agrabes

Szeth is probably my least favorite "main" character, mainly due to the lack of consequences for his actions and the retcon of his death or his resurrection pre-retcon. I don't like the way he seems to take the "just following orders" excuse for the many terrible things he has done. He was not under magical compulsion to do what he did, he chose to do it based on a personal code of values that he had to listen to his government/elders when they said he was "truthless." I get that part of the point of Szeth's story is that people's definition of honor can be different, and sometimes even contradict what a lot of people would call morally right. I can appreciate that as a good moral message for the book, but it doesn't mean I like Szeth's character. I thought he had a great story arc in tWoK and WoR - does a lot of bad deeds, but feels bad about it and then realizes what he's done is wrong and was entirely his own choice all along. Then he dies and pays the price. If it had ended there, he would probably be one of my favorite characters. Instead, he sort of pops back up and is told that everything he did was fine because he did what he thought was the law and then he moves on as if he never murdered dozens of people as part of a plan to plunge the world into chaos. I don't really get the feeling of person who is tortured by his past from Szeth the way I do from Dalinar. My most favorite through WoR was probably Shallan. I thought her character arc was really interesting and the way she tried to always make the best of bad situations, bring out the best in people despite having faced so many hardships herself, etc. I didn't like her OB arc, but depending on what she does in Book 4 and 5 if the overall arc continues to give better context and meaning to everything she went through and did in OB, then I could easily see myself enjoying that arc as well once I understand it in context. If Shallan continues on a path that isn't in my personal preference, then I'll probably default back to Kaladin for the same reasons as everybody else. Dalinar is a close third place.

I'm with you. Eshonai was always a minor character, so it's totally fine for her to disappear after two books. More than anything, I'm interested in seeing why Sanderson wants to tell a flashback story of hers. The flashback sequences have always been my least favorite part of the SA books. Shallan's was so-so, but felt significant to me because it revealed a lot of interesting new things about her character that are very relevant to her current plot and that we couldn't have known otherwise. Kaladin's was also just OK, but told an interesting personal story that explained a little bit about what life was like for "regular" Alethi and what had started his life on a dark turn. Dalinar's, imo, was lame. Just about everything we learned from the story that was relevant to Dalinar's current character or the overall plot could have been better told without doing flashbacks. I just couldn't get invested in characters who (other than Dalinar himself) are all dead now. I would have been happier if the flashbacks were about half the length. I think Sanderson is trying tell us something with his "killing his darlings" comment. He talks about this on the Writing Excuses podcast, a phrase he has for the need to kill off ideas that you as a writer think will be great in theory, but are either too hard to pull off in practice or just aren't nearly as exciting to anyone other than you. I think he set up the idea of having a certain structure for each SA book and sometimes the overall book suffers for it. What could a set of flashbacks with Eshonai and/or Venli tell us that is relevant to the characters and story we see in the main plot? Maybe Venli's motivations and reasons for doing what she did? He may be considering either changing or pulling back on the flashback structure in general. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of faith in Sanderson and whatever he ultimately does will be great, but so far the flashbacks have been (imo) the least great part of it.

Here are my thoughts: Group 1 Major POV: Kaladin Szeth Venli Group 1 Minor POV: Adolin Group 1 Minimal/No POV: Renarin Group 1 Thoughts: I think Kaladin and Szeth will be sent on some mission, along with Adolin and Renarin and likely other minor characters. They will eventually encounter Venli, who starts off separate from them. Following past precedence from what Sanderson has written, he considers Adolin a secondary character (though a fan favorite) and will keep his viewpoints at a similar level to OB. They will bring Renarin because they want his healing and future sight powers, but he will stay as a non-POV character or only very short scenes with POV. Group 2: Shallan Jasnah Group 2 Thoughts: I think the year gap between OB and Book 4 will give our heroes time to realize life is difficult, if not impossible, in Urithiru without all its fabrials working. As the two smartest radiants, these two will be given the task to make Urithiru work again. They will probably receive support from Navani and any others who aren't sent out on the main mission that group 1 is tasked with. Group 3: Dalinar Lift Group 3 Thoughts: I could see group 3 going in one of two ways - one: it's a political story with Dalinar trying to forge alliances with Azir and other nations. Lift is pulled in due to her ties with Emperor Gawx. She doesn't want to be a politician, but is forced into the role because she's the only one they have that has powerful ties. The other alternative is we see a plot with Ash and Taln doing something. I feel like the Heralds have to try to do something now that they know the desolation is here again. It would make sense the way Sanderson described Group 3 as just sort of keeping track of what certain characters are doing. So, Ash and Taln may have now regained enough sanity to believe they need to gather up the Heralds they can and try to help/do their duty.

Where have all the shardblades gone? Long time passing. Where have all the shardblades gone, long long time ago? Where have all the shardblades gone? Young girls pick them, every one. When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?

After following this whole discussion, I feel like people just got way too dug in on points that don't really mean much in the long run. IMO - you are right that we don't know for sure everything that's going on in the world of Roshar and because of that and the fact that this is a fantasy novel where anything can happen based on what Brandon Sanderson wants to happen, they could invent synthetic gemstones. I wouldn't be hugely surprised if it happens sometime in the next 7 SA books. Certain societies can be well ahead of the curve of the rest of the world - for example China vs. the West and Middle East after the fall of the Western Roman Empire until the 1400-1500s to the point that they may have technology that seems like magic to other people. So it's possible that Roshar could develop artificial gemstones without going through the same gradual steps and progress that happened on Earth just like the Chinese invented gunpowder or the Romans invented concrete well in advance of the rest of the world. That said, I also think Karger is right that based on what we have seen on screen and general knowledge of how people make discoveries in science, it doesn't make sense that they actually would make that discovery unless they are told how to do it through the Heralds or some other external knowledge source. What we see in the world just seems to be way too deficient in the relevant areas of technology. To my knowledge, there has been no evidence on screen that they know how to use chemical processes to create synthetic substances of any kind. If they don't know that they can make a synthetic version of a naturally occurring substance, that makes an even larger barrier. I also don't think we should be sure that the Heralds themselves know enough chemistry that they could tell the people how to make artificial gemstones. They might know, or they might have a magical means of knowing, but based on what we know about the Heralds the individual people who became the Heralds haven't been shown to have technology at the same level as when artificial gemstones were invented on Earth. Another point is that I think if artificial gemstones were to be invented it would be a significant enough plot point that Sanderson would have started laying down breadcrumbs that people are working on it or something similar. Then again, maybe not. It could be a secret of one of the other nations that hasn't been on screen yet but will be revealed later on when things get desperate. *shrug* Anyway, my point is this is just something we can't know until we know. It seems unlikely they will invent it in the front 5 through normal scientific discovery based on what we have seen on screen is all I can say.

Fair enough. I do agree with your point that there is no such thing as "pure logic" - David Hume's philosophy taught me that. I don't agree that what you are describing in your second to last sentence is hate though. You might call it a hateful act and be correct in terms of how people speak using the English language, but a "hateful act" does not necessarily result from hate. It's called a hateful act because it's such a terrible act that people looking at it from the outside can't believe it would have been done unless the person who did it hated the victim. But what you've described is not a person who does hate, or have any feelings toward the victim. Instead, it sounds like a person who is experiencing depression or other mental illness trying to regain what they see as a normal mental state through whatever means they can. That's not hate, its desperation. A lot of "hateful" acts could be done out of desperation. For example - think of the drowning man who clings to his rescuer, tangling them up so both drown. He's killed someone who was trying to save him. If you describe it like that, it sounds like a very hateful person, but when you give it context you realize it was not a hateful act at all. Anyway, I don't think either one of us will bring the other around on this topic since it comes down to what we each fundamentally believe hate is defined as. It was interesting to learn your perspective though.

I think I understand what you are saying regarding hate as a lack of emotion from your reply to Genesis. In my opinion, you are confusing hate the emotion with "hate" as in "hate crimes". If I'm understanding you correctly, you are saying that if a person has a lack of emotion (in particular, empathy or sympathy) they are more likely to commit what society would call a hateful act against another person. For example, if a military dictator believes a certain group of people are subhuman, then he/she is more likely to commit genocide or other atrocities against that group. Or in a less extreme example, two people talking online don't see each other as real people so they are more likely to be mean to each other (i.e. Twitter, Youtube comments, etc). If that is what you are saying, I agree with you in the sense that lack of emotion can cause bad things to happen. However, I disagree that this is (necessarily) hate. Hate is an emotion. Lacking positive emotions (sympathy, empathy) does not mean that you lack negative emotions (anger, negative biases, prejudice). So in many cases while a person might claim to be acting without emotion, they are not. They are just acting without positive emotion. Also, if a person truly is acting based on what they think is objectively right based on pure logic, without any negative or positive emotion, then what they do is not hateful. It appears to people on the outside to be hateful and they will definitely be labelled as hateful, but it is not. It is still (probably) morally wrong, but you can do things that are morally wrong without hating the victim. You can commit a crime classified as a "hate crime" even if you don't actually hate the victim. Am on the right track here? I think it just comes down to the definition of hate. In terms of Odium, I am thinking in terms of the feeling/emotion of hate. Imo, this lines up with the in world intent based on Odium calling himself "passion". Yes, he is trying to spin things his way, but he's clearly basing it in the expectation that his intent is an emotion. If Odium is intended to represent hate in the "hate crimes" sense of the word, then you are probably right. In terms of worldhoppers, I'm not saying it's unfair to speculate about where they might be or even that there aren't any out there. And this is the Cosmere board so this is the appropriate place to do it. But, it gets tiresome to me that there are a lot of people who like to create grand cosmere-wide schemes out of things that are (imo) better as mysteries related to one particular planet or book series rather than the whole cosmere. For the most part, the people who are worldhoppers are almost beyond the edge of any of the main stories. The one exception being (if they do turn out to be worldhoppers, seems likely) the Ghostbloods. Otherwise, I think people are making a lot out of a little. That's just my opinion though. This stuff is fun for some people and I don't want to shut them down, but also want to point out that these are wild guesses that are unlikely to be true so don't act like it's proven fact.

I think you're getting a little overboard on this. Anger is a passion, the same as joy, sadness, sexual desire, etc. Passion just means strong emotion, it doesn't have to be positive or negative. The first definition of hate when you google it is "intense or passionate dislike." Hate requires passion. Is Odium just "Passion"? Probably not, but on screen so far he hasn't shown that he is just "hate" either. There's a good chance in the next book or two we will see that everything he has done is to lay the groundwork for increasing the hate in the world, but as of right now he's shown relatively little hate on screen. But to the main topic of this thread: misconceptions. I think the biggest misconception people have is that they are way too quick to tie things into grand schemes with world hoppers, shards on other planets, and the cosmere at large. If anything seems slightly unusual it must be a worldhopper. People are forgetting that there are a lot of mysteries left just on Roshar or Scadrial that are internal to that planet and its own story. The other world hopping stuff is just in the background right now. I don't think Sanderson is planning to bring that to the forefront for another 5-10 books in the cosmere based on what he's said on his blog or other posts.

I wouldn't say Skybreakers aren't dark - they are kind of dark as an order. At least, some of them are and always have been. They are the cops who hold you to the letter of the law just because they think it's right, even when they know everyone is worse off if they do. They don't really care about people, only the law. In some cases that can lead to a valiant, noble hero, sometimes it's kind of a tragic, but noble story, and sometimes it can be vindictive. I think the Skybreakers have been primarily in the vindictive territory ever since they went underground. I would also say though that the Skybreakers aren't on Odium's side - they are on the Singers' side which Odium also claims he is on. I don't think Nale is going to be taking orders from Odium, though he might take orders from the Fused. If he can be convinced that the interests of the Singers and Odium aren't in alignment, he will still actively fight Odium.

Yeah, the excerpt is an interesting point. I think what makes this interesting is that the Stormfather makes it clear that he doesn't full understand what happened in those days because he was just gaining consciousness and understanding. To me that means he remembers what happened, but his mental capacity at that time wasn't strong enough to understand anything beyond the face value. Sort of like how early on Syl doesn't understand Kaladin's emotions when he looks at the poison plant so she draws the wrong conclusion. His memory being "strange" is a flag to tell us that he doesn't know the full picture, or that he's probably interpreted something wrong. He says the Dawnshards were used to "destroy the Tranquilline Halls", referring to Ashyn. But, that could just as easily mean that the Dawnshards were used to seal the path to Ashyn, destroying the ability to access it, especially if humans didn't have the Dawnshards until they got to Roshar which seems likely. Another point is that in this memory, he references the Dawnshards and Surgebinders separately. He says the Dawnshards were used to destroy the Halls and says Surgebinders would destroy Roshar. The common link is the people - humans who are descended from the original people who left Ashyn. The weapon used doesn't necessarily seem to be the same. Honor was raving, probably about things the ancient Radiants didn't understand, like implications for the wider cosmere about what was happening on Roshar. I think it's most likely that Honor was misunderstood by the Radiants in those days and the Stormfather didn't understand his true intentions either. I don't think anything in the Stormfather's memory indicates that Ashyn was destroyed by surgebinding. I think you've kind of hit on a mystery that may not be explained until the back 5. It all ties back to the origins of the war and the desolations.

Yeah, to me the response is more surprise than anything. Like - he's trying to figure out what, if anything, from the text could have given someone that impression.

This is a really interesting idea. Thinking about this brings some good context to things like the decisions of the Knights Radiant to break their oaths, etc. I'm not sure you're totally right that there are huge inconsistencies here (in the sense of errors in Sanderson's writing) but I do think there is something to the stories about Ashyn's destruction and humanity's migration to Roshar that doesn't quite add up. I had a few thoughts on some of your points. 1 and 2 are inconsistent only if you assume that the Eila Stele is correct that Humans destroyed Ashyn with "Surgebinding, ancient powers of Spren and Surges." It seems logical that someone in world (particularly one of the "Dawnsingers" who knew only Roshar and its magic system) would assume that any magic could be performed only with Spren and Surges as they knew them. Also, keep in mind that "ancient powers of Spren and Surges" is not "Surgebinding" - there is no formal name in that phrase. The person who wrote the Eila Stele almost certainly had incomplete information and wrote the Stele from their own limited view. I don't think that Nohadon thinking that Surgebinding and Soulcasting are two totally different magic systems is particularly relevant. It's likely that people during his time had different perceptions about the nature of the magic. Think about "centripetal" and "centrifugal" forces, the forces involved in rotating objects. These concepts have been understood by physicists for hundreds of years, but Newton's conception of the idea in the 1600s is different than modern physics today. They were talking about the same effects, but over time we understood them better. In terms of Urithiru, I don't know that it's necessarily true that Urithiru wasn't the home on the Knights Radiant in Nohadon's time. Doesn't Nohadon make a pilgrimage to it that he describes in the in world "Way of Kings"? It's been a while since I read this section of the books, but I don't remember him saying anything that would indicate the Knights Radiant weren't based there. My impression of Ishar's contributions were that he built up the rules around the bonds. Prior to Ishar, the spren bonded with humans, formed shard blades and possibly even plate based on whatever each spren and human pair thought was appropriate. Most likely, the same powers were granted (two surges per radiant spren). It seems most likely because there isn't anything I've seen in the books that indicates otherwise. For example, Kaladin immediately had access to both surges once he had access to one. Neither he nor Shallan gained them one at a time. Then, there were probably issues like humans breaking bonds, abusing their powers, etc which created the need for Ishar to develop formal rules of how the bond should work and how the Knights Radiant should behave.

That's true - but I think the key difference is that he is displaying (and doing) things opposite of "hatred". For example, Ruin doesn't preserve or create in order to destroy. Preservation doesn't destroy things in order to preserve them. I don't remember really any details of the Endowment letter to Hoid, but I assume she wasn't taking things away (or whatever the opposite of Endowment could be). I honestly do think there is more to Odium than just basic "hatred." And maybe, like you say, it's just that Rayse has enough control over the Odium shard to delay the hatred (be nice for now, you'll get to really be hateful to them and make them hate you later on if they think you're their friend now). That could easily be the case, but I personally like the idea of Odium really being more like the concept of Divine Hatred or Righteous Fury than plain old hate.

I don't know that we've -never- seen him manifest anything that is other than hatred or consuming void. When he talks with people, he is compassionate and kind to them. He offers to (and genuinely does) take away their emotional suffering. Yes, he does have ulterior motives for doing it, but it hardly seems like something someone who is only consumed with hate would do. Compare and contrast Odium with Ruin and Preservation. Ruin never does anything other than advance the goals of destruction. In every scene that he appears, he is destroying or changing something. Preservation is always working with the goal of preserving things though he does once harm someone for the greater good. Odium has done things numerous times that could be described as friendly and compassionate. If he was fully hateful, I think you would see him acting that way in every scene. Rather than trying to console Dalinar and coax him into joining his side, Odium could have simply killed and tortured his friends and family until he did. I guess the point is - I do think Odium is different than just "hate". He has done things on screen that were not hateful. I think the "divine hatred" concept makes more sense - the hatred of a god for human/mortal failures, the judgment that comes from a perfect being that expects imperfect beings to live to his standards. That kind of hatred has some room or even an obligation for some level of kindness and compassion. It's almost like Odium tries to trick or seduce people to "sin" in a certain way so he can judge them harshly for their crimes, but until they do sin he is not able to let loose on them directly. Dalinar has obviously sinned in the past but Odium still plays nice. Odium seems to specifically try to get Dalinar to break his promises and commitments, so maybe that is the trigger for punishment? Either way, I don't think that Odium is hatred in the same way as Ruin is destruction.

I see your point and agree with a lot of the things you're saying (women don't need men to be happy, it's bad to treat someone as if they are an object rather than an individual with their own agency, Kalladin does lie about his feelings to Syl, etc), but I also disagree a bit. What you're saying is right and true in the high minded, objective sense but in my opinion it doesn't represent how people feel in the moment and how they react when someone or something very important to them is taken away. For example: If I put myself in Adolin's position - seeing my girlfriend apparently infatuated with another guy I would have a similar feeling. She's into someone else, what do I do? Maybe I was just imagining things, maybe it's just a passing thing - so I give it time. But after it happens time and again, it's clear she's not really that interested in me anymore so I confront her about it and tell her she can be with him instead. The way Adolin expressed this was pretty bad and seemed to indicate he treated her like just an object. That may indicate something fundamentally bad about Adolin, or may be just a character flaw/blind spot that he will correct later. I don't think having those feelings and/or reaction are fundamentally wrong. If he had said something like "You can be with him if you want" rather than "He can have you", I don't think anyone would have a problem. I think Adolin's feelings were clearly communicated to us as the readers in that scene in a way that makes sense to me personally as someone who has been in that type of position in my life. If I put myself in Kaladin's shoes - the girl I am romantically interested in to the point that I even broke my own moral code by trying to win over a woman engaged to someone else has just cut off all chance of us being together and marrying someone else - I would be upset. I don't think it's unnatural or wrong for Kaladin to be sad about the girl he was interested in getting with someone else. He's not a perfect, emotionless saint. I don't agree that people don't feel sad about losing unless they feel there was cheating or some other unfair play involved. I also don't agree that it's wrong or selfish to feel sad that you're not successful in love so long as you don't wallow in it for too long. People who lose are always going to feel sad - whatever the competition. If they feel the competition was unfair they'll be angry, not sad. In my own life, again, this doesn't ring true to me. If I am even moderately interested in someone, even if they eventually end up with someone who is a good friend of mine and probably a better match, I feel happy for them but still a bit sad. If I was strongly attracted to that person, I would feel devastated for myself while still being happy for them and trying to make sure everyone else thought I was good with it. I understand your point that Kaladin could be lying or downplaying things and I agree that he accepts Shallan's choice. I don't agree that his reaction seems natural or that it would make sense if he was hiding strong emotions about the whole thing based on how it was written. The lines about him being OK with it are his own thoughts, not what he says to Syl. Here is the line from the book: "He squinted down at Shallan and Adolin, and found that he couldn't be bitter. He didn't feel resignation either. Instead he felt ... agreement?" That line is (to me) Brandon Sanderson saying "this is 100% done and there will not be another page dedicated to it." In his own mind, Kaladin has said he's not bitter and he's not resigned, his only feeling about the situation is that he simply agrees the two of them should be together. That feels wrong and unnatural to me, it's disappointing. I would have liked it if the line read something like "...found that he couldn't be bitter. What is life without a little heartache?" But, that's just my thoughts. We'll see in Book 4.

This is a really good way to express the problems with OB. Too many extraneous story threads, not enough depth to the main ones. I'm sure he is aware of the problem like other people have said, but still I hope he resolves it in a satisfying way. This is exactly how I felt about the romantic arc. It was handled extremely well in WoR, so for it to go so poorly in OB was disappointing. I think to me, more disappointing than the way the arc generally went was Kaladin's final decision making at the end. Adolin's response felt realistic and in character - "She's interested in another guy, let me step aside." Shallan's actions felt realistic - she wanted to be with the only guy she'd had actual romantic interactions with (from her end). She was also trying to preserve her commitments and her engagement even if she does feel some attraction to Kaladin. Kaladin's final response felt like a Deus Ex Machina "She chose the other guy and even though I've always been interested in her romantically for very organic reasons, I've decided I actually never had any interest and am 100% over it immediately." Sanderson's comments regarding love triangles in general makes me think he believes (or did at least once believe) that he wrapped this up neatly so that the readers didn't have to deal with the hassle of a love triangle. I get that perspective and there are a lot of people who dislike those kinds of plots. I'm OK with that, but I think the solution that would make this feel much more organic was to simply have Kaladin's last scene make it clear he's accepted that Shallan and Adolin are together, but that he's still not totally OK with it - like a scene where he's faking being happy for them but inside is sad. Then, he slowly comes to terms with it over the next book or two with maybe one or two minor scenes that it's referenced. In my world - cut 3-4 chapters of "Bridge 4" and round out Amaram and the romance arc. Make Szeth on the "good guys" side, but as an independent contractor rather than an employee if that makes sense. Dalinar refuses his help, but he helps anyway.

I think you're misunderstanding my post entirely. I agree with you - he is one of, if not the most interesting character in SA. His struggles resonate with me personally as being similar to what I face in my job - trying to organize people into improving overall systems of how the world (or in my case, my department) works. However, imagine if (to take LerasiumMistborn's point) the amount of POV's was flipped so that Dalinar had Kaladin's share and Kaladin had Dalinar's share. We would be telling a totally different kind of story. With Kaladin and Shallan as primary POV, it's a story of an oppressed young generation is rising up to try to improve the world and how they get caught up in the greater battle to save mankind. We get to see Dalinar's POV (which again, is amazing) to see the perspective of the established leader and his own efforts of reform. Kaladin and Shallan get to go out and do things, they get to be reckless and push for things that are going to upset a lot of people. They're young, they still don't know how the world really works even if they think they do. Dalinar doesn't get to do those things. His story is a story of the man in the control room who knows a lot, but is still trying to do something new. He can't afford to be reckless, he can't afford to take a day off. There's too much at stake and everyone is depending on him to keep it all together. You don't get to see the story of growth with him - he's already grown. If Dalinar is the primary POV, the story is totally different. Still an interesting story, but a different kind of story. I like the idea of him being a very important character with relatively few POV's as Sanderson currently has it. I think there are other novels where a Dalinar type character is the lead, but can't think of them off the top of my head.

I think that may be true (Ghostbloods are probably not equal allies of Ialai Sadeas), but I also think the main point of the response is that the idea that Ialai is now toothless is not correct. Mraize and the Ghostbloods could easily be using House Sadeas as a means to their own ends - which we don't know yet. It might serve Mraize's purpose to sow discord between the Alethi High Princes. And to that end, he might find allies for Ialai. I also think that though the Sadeas armies are now mostly dead or turned to Odium, that doesn't mean Ialai can't find allies elsewhere in Alethkar or otherwise. After all, the Alethi are notoriously ambitious and it's been shown time and again that they really don't like the fact that they are beholden to a king. Any time that Dalinar tries to get any of them to team up together, they rebel against the idea. Yes, the desolation has now come and they all know that now, but that will probably not stop some of them from setting out on their own. In fact, some already have if I remember right (it's been a while since I've read OB). There are all kinds of logic they could use - for example "I need to protect my own people from the Desolation, not spend the lives of my Alethi warriors to defend the defenseless people of X nation while my own people are unprotected!". Ialai could easily create a faction of Alethi High Princes that subscribe to this theory that would either split from Dalinar's alliance and just do their own thing or even actively fight against it. But, this is getting a little off topic.

I know you've made a lot of comments on this topic, so I figured I would just quote the first one as a general note to you. I totally get your frustration - if you love Dalinar as a character you want to see him in the forefront and see the world through his eyes. I've been in the same boat and it's frustrating. I guess my only advice to you is that you should try to temper your expectations and try to keep this whole thing at arms length. Try not to take it personally that Sanderson doesn't write more Dalinar, he is just writing the story the way he sees fit. In terms of Dalinar's place within the series - others have tried to explain this but I'll take my stab. Dalinar is a very important character, but this isn't the kind of story where he's going to be the primary POV character. His role is to be the steadying force, the father figure and enlightened king of the forces of good. He's not the main "doer" of the story, he's the organizer, the leader, the one who sends people out to do the things that need to be done. And he's a great character, one of my favorites. It's just that from a higher level narrative perspective the story isn't as interesting (or at least it's not the same kind of interesting as Sanderson's other works) if it's told primarily through his eyes. Imagine if Dalinar was the primary POV - we would get a lot of story about how he sends Adolin, Kaladin, Jasnah, Shallan, etc off to do different tasks. It would be about him figuring out what needs to be done, wrestling with political alliances and moral debates, trying to figure out the best people to send on different missions and deciding when he himself needs to be directly involved. That's a great story, but it's not really the kind of story that SA is set up to be. There are other works you can look at if that's the kind of story you want, which I'm sure you know. Anyway, this is just my two cents - I feel for you, I really do but I think you are looking for something here that just isn't going to be there unfortunately.

I'm with you - in fact I'd go even further and say I only care about Rock, Rlain, and Moash (but only as an interesting villain). The others I care about a little, but not enough that they should have dedicated chapters. I didn't like the Bridge 4 chapters in OB. In tWoK and WoR, we saw Bridge 4 through the eyes of the major characters and that was great, because I cared about the major characters and it was cool to see Bridge 4 through the eyes of someone other than Kaladin too to get an idea of what Kaladin doesn't see about his brothers in arms. In book 4, I don't want to see any "Bridge 4" chapters. I don't really care about Teft's addiction problems, I only care about how he interacts and affects the main characters and the main plot. I honestly think he works much better as a background character that we see from time to time in passing and we can tell he's different each time. That gives depth to the world - even the background characters are the heroes of their own stories. When you pull him into the main screen, it loses something imo. We can see Bridge 4 and even have extended scenes with them, but I'd like to go back to seeing them only through the main characters' eyes.

Agreed - I doubt many people kill the Wit at the cost of all lands and titles. And the book is directly saying it's an open secret that Wits have been assassinated, I'll grant you that. Whether or not that is intended to mean society views assassinating nobility the same way as assassinating a Wit I don't know that we can ever really know. I personally don't think so, but I think it's reasonable to believe they do.

I think you're both right and wrong about this. I agree - things like assassination happen and they are only "wrong" if you're caught. Fair enough - but if Adolin gets caught then he gets caught - he's now "wrong" in the eyes of Alethi society. Getting caught includes there being wide, but unproven in court, knowledge that he did it. For Amaram's comment toward Wit - I think it's implied that he is suggesting someone should duel Wit or find some other way to scheme him into being killed in battle, etc. For example, a major light eyes gets a minor lighteyes to publicly become enraged with Wit, challenge him to a duel and then kill him. Not that someone should assassinate him - the end result is the same (Wit winds up dead) but one has a veneer of honor while the other is naked aggression and pettiness. Most of the Alethi seem to put a lot of value on this kind of show - kill someone but make sure it isn't a literal assassination even if conceptually what they are doing is the same. You can see this in the way Sadeas tries to eliminate Dalinar - he schemes for Dalinar to die in battle rather than trying to kill him in his sleep. Tying this all back to Adolin's predicament - because he didn't use the normal Alethi smoke and mirrors, I believe that what he did would be viewed as distasteful by those in power in Alethkar pre-desolation, but probably not to the level that he would or could be thrown in jail or face real legal ramifications. However, there's a real chance he and the Kholins would face rebellion from the house of Sadeas and its allies. I think that chance still exists as of the end of OB with Ialai Sadeas' actions. Sadeas' army is gone now, but they still have allies. The non-Alethi allies are what he would need to be more concerned about in terms of moral judgment. They don't take the same attitude towards war and competition as the Alethi and would probably view the murder of a political rival in a much more negative light. With Dalinar trying to appease them and convince them that he isn't just putting up a front so that he can conquer them all, the news of his own son murdering a political rival would be very bad for Dalinar's plans for a major alliance. Overall, I believe it's going to be viewed negatively by pretty much everyone except the people who were betrayed or abused by Sadeas. As for whether what he did is right or wrong - I personally believe it was morally wrong both in terms of my own moral code and the in world morality. You can justify it and say that greater good may have come from one evil deed and that is probably true, but it doesn't wipe away the fact that what he did was wrong. There were other options available, but they would have been much more difficult to achieve. For example - blackmailing Sadeas into compliance as a puppet leader, simply imprisoning him without legal justification and dealing with the repercussions, work with the mid or lower level leaders of house Sadeas and have them either reform from the inside or launch a coup against the top level leadership. There are a lot of things they could have done instead of simply murdering Sadeas when the opportunity arose. I liked the scene as it happened in the books, but let's not pretend that if Adolin really wanted to take the high ground he didn't have other options available. The reason the scene was good was because it was morally grey.

I think the opposite is true regarding Odium's recruiting pitch - Adolin is a perfect candidate for him, or could be. Remember, we only get limited POV's from Adolin so we don't know everything he is thinking. Dalinar was Odium's primary target and we had several full POV's from him and up until the immediate section before the end of OB, or at best early scenes in OB we wouldn't have expected that Odium thought he could turn Dalinar. There are enough instances of Adolin doing things "badly" that the seeds are there. The biggest one we have is obviously his murder of Sadeas, but there are others. If you look back to tWoK, he was essentially a selfish kid who couldn't understand why his father was so stuffy and wanted to dispense with the old laws so he could have more fun at court. That doesn't make Adolin evil or even necessarily a bad person, but it does show that he has the elements of selfishness and emotion that could allow Odium to lead him astray. Also - he would be a prime target - if Odium could turn Adolin it would cause major problems for the rest of Team Dalinar. All it would take are a few things happening to put him out of place - for example, maybe the Sadeas story actually comes out and due to public outcry Dalinar is forced to disown him or put him out of any kind of position of power to hold his fragile alliance together. Then, due to the family strain and maybe some other outside influences (maybe Adolin thinks Shallan has feelings for Kaladin, maybe they have a miscarriage, etc) Adolin and Shallan fall on hard times or even split up. Maybe even Renarin has to keep his distance to keep up appearances. If Adolin does run into a lot of hardships in Book 4, you could easily see Odium offering him a way out. It would be the same pitch as he gave Dalinar and Moash - I'll take your emotions so you don't have to feel them if you serve me. He can even play the "I'm on the true side of justice, you humans are the true invaders" card to play toward Adolin's sense of justice. It could happen and Adolin is in a position where it would not be out of place. We've had too many characters successfully avoid temptation to not see one fall. I'm not saying it'll happen or that if it does it would be Adolin, but it's definitely not unreasonable to think he could go dark. Not a twirling his mustache evil because he wants to see people suffer type of evil, but a person who was put in the wrong place at the wrong time that allows an evil mastermind to manipulate him into doing the wrong thing tragic kind of evil. Even if Adolin doesn't go dark that doesn't mean Odium couldn't use his murder of Sadeas as a wedge. What he did was against Alethi law, Ialai Sadeas is definitely going to be trying to make a legal or public appeal argument against Adolin and/or Dalinar over Sadeas' death in book 4. It would be really easy for Odium to whisper in the ear of one or more of the key players to try put doubts in their minds about Adolin and Dalinar's rule. In terms of the cultural context for Sadeas' murder - I don't think you're remembering the Alethi culture correctly. It's considered cowardly to assassinate someone or kill them in cold blood when they aren't expecting a fight. If Adolin had marched up to Sadeas and forced him into a duel that was a mostly fair fight, then it would be applauded as a strong play. That is not what he did - he surprised Sadeas and murdered him before Sadeas could defend himself. The fact that he ultimately killed Sadeas is not viewed negatively in Alethi society - it's the fact that he did it dishonorably. Another theme of the books though is that Dalinar is trying to change the values of all societies within Roshar. He is trying to change the idea that might makes right which dominates Alethi culture. So, especially in his own father's eyes and over time in the eyes of the general public this is going to be viewed more and more negatively.

As someone who's had this debate in the past - I'm with you in your last paragraph. I actually like the way Sadeas' death happened so suddenly and unexpectedly, but whether I'll like its impact on the characters depends on the final results. If it turns out that Adolin gets off scot-free from killing Sadeas (everyone knows about it and doesn't care or the few people who do know already hide it from the rest of the world), then I'll be very disappointed. If he gets off lightly with it having some impact on his relationships with characters, but they are willing to overlook it due to the Desolation happening then I'll be mildly disappointed but also understand. This is a relatively minor plot point in the overall SA. The best outcome, imo, would be if it does have a major impact. Either as a hint to a future "Dark Adolin" path, or simply as a character growth moment. For example, a plot where Odium uses this issue as a wedge between our main heroes would be really interesting. Some people support Adolin 100% and think he did nothing wrong, others are in the "ends justify the means" camp, some don't like what he did but are willing to forgive him, others are against him and think he needs to see jail time, etc. Then Adolin and whoever sticks with him through this have to win everyone back and try to reforge relationships. That would be a fun plot, imo. I'm not sure if it would happen, but I would enjoy it.

I would say it's possible they would increase each other's problems, but that doesn't necessarily follow from what has been shown in the books so far. The whole misunderstanding toward the end of OB only happened because they have had limited time to actually talk to each other about their feelings and what they are currently going through. Kaladin doesn't know what Shallan's problem is so he makes a mistake in giving her advice about it. He sees the way she (outwardly) seems to be totally happy and flourishing despite being the only person outside the bridge crews he knows who has had a life as hard as his and thinks that her key to success must be her ability to ignore or bury her feelings. She never tells him her deeper emotions because she feels it's inappropriate for her to do so - with her being engaged to Adolin and wanting to stay faithful to him. My point in all this is that if you wiped the slate clean and set up the scenarios differently where Shallan and Kaladin were able to get emotionally close, he would know and understand where Shallan was coming from and wouldn't make the same mistake. I think we need to be clear that the mistake Kaladin made wasn't due to a character flaw, it was due to a lack of knowledge.