insert_anagram_here

For some inexplicable reason I visualize Molly C. Quinn as Shallan.

I'm not sure if this is relevant to the topic or not, or if already mentioned. Is it possible that aluminum can maybe be found in Aimia? I mean, I've already read somewhere that based on the map pattern of Roshar it's easy to assume that Aimia wasn't originally part of the planet's surface. Maybe that part was formed when an aluminum meteorite crashed from space? If I'm completely running off a tangent here, please enlighten me.

Oh Oh! And the triple moon gravitational forces can be used to bend the trajectory of a hypothetical Shardbullet in order to reach other planet targets! ...or ...or ...Shardshuttles... in order to escape a dying ...Roshar!

I loved The Last Jedi movie. Yes, it had low points, but overall I loved it and enjoyed it so much I wanted to watch it again when the credits rolled. I especially loved how the first part was paralleled to the original IV and V episodes, but the second part (on Crait) was a thing of its own, visually spectacular and powerful and bringing the series into another era. Force Awakens was about reviving the fandom and it made sense that it reminded us so much about the original movies, but The Last Jedi is the turning point, preparing us to where Disney is planning on taking us from now on. Granted I'm not the fandom's most biggest fan, who goes out to read canon and non-canon novels and watch the cartoon series for the sake of the story but, frankly, the movies were not made for just those people. You need to watch each movie as a thing of its own, that can bring new fans into the franchise, and that doesn't happen with suckling on the same tropes that have been done for generations. A lot of people are upset about the Poe's / the Canto Bight plan failure and how Luke reappears defeated, weak and estranged in this sequel. These people need to re-watch it, because they were so caught up on their own expectations that they failed to pay attention to what the movie was about. The point of the movie is Failure and how we need to accept and learn from our mistakes in order to come back stronger. That's the way we get retribution from the past or become more powerful. ("Let the past die. Kill it if you have to. It's the only way to become what you were meant to be.) On the other hand, I have a few strong points I was not satisfied with, mainly screen time of main characters VS supportive characters. I understand that they wanted to introduce Rose into this movie, but the side quest with Finn took way too much time that did not offer any character depth but, at most, lukewarm comedy and pokemon mounts. If I was a director, I would montage a lot of that in the crem pile. Another thing that bothers me is that we had amazing performances by Mark Hamill and Adam Driver that we couldn't get enough, why didn't we have any more of that? Two of our main characters have experienced a turning point in their lives during that flashback Jedi training, but it was all limited to a couple of screens we already deduced from the trailers. This was the point were they would explain why Ben rebelled against his Jedi training, why he turned into Kylo Ren and why he ultimately killed his own father. I mean, this movie was ultimately leading us to Luke's death, maybe we needed a better explanation, better character buildup, of how he indeed failed Ben, in order to accept a necessary death for retribution. Instead we got a triple take on a single moment in time (Luke waking Ben in the middle of the night) which, frankly, is misleading in a lot of inappropriate ways and cheapens the plot dynamic.

I think I was misunderstood (yet again!) on what I was trying to say with the excerpt I used with Veil. It seems I do miss a lot of English semantic details and please excuse me for that. I didn't mean to say that Veil is the true Shallan personality but possibly the one that pre-existed the other ones. The first time that she pushed down a part of herself in order to 'not break but crack', that first part of her is what she later named as Veil. Described in the book as "the frenzied child who had murdered her mother. The cornered woman who had stabbed Tyn through the chest. (...) the part of her that hated the way everyone assumed she was so nice, so sweet. The part of her that hated being described as diverting or clever." edit: By no means that personality is the full Shallan, because frankly that one would be an undeveloped person, a child, compared to the Shallan of multiple personalities and view points. She definitely needs to re-integrate all her character traits and memories into one, in order to balance out who the real Shallan actually is.

Amazing! @Ailvara I'll be adding my comments in there if that's okay. I'll try to cite as much as I can.

I was always under the impression that spren belonged in the Cognitive realm, but human emotions and gems were what lured them to manifest in the Physical Realm. So when a strong Nahel bond was formed between a spren and a human, that spren gained the ability to manifest itself in the Physical Realm at the bonded human's will. That's why it's body can become a weapon, and as most Radiants wanted, a Shardblade. That bond with a human would make it become even more powerful and gain self awareness, learn how to exist in the Physical realm, by taking the human's behavior as an example kind of like a child does. (That's why Venli's spren develops a Listerner-kind of behavior). Now when that bond is severed, the oath is broken, the spren basically disconnects from its Physical realm manifestation, but it doesn't go back to being a simple spren in the Cognitive realm. Because it has developed into a self aware being, it can be heart broken by the human's betrayal and might wander the Cognitive realm with burned eyes. Now what fabrial technology brought, is that humans can use gems to bond spren back on to the Shardblades. The initial spren of the Shardblade, does not have a choice on the matter, so it is somehow enslaved by the gem. That's why Maya is close to Adolin when he enters Shadesmar. Because of the gem. So where the missing shardblades have gone? Well, the ones that were somehow fabrial-bonded to humans are being passed down from a person to another person, but my best guess it that the rest of them have decayed and broken down to dust and possibly now part of other life forms on Roshar. (gemhearts maybe?)

I love this approach for some reason. Basically it simplifies what is the difference between the two Shards, and possibly why Odium is unable to fully manifest in Roshar. Maybe he is afraid of being binded instead of drawing the Investiture into himself. It could be a test for Moash to make sure that he isn't a 'son of Honour', that Honour's investiture cannot reside inside him, anymore. Or it could be as it was said earlier, the Fused were afraid of the blade itself. (coincidental Joe Ambercombie reference) So my theory is that Honour's Investiture is what made the Heralds come back to life, basically binding their presence from the Spiritual realm back to the Physical one. (like Perpendicularity ?) So the saphire can trap Jezrien's Honour essense, much like spren are trapped in fabrials and Unmade in perfect gems. Sadly, that means that Jezrien is now dead From the Endnote of The Way of Kings we have the rest of the essence information linked to this. So yes, I agree that this will be his course of action from now on, probably by combining all essenses into one weapon and/or person (Champion of Nine Shadows?). Not sure about combining all 10 essenses though. That could possibly have the opposite effect to what Odium wants. (Honour's resurrection maybe? haha.. I only dare to hope)

Yeah, sure. That's how I took it the first time I read it too. That's how red herrings work, right? But you have to admit, Shallan is not present at this moment, but Veil is instead. She uses the first person (I/my) for Veil and third person (she/her) for Shallan. She says "my sword" so that's Veil's sword, before "she" (Shallan) said the oaths. If you believe I'm still reading too much into it, okay sure, no problem. But the fact is, that these bits exist in the books, either if they are perfectly clear or not.

And then I find these bits: So Veil existed back when Shallan had her sword, back before she said the oaths, back when she was very young. She says that "Veil hadn’t lived through those days" but this contradicts the previous statements AND Pattern hums in warning, which means he knows that is a lie too. So Veil is not necessarily someone that was created recently in WoR, but possibly Shallan's original personality.

End Note of The Way of Kings End Note of Words of Radiance End Note of Oathbringer

I find it highly dishonorable that just because I made another post on attempting to discuss Adolin's morality (BTW I hardly got any logical feedback in there, but was thoroughly bashed for even entertaining the possibility of interpreting Adolin as immoral) is being used as a counter argument for the whole Shalladin approach. That was my personal post on the matter and it does not correlate with the rest of the people arguing on this thread. On the contrary, I think most people think Adolin as the perfect good guy on either side of the spectrum. Regarding the other post, the whole experience was extremely disturbing to me and I've been feeling very apprehensive in posting anything since that thread was closed down. I may appear as a logical person but that doesn't mean that I didn't feel harassed and bullied and quite frankly very unwelcome in the forums (especially by a moderator's PM the next day, after the whole thing was done and closed). Yes, I was emotionally charged when I used 'ph' on that specific post, but other than that, I certainly wasn't trolling when I made the original post and I was completely sincere in creating a logical and respectful discussion. Anyway, I've had a lot of things to say relating to the last few pages of this thread (especially where someone was comparing Adolin killing unarmed Sadeas to under-aged Shallan killing her father for causing harm to his own family)but as I said above I will take my leave before I start an avalanche all over again.

Let me state firstly that I have no evidence for the theories I am about to say, they are a matter of opinion and admittedly, a possible misinterpretation of what I've read in OB. Proving that any of my opinions are invalid with in-book quotes is more than welcome, as my ulterior purpose is to figure out what is a 'fact' within the books and not persuade people into my tin foil hat theories. Sometimes they even clash(!) so I'm not backing them with a full conviction. I'm just trying to provide 'food for thought'. Anyway... I wouldn't say trustworthy exactly, but why would she reveal herself as a friendly, warn of the Oathgate malfunction and Ashertmarn's trap, if she could just attack first and (potentially do more damage that way with the element of surprise)? From the fact that Sja-anat corrupted Glys, it's obvious that she has the power to corrupt "nahel-bond" level of spren. Meaning that she, as an Unmade, is a "superior" kind of spren, but I am not so sure if she could corrupt a 'same level' spren, like Ashertmarn. This could possibly be true if Sja-anat is somehow more powerful than the rest of the Unmade and that could be argued by the fact that she is self aware, when the others are fully controlled by Odium. So either: (1) she is in the process of gaining power, has reached self awareness level but is still struggling to take back whatever part of her Odium 'compels' - She is truthful (2) she is one of the most powerful Unmade, potentially corrupting and controlling other Unmade into doing Odium's bidding - She is manipulative For (2) my only counter argument would be 'why would she warn about Ashertmarn's trap in the first place' if it's all part of the plan? Either way, the only thing that seems sure to me is that Odium is powerful enough to compel the Unmade. Not necessarily a higher degree of self awareness, but maybe following direct commands through a direct link (kind of like a prompter talking through an ear piece)? So that command could potentially just say 'flee' to Ashertmarn and it would instantly obey even if it is a mindless Unmade. Now who that prompter was..., I'm putting my chips on Odium. So the trap was laid by Ashertmarn, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Ashertmarn was aware of doing setting it. Sja-anat doesn't say 'Ashertmarn is tricking you', but 'it' -meaning the whole encounter- was a trap. 'Son' is deliberately vague I think. The narrative lets you conclude that she means Glys, knowing that Glys got corrupted (as she calls the corrupted spren 'her children') but how would Sja-anat know that Shallan would be able to contact Glys? Renarin and Glys weren't even there. But, if we follow this theory: ... It could mean that maybe by 'son' she maybe meant Pattern, who was actually there with Shallan. Could it be that she is looking for a prospect of finding a safer home for her children ?

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/219-words-of-radiance-philadelphia-signing/#e7848 I'm not sure if you meant people (in book) or people (in real life) so I'm trying to clear this up. He says characters in the WoB, so he means in book. And he also says there are lots of ramifications. Like maybe not all of KR Orders would agree with it?

I started this as a logical discussion, placed an argument and challenged you for in book text as factual counter examples to prove the invalidity of that initial statement, because it is the only sure and logically way to prove invalidity (at least that's what I learned from Discrete Mathematics classes) Otherwise we will argue until eternity, exchanging misunderstood speculated theoretical opinions at one another, in danger of ending up bullying instead of discussing. Now, I admit my initial assumption that people commenting on this post are aware of "Proving Invalidity: The Counterexample Method" was the one that was moot to begin with, therefore before you all attack me for trying to do what seemed to me the logical thing to do at that point, I'd ask you to chill the storm down and ignore this thread (until I find a way to delete it and the end the streaming notification feedback), because quite frankly it has indeed turned up in a one sided dog-piling of illogical phallacies that provide nothing to the original argument.

Too late for that

I get it. Point taken.

@Willow@Ookla the Obtuse You are basically saying the same thing, right? He admitted to the murder only to Shallan and Dalinar. The Sadeas army wasn't an ally for a long time now, so there was no reputation to lose there in the first place. They were practically in civil war, that's why he killed Sadeas, to cut the problem from the root. He refuses to be king because he believes he will not do a good job and it will exactly harm the family's reputation. Instead they let Jasnah be a queen because she obviously will do a better job than him. At the end nobody didn't even abdicate the throne, because Elhokar's son is still alive, Jasnah will only be a Queen Regent until he comes of age. I'm not sure what the question is to be honest but I'l try to clarify nonetheless. I'm asking for parts in the book where he does a good deed that does not favour his family's influence over the kingdom, but he does it either way because he personally thinks it's the right thing to do. The only example given so far in all these comments is that he stays with Kaladin in jail because it didn't seem right. ( I could still debate that it is in Kholin family favour to gain influence over dark-eyes, but for the sake of the argument, let's say that it's still valid ) Oh I'm not demanding you to prove anything, I'm only asking for the evidence you base that he has a personal innate sense of moral that doesn't coincide with Kholinar's (and of course Dalinar's) power over the kingdom. If you do not want to participate you might as well ignore my thread.

Okay, it still seems that noone is getting the point of the thread. I do not want to debate this with you because we obviously disagree on what 'moral' means. That is irrelevant to what I'm asking here. I'm asking for PROOF that he has a personal moral code that does not coincide with his family gaining power. I'm trying to make my point clearer actually, but I seem to constantly fail. I am indeed saying I do not have proof that he has a personal moral code, that does not coincide with his family gaining power. Specifically I need counter examples to my assumption as to prove the bold sentence above as valid. (yeah, I can see how a lot of people get confused here)

You are basically saying the same thing I wanted to say, but I've lost my words in the process. We agree that Adolin lives by a different moral code uniquely shaped by the militaristic culture he lives in, where his family happens to be on the top of that power pyramid. Not immoral at all, but the criminal needs to be an imminent threat, at least have his weapon out. Sades didn't. Please provide exact location in the books. The rest of your arguments are debatable but beside the point of the thread. @Ookla the Apostate@GoddessIMHO@Ookla the Obtuse@aemetha@king of nowhere My point for making this thread isn't about what you and I think about his morality, but to define where his morality stands. I believe his morality is 'I'd everything to keep the Kholin family in power' and I ask people to give counter examples from the books that show his personal moral code, where he does something that does not give power to the Kholin family, but he does it either way because he thinks it's the right thing to do. I added the Sadeas murder as a second question, in order to see where people stand in terms of how moral it is to kill an unarmed evil man. I'll try to make these more obvious in the original post.

Thank you! This is exactly what I needed here. I'll read up the whole chapter and get back to you. @king of nowhereI've read your post and I've added the [OB] prefix if you wish to go explicit on any Oathbringer bits. I'll get back to your post as well in a few hours.

Killing another person either good or evil is not moral, that's why we have created laws. To incarcerate the evil ones and not necessarily kill them. Otherwise police officers should be allowed to kill on the spot. So no, murdering Sadeas because he was a threat to the Kholin family, clearly is not a moral thing to do. It's not even lawful. He was driven by a sense to protect his family, specifically his father's power. That's what made him snap. The only time I find it moral to kill another person is only in defense of another person, that means that their life is in intimidate danger. But not if you have the choice to stop them without bringing them any harm. Sadeas wasn't even able to defend himself, much less in position to kill anyone. He didn't even say he was going to kill Dalinar, just take his power.

I've found the prostitute bit. It's on location 13481 of the Way of Kings. After reading it though, I still cannot see Adolin's personal sense of moral here either. He doesn't place himself in danger or against a more powerful person. It could be a public exhibition of power, as he only scared away the Sadeas officer by only summoning his Shardblade. When the prostitute offers him service without charge: So he is aware of what happening here will reach his father's ears. He probably did it to show off Kholin power and their ability of upholding the old ways. Granted Kaladin is prejudiced against light-eyes, but you have to admit that is a sound argument right there. If Adolin was already suspecting Amaram, it exactly proves that he used Kaladin's testimony as a justification to his suspicion and not because he was kind-hearted enough to believe him. Either way, I want to find this bit and this part: and this part: Currently, I think that Adolin's sense of moral(if you can call it that) is "I'll do anything to keep my family and my father in power". And by anything he means even it breaks his father's code. But he does try to uphold his father's code, except if he can get away with not to. Not because he feels it's the right thing to do, it's not about Justice, Equity and Good Conscience for him, but because by upholding Dalinar's law, and enforcing it on the rest of society, he makes sure his family stays in power. I understand the love for his family but I wouldn't kill another person for it. Not even if I could get away with it. That's the kind of sense of moral I think he lacks. The part of you that says 'that's another sentient being, you don't have the right to take it's life'. As you say, I would make sure Sadeas was back in Alethkar (disgraced), and lost his influence, but I would not kill him.

@Willow Thank you for the feedback on Sadeas murder, we agree on a lot of points. I'd like to discuss whether he has a sense of morality outside of his 'sense of duty as a Kholin and royal family'. For example, if he lost his place as royalty of his nation, or if his Father lost power, or if the social classes of light-eyes/dark-eyes were disbanded, would he still be a moral person? So you personally believe that 'defense of the prostitute in Sadeas' camp' and 'broke a pre-made appointment with another lighteyes to help a woman' show his personal sense of moral? Also, can you point me into those bits in the books? You are right! I clearly messed up the quotes there. The cold blood bit is evident in number 3., because he wanted to kill Sadeas beforehand. But you are right, I'll remove 5. because it's null and void.

As someone stated earlier, it's not about the reader age but the reader level. If the minimum requirement of reader level isn't very high you can read that book either way. You might not necessarily pick up 100% of the meaning but that isn't necessarily about age but because you weren't interested in some bits as you are for others. Or you were not paying as much attention throughout all the scenes. I'd encourage you to go back and read one of the first good books you read and see how much difference your reader level experience will give you. Because books aren't always just about the story's ending, there is a lot more meaning if you read between the lines. It's about the journey, not the destination. I'm a lot older that a lot of young ones here, but I've only started reading fantasy books 6 years ago. Admittedly, I'm not a native English speaker and the Fantasy genre (which was what interests me) was never properly translated in my mother language. I did attempt to read LOTR around 10/11 years ago, but it was so hard for me to get my head around all the detailed landscapes. Eventually I tried again a few years later, but I was determined to find less heavy literature books, at least until I grew a better sense of vocabulary. Mistborn was one of those books. Stormlight Archive though, is way beyond that complexity in world building and metaphors and foreshadowing. It's challenging and so much more enjoyable to re-read, but at the same time it's not hard to read at all.