOILERS) how the body swap between Rand and Moridin was foreshadowed through their bond and a number of other things to the point that basically everyone in the fandom was already convinced it would happen, and the question one of how it would happen, and some of these things (like the formation of the bond) go back all the way to book 7, which would be roundabout the point where we are in the Cosmere timeline; with the difference that Brandon is even more of a planner than Robert Jordan, and will therefore likely have even earlier foreshadowing.

So I'd kind of want to see WoBs or possible lines from the books that foreshadow something like this.

31 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

Plus, Odium can’t be ‘Passion’ because at least three of the other Shards not counting Odium have intents that are at least arguably types of passions, namely Honor, Devotion (love), and Ambition. At most Odium could only embody a certain range of passions, but not ‘Passion’ capital ‘P’.

I completely disagree with Honor being "Passion" and, in the context that Rayse considers it, I also disagree with Ambition being "Passion", as Rayse seems to consider it to be "strong emotion". In fact, I would argue that Devotion might not fit either; I consider Devotion to be a calm force, while Passion is a wild one. Not unlike Soothing versus Rioting.

2 minutes ago, Lushman said:

Yeah something has to happen. What I'm trying to say is that odium is a known "enemy". Ruin was a known "enemy" to a point. As in they knew about the shard towards the end of the hero of ages.

So what um trying to say is surely Brandon can't introduce something completely out of the blue to be the big bad for the stormlight archive without somehow foreshadowing or even bringing up something that might be cosmere deadly in his previous books. 

 

Now that I say that though. We still have a lot of material to wait for until all of this is complete. I could and most likely am so wrong

The thing is, Autonomy hasn't appeared in any way yet in Stormlight Archive, so she's no more likely than a shard we don't know about yet, as we know Brandon wants his series (including Stormlight Archive) to stand on themselves as much as possible.

Just now, Lushman said:

Well to me, I don't feel like odium could /would be the main antagonist throughout the entire SA. That's just milking it. But then again I could be wrong and it could be odium or even another shard we are yet to see. I'm just putting thoughts to paper.  

And hey I learnt how to quote 

There could also be another Shard coming into play if Odium is defeated, right?

I do agree that there's something going to happen, and in fact I wrote a (disproven) theory about it. If you compare with something like Mistborn, where it takes until the third book until you actually get to know Ruin and Preservation, it just doesn't make sense that we have all the pieces visible already in Stormlight Archive - Brandon likes his (well-foreshadowed) surprises far too much.

There's also the theory floating around that Roshar (the planet) is going to be destroyed at some point - perhaps even at the end of book 5 already. The second half of the series would then play on Ashyn, Braize (I believe we actually have it confirmed that the back half of the series will have scenes playing on Braize, though this could just be Herald flashbacks) or even Nalthis, as there's a few ties between Roshar and Nalthis already.

Before anything else, it's in your best interests to not accept Elephant Earwax' cookies, or anything else he offers. You've been warned.

As for the best compounded metal...

Gold is great, of course, as it turns you functionally immortal.

If available, however, atium would be preferable above that - you could die to wounds or the like, but you won't age, meaning you can extend your life span much longer than normal - the one thing gold can't do, as you'll keep aging.

Chromium is also potentially very interesting, as fortune seems to allow you to do some interesting things by knowing exactly what's going to happen in the future. Always being able to anticipate anything could be a very useful skill to have. With enough of it, you might even be able to emulate gold's effect in a different way - you'll be able to avoid getting hit in the first place.

Why do you think Autonomy would come in though, rather than someone else, or Odium lasting the entire Stormlight Archive?

@Fanghur Rahl I think I also speak for Quantus and Calderis when I say that it's not the definition of the Shards we disagree on, but rather that they would make a grouping of 3. Groupings in Shards are logically 2, 4 or even 8, as those are numbers you can divide 16 by. If you would include groups of 3, you would have a significant asymmetry somewhere, which would mean:

1. A bit of an 'ugly' coordination. It just doesn't feel nice to look at something and have it be asymmetrical. As Quantus said, aesthetically unpleasing.
2. A, to one degree or another, uneven split of Adonalsium, making the 16-way split look coincidental rather than it's neat 2*2*2*2.
3. It's against how Brandon works. His trilogy of trilogies (which admittedly got messed up), the metallic arts, surgebinding, the 10 Stormlight Archive books and even symmetry being so important in Vorin culture all speak to how much he likes symmetry. It would be strange for him to abandon that in a centerpiece of his overarching magnum epos.

So from all three of an artistic position, mathematical position, and (Cosmere-)writer position it simply doesn't make sense.

20 hours ago, Ripheus23 said:

OK but where did these people get the idea that they could defy or disagree with Shards from?

Most likely? They took the name 17th Shard upon themselves and none of the Shards was bothered by it enough to tell them off for it.

6 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

Weren’t you referencing the theory of intents that basically subdivides the 16 into four groups of four? If not then I apologize, as that was the theory I made my point against.

I was arguing that if the Shards can be grouped into subgroups, then it'll be in groups of two, four or eight, simply because those are the logical groups when you have 16 Shards. Juts like the metals in allomancy are in four groups of four, and in feruchemy they are in two groups of four and one group of eight.

7 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

it makes absolutely no sense that a God could have the intents of destruction/decay and preservation but NOT some kind of growth/progression. 

Oh, I'm not saying that. I just don't think that those three make some kind of basic trio or something.

4 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

Wanton destruction WAS how Ati interpreted Ruin, regardless of what he said to the contrary.

So I can't find the WoB (I spent a good ten minutes looking for it), but Brandon has said somewhere that Ati's vision of Ruin was "one of the better versions of Ruin possible".

24 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

At any rate, my point is that Ruin is basically about breaking things down, making things more disordered, unrefined, etc.

Agreed. That is, in my view, what change without a purpose is.

24 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

while I view Cultivation as being about selectively building things up, refining things, and increasing complexity.

Again, agreed. I don't think that makes them opposite, however, as they are both about change, it's just that Cultivation only changes certain things.

25 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

And as for your point of divisions of four

Note that I don't necessarily agree with this. I just think that, if we can order the Shards, it will be in groups of two, four or eight. Otherwise it's just going to become too arbitrary. It's like having sixteen metals with three groups of 3, then a group of 5 and then two unconnected to anything; something like that. Just doesn't make sense.

26 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

we already have at least one other case of groups of Shards that clearly form a larger sub-unit, namely that of Devotion (which Brandon identifies as love) and Odium (hatred), and if I’m right, a third one embodying Objectivity or Dispassion

Also something I doubt, again see that theory I linked for what I believe to be true.

27 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

So I don’t really see how your point here can be correct in light of what we see in the books, and attempts to shoehorn it into the Shards always seems extremely contrived in my opinion (no offence intended, it’s just my honest opinion). 

I'm not trying to make a point at the moment, mostly just arguing against the Preservation-Ruin-Cultivation trio you mentioned. What's the point you thought I wanted to make?

1 minute ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

Well, I don’t see any other way of looking at what basically amounts to the Cosmere-equivalent equivalent of the Hindu Trimurti. Decay - Preservation - Growth. You can view Adonalsium in many different ways, but even Mistborn explicitly defines Ruin and Preservation in this way, and if Ruin and Preservation are, then so are Cultivation and Preservation. And by extension, Ruin and Cultivation as well. Unless you flat-out reject that Cultivation’s intent is basically ‘change to growth, refinement, and complexity’, which is pretty much exactly how she describes herself as well as the picture her actions paint.

I consider Ruin and Preservation to be hard opposites (the strongest opposites in the entire roster), while I consider Cultivation to be a different force that, like Ruin, also aims for change (and is therefore opposed to Preservation) but, contrary to Ruin, aims for changes of a specific kind (in this case, directed growth) rather than any change. I'm not familiar with Hinduism, but I don't see why these three Shards - or any Shards - should have direct equivalents in the real world.

On top of that, the Cosmere - and in particular the Shards - are 16-centric, so if one were to make groups, groups of 4 would make much more sense than groups of 3.

I also want to point out that "Decay" is arguably just Ati's interpretation of Ruin's Intent; wanton destruction instead of natural decay could also have been an interpretation.

1 hour ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

True, but in the case of Ruin, Preservation, and Cultivation, the inter-relatedness is far more striking. They’re basically three pieces of a larger ‘sub-unit’ of Adonalsium.

I fundamentally disagree.

13 minutes ago, animalia said:

Which one is that again? I am on my phone so it’s hard to tell?

It was a bit higher up than I thought:

1 hour ago, animalia said:

So when did this theory get RShara'd again?

Somewhere around post 15.

21 hours ago, goody153 said:

I don't think Sazed could just dump the extra Ruin to Nightblood like it was nothing. 

Don't forget that "extra" ruin is equivalent to literally giving sapience to an entire species(it was equivalent to preservations missing power that gives Scadrians mind/soul) and why Ruin/Preservation are literally equal. 

That was a huge chunk of shard power that would still make Nightblood look insignificant unless Nightblood is heavier than all the people in a Scadrial.

And wasn't there an uppercap something could be invested ? 

4 hours ago, Willshaping Crasher said:

I'm not sure this can be used as a standard.  Humans on Scadrial contain "more" preservation than ruin.  However, what this means is undefined except in esoteric terms such as "imbalance". In addition, I'm not sure weight (heavier/lighter) can be used as a measure.  This could be more cognitive or spiritual.  I'm not sure you can quantify it.

 

The chunk Preservation had removed from Ruin was the atium, so I think it's safe to assume that, in physical form, the chunk is equal to all the atium there is. Which, I would say, is quite a bit larger than Nightblood.

6 hours ago, Sunbringer said:

The pre-chapter random messages in Oathbringer. In one of the parts there are a couple of letters from shards to "Cephandrius" who I think I found somewhere is Hoid.

Yes, he's called Bearer of the First Gem there. We don't hear anything else about the First Gem however, and we have no idea what it is.

(Cephandrius is Hoid by the way, yes)

4 hours ago, Sunbringer said:

WHERE DOES HE SAY THAT!!! I seriously need to check out wherever you found that.

Best way to find more is probably to just search "weapon adonalsium" on Arcanum: https://wob.coppermind.net/adv_search/?query=weapon+adonalsium

13 hours ago, animalia said:

It WOULD piggyback of this one though. Also I am only vaugly familiar with that term. What does it mean?

It means RShara completely countered the theory with a single WoB. I got the inspiration for the term from this post.

Hasn't Brandon said there have been multiple immigration waves to Roshar?

8 hours ago, Ripheus23 said:

I think the 17th Shard is as powerful as a Shard. That's why it's called "the 17th Shard." Not because of what it is as such but because of how powerful it is. So, I think they have a goal, or a mandate better put, which might be something like, "Prevent Adonalsium from being reforged," or, "Prevent a Vessel from picking up too many Shards," or whatever. (I can't remember if the 17th Shard seems to favor following Adonalsium's elder plan or if that was Frost or who knows what, but even if it was the 17th Shard, it could be that Adonalsium favored being Shattered so the 17th Shard is trying to follow Adonalsium by preventing a reforging scenario.) Whatever the policy is, events in MBE4 will threaten to violate said policy to some "unforgivable" degree, and the 17th Shard will threaten to destroy the entire Cosmere to prevent this violation from taking place. (I'm thinking of something like the Osterhagen key scenario in Dr. Who, when they were gonna blow up the Earth to prevent some Dalek super-plan from being executed.)

Uhm, the in-world 17thshard is actually named after us, implying the name may have been taken simply because it sounds good (because let's be real, it does). And haven't they been founded by Khriss?