therunner
-
Posts
1601 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by therunner
-
-
19 hours ago, ParaTulip said:
Their pacifism is done really poorly though. They rely on having a lower caste who does all the things they call violent.
I wouldn't say its done poorly, just contradictory.
Their culture did have more violent periods in the past (the Shin Invasions), and on Roshar of all planets nation full of pacifist simply couldn't survive circa ~8 millenia.
So by necessity their culture has to make some allowance for violence. Currently that takes the shape of pushing that 'crime' on permanent underclassQuoteBut there is yet to be a Cosmere planet that does not seem to bend towards having a class of elites who manage access to both magic and violence.
Well, elites are formed from those who have some type of power, be it economical, martial, or social. Adding magic into the mix just means that possibly those with magical power will rise to be the elites in their society.
And in pre-industrial society, access to magic generally puts you quite far over others, meaning you will have inherent advantage. Over time that will compound, especially if in the magic there is element heredity (like in Metallic Arts), proximity (like in Surgebinding), or plain inheritance (like in Awakening).
Even Elantrians formed a permanent elite class near Elantris, and that is despite them lacking any heradity (though the invitation mechanism possibly nulls that).11 hours ago, Nitpicking said:QuoteCultivation had space to raise this issue (she did visit the Tower), or employ her agents to stop it, and never did.
Perhaps consider that the Tower is the Sibling's physical form. And, as Navani eventually realizes, it is also a fabrial. So the Sibling is a pre-Recreance fabrial, a spren who volunteered to become a tool. Just a really cool, complicated, powerful tool.
What does that have to do with the fact that Cultivation doesn't seem to be opposed to modern design of fabrials?
0 -
22 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:
I think the Horneaters might consider The Sibling a god, since (at least some of them) consider spren to be gods (as far as I know).
Horneaters also consider Hoid a god, and he is okay with fabrials, And so are most other spren.
So at best, one god (out of many) has issues with fabrials.
And Horneaters we do see don't have issues with fabrials themselves.QuoteHonor's dead, Cultivation's uncommunicative and inscrutable for the most part, and Odium's a butthole. Also, I'm not certain, but I thought I remembered Tanavast shuddering or at least having a "I'm not comfortable with this, guys" reaction to the first Fabrial, though I'll admit he darn well could have forbade them and chose not to.
Tanavast had issues due to power it could grant If I recall correctly.
Cultivation had space to raise this issue (she did visit the Tower), or employ her agents to stop it, and never did.
All of these are certainly more 'godly' than Sibling is, and never raise the issue.
The above doesn't mean Sibling isn't possibly right ( I do think they have some points, but goes a bit too far ), but they shouldn't be listened to because they are a 'god', because basing their authority on that immediately refutes the stances.QuoteI have issues with certain ways of using animals for labor, and with certain ways of using animals for food. Other ways I don't necessarily have problems with (at least in the context of real life).
I guess we are relatively close in these opinions then.
QuoteAlso, I never interpreted spren as being equivalent to animals, I always saw them more as fairies, ghosts, animist spirits.
I didn't up until Oathbringer, but there we saw Shadesmar where spren play the same ecological role as animal do in PR, and other Radiant spren use them for labor in exactly the same fashion humans/Singers use animals in PR.
Since then I considered them to be equivalent to animals, just from a different tree of life.17 hours ago, ParaTulip said:This looks like an ethics discussion with some clear thesis points. I hope you do not mind me stepping back in:
...
But what about the standards of Shin culture? Well, that is where it gets weird. Shin culture hates doing violence too! Szeth hates himself for killing people to the point where most of what happens in his head before his therapy road trip of miracles is the screams of his victims. Sorry, I thought there would be more here, but... no. Shin culture seems to love to doom people to lives of moral evil while making a big deal of it. It is a really dumb society. Shallan is right, they do resemble children.
I do not mind, in fact I welcome it, as I am not that well versed in ethics and morality.
I do agree that Shin culture is quite contradictory, though it started with good intentions (likely their pacifism and taboos forming from those who refused to participate in First Desolation).
But I would also say that Szeth circumstances are somewhat unique, due to his neurodivergence. From his flashbacks, he was unusually rigid even by Shin standards, and most other Shin would likely say 'Crem the Oathstone' and simply ran away, or at the latest would refuse to follow orders to murder innocents. So not all cam be blamed on Shin society in general.2 -
16 hours ago, Frustration said:
Because he placed greater moral weight on obedience to the Oathstone than anything else.
Now clearly he was wrong in this, but it was moral consistency.
He was consistent in the following of the Oathstone yes.
But it didn't have greater moral weight, Szeth was clear that following Oathstones does not absolve him of his crimes, in fact that was the punishment.
I would say that his morality overall was not consistent, as he was murdering people who were innocent, an act that was morally wrong.
If your morality demands you:- Do some act (murder innocents because of Oathstone)
- That act itself is deemed immoral (murdering innocents is bad)
- Yet not doing that act is also immoral (disobeying Oathstone is bad)
then I would say your morality is not consistent.
Arguably this is the first case of SA criticizing what it later did with Skybreakers, obedience to a code that can be fallible, with no regards for if the rules actually make sense.14 hours ago, listerfeend said:It's almost like you don't understand the indoctrination and mental status of Szeth...
I do.
It's just that I don't see how it has any bearing on moral consistency of the person in question.
EDIT: @Aliroz-The-Confused
QuoteWhen a benevolent god tells you to stop what you are doing because it is an abomination, you should stop what you are doing.
Sibling is not a god, nor are they considered as such by most Rosharans, certainly not by any Vorins.
And notably, none of what Rosharans would consider gods (Honor, Cultivation, Odium) have issues with fabrials.QuoteAlso, you seem to think that this is about reasoning/thinking ability. I reject that framework, because I consider it to be an inherently evil framework to divide beings into "greater" and "lesser" on that basis.
If consideration and freedom are only owed to those "greater" beings who can run Reason.exe, then I am inherently lesser because my instance of that program is broken/corrupted. I do not think like people think.I said nothing of the sort.
I just said that lesser spren are funcionally (and ecologically) equivalent to animals, and are treated as such by everyone there. Sibling is basically animal rights activist.
IF you don't have issues with using animals for labor or food, I don't think it is reasonable to criticize use of spren either.
4 -
On 2/13/2026 at 9:36 PM, Aliroz-The-Confused said:
That caveat is a lot of my problem with The Stormlight Archive. That caveat means that your own physical and/or mental health is more important than the ideal, and thus more important than right or wrong. It means that your own physical and/or mental well-being is more important than than your soul or the eternal afterlife consequences of your doings.
I think it means that pushing yourself until you break means you won't help anyone.
It doesn't you have free pass to give up on your morals, it means that to be able to apply those morals long term, you have to remain functional, both in body and in spirit.QuoteLike I said, I think The Stormlight Archive does morality on easy mode, Mistborn does morality on hard mode, and the rest of the cosmere does morality on normal mode. I feel that it's a double or possibly triple standard.
Funny, I see it exactly opposite.
Mistborn has morality on easy mode, their foes are fully irredeemable monsters (nobles, TLR) or forces of utter destruction (Ruin) and they don't have to consider them at all. Anything the protagonists do is justified, because their opponents are so much worse. Era 2 is basically the same, enemies being people who make breeding farms.
Closest to moral complexity is Shadows of Self I would say, where Paalm is fundamentally a victim, and a perpetrator.
Stormlight doesn't have that luxury. The enemies are humanized (Singer-nerized? ) as early as book 2, and it goes much further from there. Neither side is fully in the right, both are full of both victim and perpetrators.
Individual characters can be simply antagonistic (Rayse, Taravangian), but the sides are not.QuoteLuckily for me, this is a character point rather than the story's perspective, and The Lost Metal (in my opinion) manages to keep itself morally and tonally consistent enough with the original Mistborn trilogy to avoid being Stormlight On Scadrial, but it's a worrying sign for me that The Stormlight Archive's narrative/moral priorities might be starting to bleed into the rest of the Cosmere. Narrative Black Hole indeed.
I think its less Stormlight Archive moral priorities, and more simply going into more complicated things than : overthrow evil immortal Tyrant / stop God of Desctruction from destroying the planet.
QuoteSincerity, to me, would be stopping all fabrial research and banning it. An actual attempt to do better would be outright outlawing the creation of fabrials, at bare minimum. Following through on this attempt by destroying as many as possible of the fabrials that exist so the spren can be free is what it would take for me to consider Navani as having had a change of heart. Otherwise, she stays in her place as the fictional character I hate fifth-most.
I will again say that fabrials are fundamentally no different from using animal labor, and that is something even other thinking spren (with the sole exception of Sibling) agree with (themselves using lesser spren for labor in Shadesmar).
Navani is no more a monster than the person who started domestication of wild animals, or us for leveraging those animals for our comforts.QuoteDo minor characters count? Because I think moral inconsistency is much more of a main character thing. If not, then I'd say that Szeth was morally consistent. I'd also call Sarene and Raoden morally consistent.
Szeth was anything but morally consistent.
He literally murders people knowing it is wrong, just because someone told him to. How is that morally consistent?Sarene and Raoden sure, though they each have page count roughly equivalent to 1/4 of one Stormlight book. On that scale, SA chars are usually morally consistent too I would say.
3 -
8 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:
As for the mentality of Stormlight, it's less "ends justify means" I see and more "people are inherently flawed, this is how they are, this is all they are, all they can ever be, this is the best they can do, they're trying their best, love them anyway despite their flaws. To expect anything better than this behavior is to expect too much of humanity. There are no consequences in the end, no punishment for oathbreakers, no eternal pattern of rightness to which all things resolve in the next life. The ideal is impossible, give up on it. Perfection doesn't exist."
I agree with basically all of this except the last two sentences.
I think Stormlight is more about "The ideal is impossible, but try anyway.", with the caveat that it should not come at the cost of your own health (physical and/or mental).
Dalinar and his 3rd Oath (Rising each time you fail), 1st Oath in general (Journey before Destination = it being the process that matters). Kaladin just keeps trying to help people around him, even if he thinks it is impossible to save them (that was literally his mentality in TWoK, that Bridge 4 will die anyway so why should he try? And Syl convinces him it is worth trying it).
That is why I don't see Navani as a monster, in the first days of being bonded to Sibling, she immediately pivoted Fabrial research to try and make it less objectionable to Sibling, and to ideally have spren enjoy the process. Something which seems to have at least partial success. That is her trying to do better.
So long as they earnestly try to improve, that is good. Taravangian doesn't want to improve or change, he thinks he has all the answers, and it is just others who have to change, not him. Jasnah suffers from similar flaw, if not to the same extent (at least yet, who knows what her arc will bring).8 hours ago, Immortal Platypus said:I disagree with Aliroz's interpretation, but I'm sure he could cherry-pick examples, just like those to prove his point. In that case, he could say the same thing that you say at the end. And I don't think he's wrong that the protagonists are morally inconsistent, but I would say that normal people are morally inconsistent and that while it is bad, it's to be expected.
The points I mentioned are culminations of arcs at least within individual books. That is usually where you look for what the end message is.
People being morally inconsistent is I don't think any surprise, you won't find any person in all Cosmere books who is morally consistent.1 -
1 hour ago, Immortal Platypus said:
That seems an unfair framing to me. It seems to me that Aliroz's complaint is that the mentality in Stormlight is more on the side of "The ends justify the means" and "If someone wrongs me, I'm going to wrong them back, really hard, even if I wronged them first" (side note, I don't think that is the mentality in Stormlight, but that is the basis of many of his arguments IMO)
Unfair framing is like half of this thread, if not its fundamental basis.
I mean that one situation (Vengeance Pact) is clearly not the basis of moral reasoning of Stormlight, series where:-
Protagonist seeks peace with killers of bis brother (Dalinar with Listeners and with Szeth)
- In the process Dalinar is also trying to end the War of Reckoning, and the failure of peace talks is considered tragic by them. Which is where narrative clearly frames War of Reckoning in its current version as morally wrong (as if it was not clear beforehand).
- Another protagonist protects another who is arguably responsible for death of his brother (Kaladin, once with Elhokar, once with Roshone)
- Men decide to try and save others, who (as far as he knows) victimized him and others like him (Kaladin and Bridge Four deciding to try and save Dalinar and his army at the Tower)
- The main antagonist espouses ends before means and the one among protagonists who does the same end the arc at her lowest (Taravangian and Jasnah)
If after reading all that you come away thinking the moral reasoning of the series is "Ends justify the means" or "wronging people back is okay", there is likely something wrong with your reading comprehension.
1 -
Protagonist seeks peace with killers of bis brother (Dalinar with Listeners and with Szeth)
-
3 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:
And yet you say things like "Death rate of 30% below age 15 was the norm.", "Semi-constants wars between states was the norm.", "Slavery was the norm", "Religious pogroms were the norm.", as though such were incontrovertible truths rather than your interpretation of the historical record, an interpretation which is the opposite of incontrovertible among historians.
I am happy to be proven wrong on any of the above statements.
But what I said above is in fact taken quite seriously by historians- Death rate of 30% below age 15 was the norm. (https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality ) (actually even worse than what I said
QuoteThese have all declined substantially in many, but not all, parts of the world – child deaths were a grim constant in the past. For most of human history, around 1 in 2 newborns died before reaching the age of 15. By 1950, that figure had declined to around one-quarter globally. By 2020, it had fallen to 4%
-
Semi-constant wars being the norm
- Here it was difficult to find a good source, but e.g. it seems that at least since ~1800s the conflict first grew a bit and then lessened again (https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace?insight=relationships-between-countries-have-become-more-peaceful#key-insights )
-
So it seems that during trasnition to modernity the frequency did increase for some period of time.
Though it is open question if that was causation, or just correlation.
- Slavery being the norm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery )
QuoteSlavery was institutionalized by the time the first civilizations emerged (such as Sumer in Mesopotamia,[5] which dates back as far as 4000 BC). Slavery features in the Mesopotamian Code of Hammurabi (c. 1750 BC), which refers to it as an established institution.[6] Slavery was widespread in the ancient world in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa,[7][8][4] and the Americas.[9]
- Pogroms being semi-constant danger to Jewish communities ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom )
QuoteI don't have the patience or energy to argue with you on these things, especially when you have no interest in engaging in any way other than being reasonable despite repeated reminders that this is a thread for being unreasonable and not for having reasonable discussion.
There is a difference between just being unreasonable, and outright lying about facts of history (or written words in book).
Quote1700. Only 1700 Listeners, unless I'm reading this wrong.
(I know not all Singers are Listeners, that's not the point).
Outside of these 1700, every single singer has either been killed by or because of the Children of Ashyn, or has at some point been enslaved by the Children of Ashyn.
If we had thousands and thousands of pages about them, we would not regard the humans on Roshar the way we do.
Yes, and most Listeners were killed during summoning of Everstorm, after having their personality taken over by Stormspren.
Roughly 35 thousand of them died there, and most were killed by the clashing of Everstorm and Highstorm, as the forces of Alethkar lost the battle and had to retreat to survive.
That was the key event, summoning of what turned out to be a seed for Night of Sorrows.
Prior to it, both Eshonai and Dalinar were willing to start peace talks. Not exactly and act t of monsters you are trying to portray humans of Roshar as.
Also, why are you not angry at those spren for brainwashing the Listeners? Because that is what they explicitly did, based on PoV chapters of Eshonai?
Not to mention that the whole conflict was intentionally provoked by Ulim, agent of Odium. (the assassination of Gavilar being his idea, as is the summoning of storm spren and of Everstorm).3 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:This is, as far as I can tell, the moral reasoning of The Stormlight Archive, and it terrifies me.
It terrifies you that assassinating leader of foreign nation, during singing of agreement, has consequences?
2 -
13 hours ago, Qianweilian said:
It's a real shame we never got those outrigger novels. It's hard to portray advancement when the entire series is only like a year.
Indeed.
Which is why I have high hopes for Sanderson, since he will be denoting multiple books to such advancement.10 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:I vehemently disagree. And if you're going to present your views as incontrovertible truth, then so shall I. It is tedious for me to always have to defend my views, put qualifiers on what I say, and constantly point out that my opinions are opinions, while others are allowed to express subjective appraisals without requiring such qualifiers (at least, not as often).
You might notice that vast majority of what I say does have qualifiers : "often", "most", "I think", "IMO".
Hell, the one thing you just quoted starts with "I hesitate", to signify I am not sure in it.
So no, I don't present things as incontrovertible truths.QuoteWhat you see as the norm in history is the worst nightmares of short transitional periods, well-recorded because they were exceptions. It is like how every plane crash ever is remembered, photographed, and publicized, leading people to think that air travel is unsafe when such things are the exception.
- Death rate of 30% below age 15 was the norm.
-
Healthcare was abysmal
- Serious illness regularly ravaging countries.
- Broken bones being quite serious problem (especially for peasantry)
- Semi-constants wars between states was the norm.
- Slavery was the norm
- Religious pogroms were the norm.
None of these are fault of transitional periods, they are just what life was like in pre-modern times.
Some were eliminated, others were lessened.QuoteThe transition to modernity is uniquely awful, violent, and traumatic because it represents the time when after all the guardrails were removed and before the new ones were installed. It was so terrible that modernity had to invent the Progress Narrative to justify itself, and had to demonize and regard as worthless the entirety of human history before itself by presenting the horrors of modernity's transitonal birthing period as the norm for the human condition. It more or less constructed the progress narrative so it could say "you don't want to go back to those bad old days, do you? Do you? Because that's what would happen without modernity.".
What was uniquely awful about it?
Wars? Been there done that. Genocides? Ditto.Proportionally, Genghis Khan killed more people than WW2 did. And quite possibly, in absolute numbers as well.
Some of the horrors were magnified by technology (WW1 being IMO the best example), but at the same time the frequency of those horrors somewhat lessened (fewer and shorter wars). And some horrors were eradicated in parts of the world (slavery being outlawed in most countries, women's rights in the west, modern medical practices, etc.)
The progress narrative is not artificial construct, when massive positive progress was made. You yourself literally just said that you wouldn't want to live in pre-modern periodQuoteI'd think it might be more accurate to say that as problems are solved, new problems are created (often lesser, more manageable problems, but sometimes horrors as bad as any in history). I'll grant that the tradeoffs are worth it (I certainly wouldn't choose to go back all those centuries) if you'll grant that there were tradeoffs, but if you're going to be black-and-white with a progress narrative then I will happily be black-and-white with the opposite.
QuoteThe only point where the Kholins could get away with their atrocities and maintain reader sympathy is in this transitional period where there are no rules and no guardrails, where the ancient taboos are gone and honor is dead, but the new rules and new guardrails don't exist yet. It's the only point where we could go "Oh, the Kholins aren't doing anything unusually evil".
But both in real life and in the cosmere, the invasion of the Shattered Plains would be outside the bounds in any other time period or setting. Heck, Hallandren and the Fjordell Empire are much, much less evil, and are innocent of atrocities which are evidently normative for at least the Alethi if we judge by their invasion of the Shattered Plains and Unclaimed Hills.The only thing Kholins (Dalinar specifically) did that was uniquely awful was burning of Rathalas.
Invasion of Shattered Plains is completely normal occurrence, it is a punitive war for extremely valid cause. Listeners assassinated a head of foreign state, refused to do any diplomacy (other than leave a few people there to admit to it), and so they got invaded.
If some nation today just assassinated head of another state, you can bet there would be retribution for it.
In history, such retribution would often be simply war until the offending nation yielded or was wiped out.And as established previously, wiping out other nations was not particularly unique in history.
QuoteMister Sanderson might disagree, but that is because he does not understand his own work, and if he dislikes how Fantasy stays in the medieval stasis, it is because he fundamentally does not get (or rather, has forgotten) what Fantasy is or why it's good.
Or maybe, your opinion on what constitutes a good fantasy is not the only valid viewpoint?
And Sanderson understands his work perfectly well, you just don't like what he does with it.
E.g.QuoteThe genres of Fantasy, Western and Science Fiction are escapes from modernity, and they speak to a desire to see a world not yet stained with such sin.
Heck, a lot of the appeal of fantasy is the notion of preventing the transition to modernity inasmuch as such is possible, and preserving what was before. That's more or less what The Lord Of The Rings is.
I don't like fantasy or science fiction because they are escapes from modernity, I like them because they are new and different and semi-easily digestible. And preventing transition to modernity is not appealing to me at all.
IMO, LOTR is less about preventing transition to modernity, and more about inevitability of such transition and mourning for what once was.
( Also, how the hell is science fiction not stained by modernity??? )
QuoteNo, wonder is about appreciating that which is not understood (or at least not fully understood). That's why they call it wonder.
...
Often, increased understanding leads to increased wonder, with each answer revealing more questions. Telescopes and microscopes to see more of what the Creator has made. But the wonder, I think, does not come from the understanding, but from that which is not (yet) understood.Going by dictionary, it is just being awed by something
Quote-
The emotion aroused by something awe-inspiring, astounding, or surprising.
"gazed with wonder at the northern lights."
- The quality that arouses such emotion.
-
One that arouses awe, astonishment, surprise, or admiration; a marvel.
"Given all his unhealthy habits, it's a wonder he's lived this long. She was a wonder in that movie."
So understanding seems to be orthogonal to it.
Which yeah, it seems that for you, understanding lessens wonder, for me it magnifies it. Both are valid.
3 -
1 hour ago, Qianweilian said:
I'll agree with Aliroz here, it often is traumatic and violent. We have been thrown into modernity by revolutions, wars, battles, etc. Even the quiet march of industrialization leaves those who relied on the old world aside. Many of the technological advances we have come from the world wars. The modern concept of democracy came from the French and American Revolutions. While not as violent, many modern day fixtures only came about as a result of the Cold War. Even the internet—the foundation of modern economy, society, politics, and more—was originally a military project to address communication vulnerabilities. Transition to modernity is a good thing, but it often is “traumatic and violent."
The reason I'd hesitate to call the transition to modernity 'traumatic and violent' is because historical events as a whole are often traumatic and violent. Is transition to modernity more traumatic and violent than Crusades? Fall of Ottoman or Roman empires? Reconquista? Any number of plagues?
So since it (IMO) doesn't fall outside of the 'trauma scope' of what happens when historical events are ongoing, I wouldn't call it traumatic and violent, at least not more so than any dozens of things that were happening in pre-modern times anyway. In fact, I would say it is much less traumatic and violent than any number of large historical events.
And if those numerous traumatic things were happening in pre-modern times, than transition to modernity is not particular noteworthy IMO. If you would call most changes in history traumatic and violent, then well, it is at that point just description of history, not a property of transition to modernity.1 hour ago, Qianweilian said:We will see. (see my previous comment for more comments) I also think he got a some of this idea from WoT.
Wheel of Time Spoilers
Near the end of the series, early cannons (known as “dragons”) are developed and used. One character even has a vision of a possible future (which she resolves to prevent and is more technologically advanced). The very nature of the Wheel and the ages require some technological advancement by themselves, as we have to reach the first age somehow. (The first age is our age)
While WoT hint at these things ( and I loved those parts ), it never really explore them in particular depth, which is where I think Sanderson intends to differentiate himself.
2 -
12 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:
I'll grant that religions have been drivers of atrocities if you'll grant that they've been guards against atrocities.
I'll acknowledge the wrongs done by theocracies if you'll acknowledge the wrongs done by secular regimes.
I'll concede the flaws of the pre-modern world and credit the better qualities of the modern world if you concede the flaws of the modern world and credit the better qualities of the pre-modern world.
I'm not claiming equivalence, but if you're going to be black-and-white about this than I will as well.I will grant you that they likely did at some point in history, as history is not black and white.
But I won't grant that religions have acted systematically as guards against atrocities.I don't have problem acknowledging wrongs done by secular regime, my grandparents and parents grew up under communism, my great-grandparents were killed by Nazis in concentration camps.
Were there places where pre-modern world was better? Sure maybe the smaller connectivity, slower pace most of the time, smaller disparity of power between classes. But I would never want to be born in the pre-modern world than in the modern one. I would be dead in pre-modern world few days after birth, and ~30% of people didn't live past age 15.
Fundamentally, religion (IMO) is neither force for good or for bad, it's just a force. It depends what people do with it.
I was never black and white about it, I was just pushing back on the assertion that religions acted as a systemic check on secular power, when that simply wasn't the case.
QuoteI'll also point out that many of those pogroms and genocides were done by secular regimes, with an example of non-dominant religions being subjected to such under a secular regime being the expulsion of the Latter-day Saints from the United States in the nineteenth century. Other examples may be seen in the history of many communist societies.
I am very well aware of what secular regimes can do yes (see above about my famiily history).
That is why I never claimed they are somehow perfect, only that historically it was religions that primarily drove atrocities.But I would caution against thinking that in those same situations, theocracies would be somehow better. Just look at Iran.
Modern regimes have more power available, so what they can do is necessarily 'greater' in scale, than what people did in past. But that doesn't mean that past people wouldn't use those tools in the same (or simimlar) way, had they had them.
For more extreme example, would Nazis focus so much on Jews, if it were not for ~2 millennia of religious persecution?
Ultimately, we are still relatively new to the 'secular' thing as a world, as well as to equal democracies (women started to get voting rights mere century ago). So separating which woes are fully fault of secular structures, which are growing pains, and which are holdovers from more religious times, is impossible to say.
QuoteMany civilizations that were conquered lasted longer than our current civilizations have lasted. Many of those civilizations that conquered them also ended, sometimes surprisingly quickly after such conquests. This, I think, applies in the Cosmere as well. Recall who the last holdouts against The Final Empire were. I'll accept that a physical means of holding on to power is necessary in order to maintain power, but I think you ought to acknowledge that it is not necessarily sufficient.
Yes, most things move 'slower' in the past, for better and worse.
But this is not a point at all, point is that unless you can back authority by power, you cease to have authority.What motivates you to hold on to power is separate question.
Note that I consider organized religions to be a form of power in and of itself, as it allows you to move and coordinate larger masses of people (see e.g. crusades).QuoteI guess my point is that power is foundational to these kinds of authority, but other things can be foundational to such authority in addition to power.
I do agree with the this.
QuoteBy the time of Wind And Truth, the Kholins have removed (more or less) all foundation for their own authority other than power, and thus, when faced with Taravangian's greater power, Jasnah has (essentially) nothing else to fall back on (or, at least nothing else that can compel Fen to obligation against Taravangian).
I would disagree here.
I don't think Kholins ever had anything other than power backing their authority.
Alethkar as united political entity is ~30 years old by the time of SA1, they are extremely new regime. And it was created by conquest, nothing else. They slightly undermined the assertion that lighteyes are better than darkeyes, but still have power inside Alethkar.
Jasnah's failure to negotiate with Fen is more her own personal failing than failing of Kholins as a whole. She never had anything that could compel Fen, she could always only ask. And since Jasnah disregards anything she deems 'irrational', she had nothing to say against Taravangian.QuoteIn my opinion, the Kholin monarchy is in some ways unsettlingly similar to many antagonist factions in fiction, with one of the crucial differences being that their invasion isn't against the main characters' homes.
The way they got power is very unsettling, though basically in line with how most monarchies got power.
They had bigger stick.
Even today that is the sad truth of the world.12 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:How are the nightmares of modernity better?
Is it the wars? The desolation of the African, Australian, and American continents.
Wars that have been happening constantly throughout pre-modern times as well?
Speaking specifically for Europe the 80 years since WW2 have been the most peaceful time ever for this part of the world. It wasn't perfect of course.
And why do you exclude Europe from the desolation of continents? It is one of the more desolate ones by some metrics (e.g. most original forests being cut down for example, though we are slowly starting to restore the wilds).QuoteOr the mortality caused by the various leads, microplastics, carcinogens, and other products of progress (smoking, industrialization, pollution), as well as the mortality factor of automobile travel?
You mean mortality which is lowest in history in vast majority of the world? Pre-modern mortality was such that 30% of children never lived past 15.
Romans had lead poisoning, and likely so did many other civilizations in history. People smoked in history as well.
Microplastics, pollution are now new problems, yes.Travel always had risks associated with it (weather, bandits, accidents), today those are immensely lesser than they were.
QuoteI'd think it might be more accurate to say that as problems are solved, new problems are created (often lesser, more manageable problems, but sometimes horrors as bad as any in history). I'll grant that the tradeoffs are worth it (I certainly wouldn't choose to go back all those centuries) if you'll grant that there were tradeoffs, but if you're going to be black-and-white with a progress narrative then I will happily be black-and-white with the opposite.
Again, I was never black-and-white about it, I was pushing back on your assertion that pre-modernity was somehow universally better. If you didn't mean it like that, than I misunderstood your point, and I apologize.
I do agree that as problems are solved, some new ones are created, in exactly the way you say.QuoteBesides, my point was that the transition to modernity represents something traumatic and violent, a loss of the wonder and magnificence of much of what the Creator had made,
While I agree that the transition to modernity can be difficult, I would hesitate to call it traumatic and violent.
The loss of wonder is there, which we can see even in e.g. art history, by romantic movements.But personally, I see more wonder in today's world, than in premodern one. There I would be awed by lighting, or by a majestic storm, which I would not understand. Today I am awed by those things, but I also posses understanding, which (again for me) magnifies the awe.
And we know much more about universe, so there are even more things to wonder at. Pre-modern man could never wonder at photos of other planets, sound of black holes merging, etc.
So I would argue today we see (and can be awed by) more of what the Creater made, and our better understanding of the creation can bring us closer. If one believes in some form of Creator of course.Quoteand most of all, in the context of The Stormlight Archive, a colonization of fairyland and Fantasy. Usually the kind of stuff that Fantasy's about preventing, avoiding, or escaping from.
Well, Sanderson in many comments about Cosmere was pretty clear that his major goal is exactly this transition.
That he dislikes how fantasy is always stuck in medieval stasis of sort, and that he wants to have the world progress.
We see it in Stormlight, and we see it in Mistborn as well, both of these are doing the same thing. It's just that in Stormlight we get closer more intimate look on how that progress happens, whereas in Mistborn we jump over it.
2 -
18 minutes ago, Qianweilian said:
See the investiture controversy. (Although that’s a bit different for a lot of reasons).
Interesting, I have never heard of that.
Down the rabbit hole I go!
Thank you.0 -
1 hour ago, Qianweilian said:
I mean, it arguably existed, but only because of power dynamics and less of a matter of outranking or religion. The Roman Emperor was even the Pontifex Maximus.
True. Though emperor being also the highest religious office inherently means that high priest can't really tell emperor to go pound sand, that is just emperor changing his mind.
If the religious order was the highest power, they usually also were the highest secular power as well, e.g. Papal states.
But yes, the actual power dynamics are more complicated than these blanket statements.1 -
15 hours ago, Qianweilian said:
Honestly, this is an astoundingly good point. The only real struggling Radiants in negotiations are Dalinar and Jasnah, one of whom who eventually convinces everyone anyways, and the other is debated by a god who attacks her philosophy and leaves her crying (at least internally). Kaladin converts Szeth to his mental health crusade in a matter of days, something that often takes years—or at least months—in the real world. Shallan gains the service of deserters about to attack her caravan, Navani convinces the Sibling in days (although I’ll excuse that one, as it was a life-or-death situation for the Sibling), etc.
In Mistborn, negotiation is much harder. Yeden, while bought into Kelsier’s plan, goes rogue and decimates the skaa army. Jastes is unconvinced by Elend to take the koloss away (and is later executed by Elend, but not relevant), Cett only came over after Vin forced him to swear allegiance, Zane had to be killed by Vin, Yomen only after the koloss started killing everyone, etc. Miles is never convinced by Wax, nor his uncle, nor Telsin, and only got to use the Malwish ship after showing off the Bands of Mourning.
I mean, if you count Yeden (who barely appears on screen) going rogue as example of difficulty of negotiations, then Radiants struggle far more.
- Dalinar never convinces either Elhokar or most of the Highprinces in first two books
- Kaladin takes months to convince people in mortal danger to...try and do something about it
-
Oathbringer is an entire book about Radiants negotiating to get support
- So just on raw page count (and time spent on it in-world) there is more negotion going on than in Era 1 as whole
-
Coalition then slowly fragments over the course of RoW and WAT, an example of failure to convince others
- Herdaz joins Coalition solely because they lost on their own, and Coalition promises them support in re-taking their homeland (so not so much convinced as the only option)
- Numerous lands of Azir leave, Shinovar is never convinced, Ishar is not convinced to support Coalition etc.
QuoteThis might be right too. Jasnah is “yay, democracy” and “we will have an elected senate and a ministerial exemplar” while doing absolute monarch mode. Elend grapples with the failures of his attempted democracy, and even respects losing until the world ending makes that impossible for a democracy to function effectively in a world that was ruled by an immortal dictator for a millennium.
I would say Jasnah is constantly portrayed as 'meaning well, but her choice of methods bites her backside', similar to Elend in book 1 and 2, except morally 'opposite'.
- TWoK - Jasnah is the narrative antagonist for most of the book, and portrayed as a overlooking the more human aspects of people around her
- O - Jasnah is the voice of extreme action, and opposed by the moral core of the cast Kaladin and Syl
- RoW - Jasnah removes her political opposition (the duel), but in such a way that it horrifies even Dalinar (and all others present)
- WAT - we all know
So I would say that Jasnah is semi-constantly criticized by the books, for the methods she uses to get her goals. This can be contrasted with Elend:
- Where Elend was naive and overly trusting (leading to him being deposed), Jasnah is cynical and trust no one (leading to her being abandoned by her ally).
- Elend had to learn to be harsher as ruler (executing his former friend, and then ruling as absolute monarch backed by the power of Koloss armies), Jasnah has to learn the opposite how to be less harsh (IMO at least).
Basically, we saw full arc of Elend, going from naive ideologue to much harsher but effective ruler.
With Jasnah, we are at best in the middle of the arc, likely not even that (considering the relative page-time).5 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:No, that's how modernity insists all governments work (and modernity insists that that's how all governments always worked), because if it wasn't the legitimacy of all modern governance would be threatened.
Spoilered for tedious rambling.
The idea that all governance is based on power and only on power is a construction invented to keep the anarchists (who would be much more of a hindrance to the powers that be if they figured out how perceived legitimacy, aesthetics, approval, and all the other things that social structures are based on actually work) and their spiritual twins the authoritarians (who would be much more of a hindrance to to the powers that be if they remembered that authority can derive from things other than power) under control. Basically, the Neutral alignments teaming up to play the Lawful and Chaotic alignments against one another.
Pre-modern authorities almost invariably acknowledged greater authorities (most often God or gods). Pre-modern cultures almost invariably had unwritten laws/customs/traditions that were beyond the capacity of any governing authority to change.
Modernity didn't invent the idea of having checks on the secularly powerful, it destroyed the idea by removing the checks that existed (often in the forms of organized religious hierarchies), placing extreme military capacity in the hands of centralized power structures to the point no resistance was possible, dissolving taboos against atrocity, fragmenting individual-based tyranny into committee-based tyranny (much harder to kill two rulers than one, and far harder than that to kill a dozen, and far harder than that to kill a hundred), inventing widespread information dispersion in easily-controlled forms, and teaching that reason was the only virtue (removing Pathos and Ethos from decision-making, leaving only Logos). Then, after nearly destroying itself through the generations of its own nonsense, it slowly reconstructed the idea that there need to be guardrails for power structures. Then, to spare itself embarrassment, it constructed a progress narrative where all of humanity prior to the last tiny sliver was Terrible and Less Civilized Than Us Now and Didn't Know Better, just in case anybody still had the nerve to question whether the ancients might have been on to something.
This sort of badness is the very thing that the Fantasy, the Western, and the Sci-fi are escapes from, and it has no business being in a fantasy book series. It is also the sort of thing that the Kholins do, which is why they are so thoroughly redefining their world to no longer be a fantasy world, and their books to not be fantasy. They enslave the fairies because the wild and free fairyland is a world that does not, on the thematic and emotional level, support their modernist desires for unchecked power and progress. They create systems where organized religion is powerless because a world where the high priestess can tell the Emperor to go pound sand because a servant of the gods outranks a king of men is a world where something exists that is greater than the Kholins. They renounce oaths and introduce soulless pragmatism because a world where "because I made a promise" is justification in itself is a world where there exists some transcendental Right and Wrong to which the Kholins may be found lacking.
At the end of Wind and Truth they have succeeded in getting Cultivation to scram (vanquishing the mother dragon from her hoard/treasure/world), making Honor and Odium the same enemy (a rival modernist, Taravangian, rather than the ancient mythical evil of Rayse), and banishing the Evil Spirit Of Excess Emotion (Nergaoul/the Thrill) while tentatively negotiating with the Rebellious Spirit Of Enlightenment (Sja-anat). Truly, a masterful colonization of fairyland.
Further, they have subordinated the will of what divinity remains (the Sibling) to their own ends (so as to have free access to Towerlight without worrying about whether or not The Sibling will or can object to what they do-- no higher moral authority remains to judge the Radiants, no greater authority remains to ask anything of them, the only god remaining is the Enemy God). They have made Roshar a world where Lift cannot remain an innocent child, where Chasmfiends are all but extinct, where the artificial machine for indoor lighting and heating replaces the hearth and the instant message replaces the single brave messenger on horseback, and where a growing bureaucracy manages the transition from the days of warrior-kings and prophecies to the days of nation-states and the scientific method.
I mean, it is how governments functioned historically as well.
Ruling by 'grace of <insert relevant deity>' is nice and all, but unless you have physical means of holding on to power, you won't. Just look at numerous civilizations that no longer exist, because they got conquered by their neighbors.QuoteThe idea that all governance is based on power and only on power is a construction invented to keep the anarchists (who would be much more of a hindrance to the powers that be if they figured out how perceived legitimacy, aesthetics, approval, and all the other things that social structures are based on actually work) and their spiritual twins the authoritarians (who would be much more of a hindrance to to the powers that be if they remembered that authority can derive from things other than power) under control. Basically, the Neutral alignments teaming up to play the Lawful and Chaotic alignments against one another.
Anarchist though is fundamentally utopian, if those ideas worked in praxis, governments would never arise in the first place.
The world was as anarchist want it to be, back in pre-historic times, since laws and governments are invented. Our world is the natural conclusion of anarchist thoughts, they are fundamentally self-refuting.QuoteModernity didn't invent the idea of having checks on the secularly powerful, it destroyed the idea by removing the checks that existed (often in the forms of organized religious hierarchies), placing extreme military capacity in the hands of centralized power structures to the point no resistance was possible, dissolving taboos against atrocity,
Most civilizations throughout history were literally theocracies, so religious power didn't exist as a check on political power it existed to support political power.
So in history religious hierarchies were the centralized power structures that possessed extreme military capacity, and suppressed any resistance with extreme prejudice and atrocity.
For atrocities, feel free to reference any number of pogroms and genocides done to members of non-dominant religions.So claiming that religions were a guard against atrocity is a bit laughable, when often they were the drivers of atrocities.
QuoteOr, in other words, nuh-uh! Authority's not just power. I got... metaphors and stuff... and feelings about fairytales. Just wait, it's gonna be a whole thing when some cool monarchs show up instead of these Kholin upstarts.
I do agree that authority is not just power.
But authority without power is...pointless. And by power I mean any means of convincing or coercing others to do as the entity with authority wishes. It can be brute force, it can be economic coercion, it can be economic incentive, power of personal charisma, brainwashing, etc.
But ultimately, unless you can convince other people to do as you wish, your authority is meaningless. See Elhokar, on paper the highest authority, in praxis..yeah.
EDIT:
QuoteThey create systems where organized religion is powerless because a world where the high priestess can tell the Emperor to go pound sand because a servant of the gods outranks a king of men is a world where something exists that is greater than the Kholins.
Such world basically never existed, often king was the personification of gods on earth, and so outranked everyone.
QuoteThey renounce oaths and introduce soulless pragmatism because a world where "because I made a promise" is justification in itself is a world where there exists some transcendental Right and Wrong to which the Kholins may be found lacking.
Did you completely miss all the Adolin sections in WAT?
Because they literally say that same thing, and it is a Kholin who says that. That doing something simply ' because I made a promise ' is literally said and done by Adolin.QuoteFurther, they have subordinated the will of what divinity remains (the Sibling) to their own ends (so as to have free access to Towerlight without worrying about whether or not The Sibling will or can object to what they do-- no higher moral authority remains to judge the Radiants, no greater authority remains to ask anything of them, the only god remaining is the Enemy God).
Alternative being that the divinity what remains would be killed. And that divinity chose to do this, instead of the alternative.
QuoteThey have made Roshar a world where Lift cannot remain an innocent child,
Roshar (and history) was never a place where Lift could remain an innocent child, such is a reality of the fact that all grow up.
And the hints we have of her past all point in the direction that LIft lost her innocence even before meeting Cultivation, and this was her attempt to get it back/hold on to it, despite all that happened to her.
But you can't go back into the past.Quotewhere the artificial machine for indoor lighting and heating replaces the hearth and the instant message replaces the single brave messenger on horseback,
Because more convenience and safety is bad?
Quoteand where a growing bureaucracy manages the transition from the days of warrior-kings and prophecies to the days of nation-states and the scientific method.
How are the days of warrior-kings and prophecies better?
Is it the wars for glory of king/god?
Or the high infant mortality?
3 -
1 hour ago, Frustration said:
Well looking into heat your natural body temperature is close to 98 degrees Fahrenheit. (As we are talking about the human body Fahrenheit is objectively the superior system of measurement for this).
Getting to 1000 degrees would be slightly more than a simple 10x increase in temperature, that should be well within the limits of what feruchemy is capable of.
I think a more natural unit to use would be Kelvin, not Fahrenheit, as that is the absolute temperature of body in physical sense. Fahrenheit and Celsius both have 0 set relatively arbitrarily.
98 F ~ 309 K , 1000F ~ 810 K , which makes it 2.6x increase. So certainly well withing capabilities of Feruchemy.
Also well within capabilities of killing you0 -
5 hours ago, Duxredux said:
Just checking, how much of Wax specifically surviving against Aluminum bullets and explosions to the age of retirement are we chalking up to plot armor?
A lot to be honest. E.g. I think Wax at the end of TLM (the charge on the Tower) was pure plot armor. All it would take for Wax to die would be someone firing aluminum bullets down that stairwell, or dropping a grenade with aluminum shrapnel.
Across the entire length of skyscraper once they used aluminum grenade against him, and no bullets. If that is not plot armor, I don't know what is. He is not even trying to dodge anything.
They didn't even set the most basic of traps, tripwire in stairwell + explosive.
Interestingly, he is described as trailing mist, despite being indoors, so perhaps Wax got a little boost from certain Harmony.QuoteFinally—trailed by the mist, trailing death—he reached the top. The endof the stairwell.
Hell, take the train fight in BoM. If instead of primer cube with chromium Set threw a stick of dynamite, Wax would be dead then and there.Not to mention your regular Mistborn won't have skill of neither Wax nor Vin.
QuoteYou call it plot armor in lieu of actual armor, I think this is minimizing how hard it would be to track and shoot a Coinshot/Pewterarm/Slider moving erratically across complex terrain.
- Pewterarm is 2x as fast (maybe).
-
Coinshot is moving depending on where they are in arc, somewhat faster than sprinting human, but not by much (see spikeways, or Vin's horseshoe spike way).
- Wax could be more unpredictable thanks to F-Iron, but Mistborn won't have that.
- Sliders are the fastest of the bunch, but their metal is also very fast burning.
None of them are moving fast enough do dodge bullets or explosions. Even Slider has to either anticipate them, or get lucky they are sufficiently far to react in time.
5 hours ago, Duxredux said:The real point of my post is to start with "if pushed, what would a Mistborn do to fight at a large scale?" Strategies like "have a squad shoot aluminum on all sides around them so they don't have a way they can dodge" is a severe oversimplification of a war zone.
I told you what I would do as Mistborn, stay the hell away from front lines, my skills are better used elsewhere. Assassination, sabotage, the works.
In Era 1, 8 people with melee weapons and wooden shield are a threat to Mistborn, and Mistborn are repeatedly stated to be primarily used as spies and assassins. Only with Atium are they large scale danger.
By Era 3, Mistborn did get access to few more metals, of which only two are relevant in combat against non-Invested people, Bendalloy and Duralumin.
Except humans now have aluminum bullets, and helmets, and armor of their own, which nullifies the ranged advantages of Mistborn, and you have to realize you are in danger to use Bendalloy defensively, i.e. you have to survive the first few shots/explosions, which is just luck.
So now Mistborn keeps the edge in close range (sub 20 meters), but are in no way better at long range. Modern warfare is waged on hundreds of meters, range at which none of Mistborn abilities work, so considering them is pointless. Which in turns mean Mistborn are a bit faster, bit more accurate (pewter + tin) soldier. Which is a waste of their abilities.In purely urban environment, Mistborn could be useful, as the range of conflict drops to dozen meters , where their abilities start being more relevant. But they are still vulnerable to everything regular soldier is (assuming everyone is using aluminum because they should), which makes using them for direct combat a pointless risk
QuoteIn essence, I'm asking you very clever people to start with how you would fight in a war as an Era 3 fully funded and supported Mistborn trying to cause as much damage as possible to the enemy's ability to wage war on you first. Then counter that.
What equipment synergies with Mistborn?
You say primer cubes, but ultimately Basin doesn't have access to ettmetal, only Southerns do.
Marasi has to have them smuggled in by Allik few at a time, so the Mistborn likely won't have them available once the relationship gets even worse.Which reduces Northern Scadrian Mistborn to, well regular technology as far as we know. And Mistborn with guns, is just a person with guns, just a bit more mobile.
Which means you counter them like you would any other person, except you bring in more people to account for mobility. So larger scale suppressing fire, and then area of denial weapons like explosives.
QuoteI still assert that we don't know enough about the Malwish, nor are we thinking like them. No talk about airships and air superiority, the exact flex Admiral Daal gave Wax in TLM, the technology the Consortium is most proud of. No talk of how they already cracked aerial bombardment decades before BoM (at least the obsolete ship was carrying a bomb capable of leveling the Sovereign's temple). The solutions I'm seeing feel like they were taken from U.S. war movies/games with Northern Scadrial tech slapped on, not a civilization that took an entirely different leg on the tech tree from anything Earth has seen with mechanized Allomancy and Feruchemy.
I don't speculate about this, because in past such speculation always proved wildly optimistic compared to what happened in books.
-
After Era 1: People speculated incessantly about Scadrial creating and fielding Compounders left and right.
- Reality, no Compounders and they cannot be created.
-
After BoM: People speculated about giving people Medallions + Hemalurgy to create functional Fullborn.
- Reality: Again Compounders cannot be created, and you cannot grant more than 4-5 abilities.
So I stick to basics, aluminum weaponry. And frankly, that is enough to deal with Mistborn.
EDIT: Additionally, Mistborn won't have the same level of skill with their abilities as e.g. Wax has with steel, or Spook with Tin, or possibly Wayne with Bendalloy.
They have more powers, so they won't be as skilled in any of them as Mistings are in theirs.2 -
10 hours ago, Duxredux said:
We're going up against a Mistborn expecting heavy resistance. Expect them to come in like Wax with the Big Gun and Duralumin at a minimum.
Mistborn with Big Gun, gets big backlash, Wax used it because he had F-Iron, which Mistborn lacks.
Duralumin requires the Mistborn to stop burning all other metals for a moment, and leaves them open for a moment afterwards, so it is a high-risk high-rewards sort of tactic.
Which can be a big risk on battlefield.QuoteAnti-personal grenades in close quarters that would be suicidal for anyone except a Coinshot,
They would still be suicidal for Mistborn, because nothing in their powerset would protect them from the pressure blast
Quotevehicles or whole buildings ripped apart by structural steel via Duralumin-Pushes after the grenades blasted the aluminum coating off.
Assumes that the structural steel doesn't have aluminum coating directly on its self.
Plus the whole risk of dropping other metals to use Duralumin.QuotePrimer cubes charged with Iron lobbed behind our lines. Compared to many conventional energy sources, the power density available to a Mistborn with a stomach full of steel is terrifying.
Primer cubes they don't necessarily know how to make.
And something Southerners should be easily able to counter, since they invented those things.QuoteI expect a storm of steel and debris obscuring the Mistborn as they wreak havoc, then the debris blasting outwards when they left a primer cube and faded either back to restock or behind my lines - I don't know which.
Yeah, such storm won't do much against explosions, or bullets.
QuoteBeyond that, they are not operating as a one man army here. They will have a support team that can restock them midfight, add suppression fire of their own, and the Mistborn can duck back and recharge the team's primer cubes and make it very difficult to pin down where exactly they are. At this point, who knows, maybe the Mistborn did just a quick recon hit-and-fade and is calling in an airstrike on the target they identified and is planning on going in while the area is actively being bombed. We hardly ever see the protagonists when they aren't outnumbered, generally working nearly solo or with one or two others.
If they are operating as part of larger group, they are:
- Easier to track and target
- Less mobile then they would be otherwise
The same tactics still apply, Mistborn has nothing to protect from aluminum bullets or explosions, and are nearly as fragile as regular human.
If any support team proves trouble some, target those first, as they are not Mistborn.6 hours ago, DoctaDajman said:But against a squad of non metalborn... and armed for a battle... we never saw one really truly operate that way.
99% of what we see of mistborn in combat is based on them planning for a stealthy mission or being prepared for combat against another mistborn. We never saw one wear armor ever.
We never saw them operate that way, because as described in literally the first Mistborn book, they are ultimately not that strong in battle (without Atium).
They are fragile, and even 8 trained people can be dangerous for them.
Duralumin shifts the balance a bit, but not too much.QuoteYou get a mistborn armed with a koloss sword like Vin was and give them a decent set of armor and I do believe they will blow through an army of non metalborn pretty dang easily.
Any armor they would have will be leather at most (or kevlar + ceramic in era 2), which still leaves them open to simple stone tipped arrows (or obsidian, if we would get fancy).
In Era 1, such equipped Mistborn would still get bodied by any reasonable army, because that army has metalborn, so the Koloss sword would be stripped away pretty fast.
Ditto for Era 2.
By Era 3, melee equipped Mistborn would just get shot from a distance by Aluminum bullets, even if opposing army has no metalborn.
5 hours ago, DoctaDajman said:That is a big part of what is missing. Vin never wore armor of any kind. Stone tipped arrow wouldnt do much of anything if she were wearing any kind of armoring.
Against leather armor stone tipped arrows would do fine. If she wore metal armor...enemy Mistings would use it against her.
They were properly equipped for what they were doing, and that included fighting against enemy Metalborn.QuoteArmoring and weapons made for a battle would make a massive difference.
Depends on battle.
Even in Era 1, Mistborn couldn't afford to wield anything metallic themselves, because otherwise opposing Metalborn would use it against them. That leaves them with leather armor at best, but that won't protect much from stone tipped arrows, or obsidian daggers.
Same with weapons, they can't really use any metallic weapons.In Era 2, guns are starting to be a problem, but aluminum is not yet commonplace, but neither is any bullet resistant armor. Which leaves Mistborn in similar position to Era 1, except now there is a risk that someone will just drop a dynamite on them.
By Era 3, Mistborn can have some bullet resistant armor, but that won't protect their hands or legs that much. And even those won't protect them from explosives. Combined with aluminum bullets, Mistborn are basically slightly more mobile soldiers who can interfere with metals from range of 20-50 meters, far less than range of a simple gun.
Mistborn have all their powers relatively short-range based, if they were not considered sufficient for battle field use in Era 1, they won't be useful on battlefield in Era 3, where most of their advantages have been washed away by advancing tech.
1 -
2 hours ago, Frustration said:
Kelsier was given something similar to Allomancy while a CS directly from Preservation, and then held the Shard itself a little later.
Yeah, I think that was basically the same as when Allomancer is using Mists, powered by part of Preservation directly.
If so, then the only two/three candidates for something similar to Heralds (pre-Oathpact) are Kelsier, Wax and likely Marsh.
But of those I think only Kelsier and Marsh have been Invested enough to be in the same ballpark as pre-Oathpact Heralds.QuoteAnd I don't think that 1 is necessary, there was no agreement between Wind and Retribution, but it worked all the same.
No, but there was an agreement between Honor and Odium, and the Power of Honor still wants to stick to those Oaths, as we have seen.
The powers explicitly say to Taravangian that Honor demands the Oath of Heralds be followedQuoteThey are protected, his powers said. “By what?” Retribution demanded.
By an oath and a circle, the powers said. By Adonalsium’s strength. Ten stand against you, using the piece of us within them. Honor demands their oaths be followed.It is likely that neither Preservation, nor Ruin would have the same compulsion to follow oaths.
Plus, Ishar explicitly says that they (Heralds) are a weakness of RetributionQuote"Yes,” Ishar said. “We bear Honor’s power. Much as our Connection to Odium helped us bind him and his spren long ago, our Connection to Honor could let us bind Retribution. In a small way.” The elderly Herald wiped blood from his mouth. “We could maybe prevent him from taking the spren to himself. We could seal away that part of his power, weaken him. Yes … Yes, that could work.”
...
"We must reforge the circle,” Ishar replied. “If the spren are to be preserved, if a Splinter of Honor is to be kept from Retribution’s touch, we must stand tall again. Reaffirm our oaths, exploit that weakness he made in himself for us.”So likely without Oathpact already existing and without the exceptional Connection they have to Honor (even spren consider them closer to Honor than themselves are), they couldn't protect spren.
Plus all of that is just Ishar altering already existing Oathpact, and creation of Oathpact did require Honor.
So I still think 1 (pre-existing agreement of Shards) is necessary for something like Oathpact. And quite likely, the Shard of Honor itself, if you want to bind something against its will.0 -
10 hours ago, Jult said:
Except it is specified as mattering:
Spoiler"We eight who have sworn," Jezrien said, "all remember the old world. But there is one more here who knew the gods. Midius? It is time."
-Jezrien WaT, Chapter 64
"It must be a volunteer," Tanavast said. "And to create the bond it is better if it is someone who has interacted with the gods in the past."
-Tanavast WaT, Chapter 64
"The horse keeper?" Ishar asked, skeptical. "Wasn't he dismissed from the front lines and forbidden a weapon?"
"Yes," Jezrien said. "Nale, this is a bad idea."
"Honor said he wanted someone who had interactions with the gods," Nale said. "Well..."Notably, Hoid was among one of the people who was considered for the original Oathpact. And I don't believe Rayse Invested in him at all.
I stand corrected!
Though Tanavast also specifies since Odium granted them powers, there is a Connection to exploitQuote“Most of you once served him,” Tanavast said. “He granted you his powers. There is a Connection we can exploit, so long as the circle contains enough of you.
- Tanavast WaT, Chapter 64He further brings up a 'blessing' (likely the granted powers) of Odium
QuoteYour pact will complete the blessing that Odium began, then rejected—but you will become mine instead of his.”
- Tanavast WaT, Chapter 64And Taln is specified as being warped by his attempt to kill Cultivation when talking about how he interacted with gods
Quote“How?” Dalinar asked Jezrien, curious. “How did he interact with the
gods?”
“Have you forgotten so easily?” Ishar asked.
“I have had a lot on my mind,” Dalinar said. “Jog my memory.”
“His soul is warped,” Jezrien said, “from his attempt to kill Cultivation.”
So likely Oathpact requires the would-be Heralds to both have souls warped by the Shards (at least some by Shard they want to bind, but not all, considering Taln) and to have some personal Connection.
So, to sum up Oathpact required:-
Pre-existing agreement of Shards that limited how they interact with mortals
- Possibly one strengthened by powers of Honor
- People that interacted with the Shard directly (not all have to have interacted with Odium, as Taln interacted with Cultivation)
- People that have been given power by Shard, for necessary Connection to exploit.
Kelsier does satisfy point 2), but points 1) and 3) are missing on Scadrial (unless regular old Allomancers count). So I don't think Harmony could be bound by something similar (not that he has to be, considering they are already more limited than Honor and Odium ever were).
Kelsier is likely the one that could be most easily re-fashioned into something like a Herald, however he is just one person.2 -
Pre-existing agreement of Shards that limited how they interact with mortals
-
59 minutes ago, Jult said:
I don't think we have the full terms of either agreement, but I could be misremembering (especially on the Scadrial side - I haven't read MB Era 1 in ages).
True, however consider this:
-
In SA we know that the agreement was explicitly designed to limit how Shards can interact with 'mortals', how they can grant powers, modify them, interfere with them etc.
- And that this agreement was further strengthened by power of Honor (which goes step beyond just Shardic agreement alone)
-
In Mistborn, at most we know that Ruin was allowed to destroy Scadrial, and that they agreed to create Scadrial together. It likely doesn't involved much further limits considering:
- Sliver of Preservation can: move continents, genetically engineer all the species on planet, move orbit of the planet
- Preservation can: move continents, move orbit (Vin did both when Ascended), cause earthquakes
-
Harmony can: rewrite genetics of multiple species, all the orbit/continent shenanigans as well, and can grant powers (Spook becoming Mistborn)
- And Sazed did this without rescinding any agreements between the Powers, and we know (from Odium) that pre-existing agreements still bind the Power, unless explicitly voided.
From the above I think it is reasonably clear that Odium, Honor and Cultivation were all much more limited in how they can interact with Roshar and its people.
E.g. the only reason Taravangian was capable of destroying Khabranth was because it was his per the agreement with Odium, he couldn't do the same to others. This constrasts with how both Ruin and Preservation are both capable of massacring population of Scadrial with no regard to breaking of any agreements.59 minutes ago, Jult said:I think we're starting to conflate "Connection" with "Investment" here. I think the strongest factor for Kelsier and Marsh is that they know Sazed and have a relationship with him. Just like the Heralds (minus Taln maybe) had a pre-existing relationship with Rayse. Investment probably matters too, but I'd wager it isn't as important as Connection.
Being Invested by Shard creates Connection, e.g. we know that Mistborn have stronger Connection to Preservation than non-Mistborn.
Knowing someone does also, however knowing e.g. Stormfather and being Invested by Stormfather (as Radiant is) are very different, and the second Connection is the more important one.Ishar specifically suggested Oathpact because of their Connection to Odium, Connection that was there because they were granted power by Odium, so much so they stopped aging. Them knowing Rayse is never specified as mattering, only their Connection to Odium due to being granted Surgebinding by him.
I would say that knowing someone is much less important of a Connection than "had a soul modified by them and their power", which implies some flow of Investiture between the participants. Knowing Sazed didn't make anyone Mistborn, so that Connection is likely useless for binding a Shard.1 -
In SA we know that the agreement was explicitly designed to limit how Shards can interact with 'mortals', how they can grant powers, modify them, interfere with them etc.
-
2 hours ago, ParaTulip said:
The battle of champions plan was a plan to just start a cold phase in the endless war between Singers and Humans of Roshar though. It was a dumb plan. Tanavast was dumb. Hoid is dumb. Everyone who believed in the contest of champions plan was a dupe; I feel most bad for Jasnah in this since it hurts her reputation to be made into a dupe.
Not under Rayse. Rayse wanted this longer break to reconsolidate his power and to manipulate future for better outcome.
Plus cold phase of war is still a massive upgrade to the status quo.
And frankly it wasn't that dumb, if you work with the constraints of- Not wanting to destroy Roshar with Surges
- Want to keep Odium bound
Tanavast formulated this plan when he was dying, and knew future generations would fight a war against a Shard.
You have no hope of doing that, unless something like contest is in effect, or you have Shard on your side as well.QuoteSuppose the day of the contest came and Rayse as Odium put up a normal chicken for a champion which Dalinar strangled and cooked for dinner, winning the contest.
Chicken wouldn't count as willing champion, so that won't fly.
QuoteSure. This theoretically traps Rayse on Roshar for a thousand years. He won't start anything, but eventually someone's pig or chull is going to walk over the border and cause an incident.
The contract is to cease hostilities and maintain peace from Rayse. It would allow him to defend his territory, but only to the extent of maintaing peace.
So it still limits possible extent of hostilities for the next millennium (unless some future representative of Honor breaks the agreement somehow).QuoteI really wish exploring the details of how a peace under the terms of the contest is never going to last was itself part of the contest instead of concluding that in the spirit world.
The contract has in-built requirement of maintaining peace, and not working against Coalition allies or their kingdoms.
That alone is pretty robust guarantee of limited hostilities.
It would allow Rayse to act against any unaffiliated countries, but those would have to become unaffiliated of their own volition with no meddling from Rayse at all.But if e.g. Coalition country attacked Odium country, the contract as written isn't broken, as Dalinar never promised any end of hostilities from his side. But it would allow Odium to defend his territory, as that could be construed as maintaining the peace as set by the contract.
Final wording of the contract below
SpoilerFinal terms are these: A contest of champions to the death. On the tenth day of the month Palah, tenth hour. We each send a willing champion, allowed to meet at the top of Urithiru, otherwise unharmed by either side’s forces. If I win that contest, you will remain bound to the system—but you will return Alethkar and Herdaz to me, with all of their occupants intact. You will vow to cease hostilities and maintain the peace, not working against my allies or our kingdoms in any way.”
“Agreed,” Odium said. “But if I win, I keep everything I’ve won—including your homeland. I still remain bound to this system, and will still cease hostilities as you said above. But I will have your soul. To serve me, immortal. Will you do this? Because I agree to these terms.”
“And I,” Dalinar whispered. “I agree to these terms.”
1 -
4 hours ago, Frustration said:
So thinking about two recent topics, specifically these
I decided to work out an idea
Mission details:
During a hypothetical era 3 war a northern Mistborn is causing the Malwish trouble on the battlefield. Your mission is to eliminate them.
The Malwish have no metalborn to spare, and all combat useful Medallions are currently in use.
What is your plan?
If on battlefield, use
- Suppression (aluminum) fire to pin them down, doesn't matter if they throw up a bubble or not
- Once pinned down, artillery strike or other explosives on their location. Ideally all around the bubble, so they have no room to escape.
Done.
If in closed space, step 1 is the same, step 2 is grenades and other explosives.
Frankly, Mistborn shouldn't be on a battlefield from ~1920s tech onwards, they simply aren't all that anymore.
They should be assassins, like we were told even in Era 1. They are best suited for that:-
Copper
- Hide their own use of Investiture
-
Steel/Iron
- Improvised weapons, and quick mobility using terrain
-
Tin
- Edge over guards/target
-
Zinc/Brass
- Distract guards/target
-
Bendalloy
- Quickly hide/reposition or to quickly kill target
-
Cadmium
- For long stretched of waiting in secure location
-
Electrum
- Double check if your move will work out before attempting anything risky (e.g. passing hall you don't know is empty or not)
-
Chromium
- Helps when target has Investiture that could heal them, though depends on how much Investiture they have
For battlefield, Mistborn are simply too fragile, and not that strong offensively without Atium (and even Atium won't help them against Aluminum bullets and shrapnel).
3 -
11 hours ago, Jult said:
There is a pre-existing deal binding the actions of Preservation and Ruin - The aforementioned pact they made when they created Scadrial. Preservation agreed to let Ruin destroy their creation at some point. In the same way that Honor and Odium remember their deal despite the deaths of their original Vessels, Preservation and Ruin may still be bound to this agreement.
From what we know, Leras and Ati swore was, "You help me create a planet, and in exchange you can destroy it later (or some specific time frame".
This won't bind the Shards anymore than that.
That is very different from the pact of Honor and Odium, which was directly intended to limit all actions they can take on the planet.
Oathpact is explicitly called out as kind of closing a loophole in the original deal, not a strong restriction of its own.
As there is no loophole Harmony is using to act, there is nothing to close with 'Oathpact'.QuoteAll Scadrians have pre-existing Connection to Preservation and Ruin. Preservation and Ruin created them (unlike Rosharans who were created by Adonalsium). Metallic Arts users would have stronger Connections.
You likely need stronger Connection than just that.
Heralds were so warped by the Surges granted by Odium they basically didn't age. This is far from any Scadrian, barring maybe Kelsier.0 -
12 hours ago, Frustration said:
To be fair it was Kaladin who(unintentionally) talked him into suicide to begin with.
Yeah, that was a bit of a fail on his part.
Then again, it was technically a success in that it was first example of Szeth putting what he wants first.
It's just that Szeth has been so used and abused, that he want to die. The man need calm and peace, not a mission (and luckily he gets that).
Plus, Kaladin did try to kill himself not even a week ago, you don't fully shrug off that sort of thing, so him not being at his A game is fine.7 hours ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:The Kholins, paragons of reason, after making themselves powerful above all other mortals in their world, after paving fairyland and putting the fairies in little devices like Dr. Robotnik, after winning every argument and killing everyone who could oppose their authority, while striving to gain the power of Honor, after committing atrocities (genocide, slavery, putting up with Sadeas's atrocities when they have power over him and are actually in charge), after claiming thousands and thousands of pages for themselves and their friends/backstories/love-triangles/feelings, after subordinating the spiritual to the material,and getting off scott-free with the readers' love and approval... finally get a consequence.
If Kholins were paragons of reason they would
-
TWoK:
-
Kill Sadeas-> they actually don't have power of him, they are co-equal noble houses
- And Adolin does do that eventually
-
Kill Sadeas-> they actually don't have power of him, they are co-equal noble houses
-
Oathbringer
-
Dalinar would release Odium to wider Cosmere back in early Oathbringer, and spare himself the headache of dealing with other people's problems
- Let other Shards clean up their mess for once, Honor and Cultivation have been dealing with it for 8 millenia, other Shards can deal.
-
Jasnah would kill Renarin in Oathbringer
- That was explicitly called out by narrative (and her spren) as irrational yet right choice
-
Dalinar would release Odium to wider Cosmere back in early Oathbringer, and spare himself the headache of dealing with other people's problems
-
WAT
-
Navani would not start research into using willing spren in fabrials
- After all, the old ones work, why do more research just on ethics right?
-
Dalinar would not send Windrunners to try and save Herdaz, and instead they might have used them more strategically
- Again, literally called out by narrative (through Jasnah) as irrational
-
(Arguable) Dalinar would kill Gavinor. It would win him the contest, he would be alive, and Odium would once again be someone elses problem
- Luckily, he took the more difficult choice, and forced the people who should have been dealing with Odium all this time (other Shards) to actually deal with him.
-
Navani would not start research into using willing spren in fabrials
So Kholins actually act against reason all the damn time.
Jasnah is the one that is trying to be rational all the time (and even she has brighter moments), and it does rightfully bite her in the bum in WAT.
But even she has her bright spots, thought they just highlight her hypocrisy at the moment.Quoteafter subsuming The Sibling
Once again, bonded spren are not subsumed, no matter how much you don't like it.
QuoteA failure of reason, not because it is not a virtue, but because it is not the only virtue, and Jasnah has made it her only virtue, and has made power her only basis of authority.
...
I love it, because it validates at least some aspects of some of my views on oaths, honor, ideals, and pre-modern ways of life. Had she been "unreasonable" and not been so pragmatic, she could call upon Fen's obligations to her, but she and her family burned away all considerations in matters of power except for power itself.You may be surprised to hear this, but I like that scene for this exact reason as well.
And its not even that if she wasn't so 'pragmatic', she would be able to call upon Fen's obligation to her. It seemed to me that if Jasnah was more 'unreasonable' as you say, and didn't have e.g. assassination plans for other leaders, Fen would side with her there, and Jasnah wouldn't even have to ask.But Jasnah didn't trust anyone other than herself, and her reason (with some minor exceptions), and it caught up with her.
QuoteAnd Taravangian is very much like her. And that's beautiful, because it means he's using the same flawed playbook, the same bullying methods, the same chicanery. Which means he, too, may one day find himself up against a greater power.
Yep.
Though I would prefer if his comeuppance comes not from greater power, but from number of lesser powers.
I don't really like the 'strength justifies the means' approach, but hey so long as the consequences come.QuoteA point where the protagonists actually don't get everything they want like they always do.
I think it is a bit obscured by the narrative focusing a lot on the individual people, but the protagonist side has been losing since Book 2.
- WoR: They don't stop the Everstorm from coming (explicit goal for most of the book)
- Oathbringer: They do stop Dalinar from turning, but they lose Jah Kaved (military on par with Alethkar and Khabranth).
- RoW: They don't get Ishar on their side, they only take back what they lost in the same back, so no progress there. And Taravangian Ascends, completely ruining the battle of champions plan (though they don't know it yet).
- WAT: They lose. Honor is absorbed by Retribution, Stormfather is killed, Urithiru is isolated, most of Roshar is under Odium's side control and Coalition is reduced to..central Azir?
And honestly, I am glad that Odium won in WAT. Not for his sake, but because Singers do deserve that. They deserve to have more of the land for themselves, just like humans in early Roshar history did deserve more space as well.
And maybe they will finally learn to work together for good of all, as like Navani and Raboniel showed, together they can achieve more than they can separate.3 -
TWoK:
-
10 hours ago, Trusk'our said:
Didn't she say she thought she had a bit of them before bonding Pattern? (Coppermind says this happened in RoW chapter 115, though I would double check it if I had the book).
Somewhat yes, but Kaladin also exhibited variety of powers before formally swearing an Oath at the end of TWoK
- Reverse Lashing (with arrows during runs)
- Full lashing (climbing in chasms)
- Breathing in Stormlight and healing (after being left in the storm)
So budding Radiant can exhibit Surges and other facets of Radiancy even before they formally swear an Oath.Shallan does have multiple unusual things going on, but her exhibiting surges before fully bonding Pattern doesn't seem to be one of them.
0
Burn a Shardblade Slicing Through?
in Cosmere Discussion
Posted
More recent WoB is rather clear that metal that is body of living spren cannot be burned.
So Allomancer couldn't burn Shardblade at all