Windrunner

I'm glad you like the site! We really try to provide a fun place for discussion. Also just as an aside, you do not have to use spoiler tags here, since we're in the Cosmere Theories Board, all cosmere works are fair game. I'm glad to see your definition of anti-investiture, as I had not found a specific definition for the term anywhere on the boards (another problem I had with it being commonly used is the lack of a clear common meaning) My apologies if I missed it, but I do think that says something in and of itself. I'm no newbie, I keep up to date with most all the non-RP boards on this site, and yet I still wasn't quite sure what exactly this word was supposed to mean. Members that are less active or new would have an even tougher time figure out precisely what is meant. Now I want to point out what appear to me to be flaws with that definition. What precisely do you mean by "an Invested"? Someone who uses one of the magic systems, like an Allomancer or a Surgebinder? Anything that has Invesiture related to it, such as a Splinter like a Divine Breath or a Shardblade? I think I provided a pretty solid definition of Investiture based on what's actually in the books. I can pull specific quotes if I need to make it more ironclad. I'm not at all certain what you mean by investment. Do you mean times such as when Kaladin invests say a rock when he's lashing it? But the next bit about Investment being a key kind of loses me. If you're already Invested there's no need to transcend the borders of the Realms, you have spiritual energy already. Are you talking more about Elantrians when they draw the Aons to create external places to channel Investiture through such as the Aons, rather than through their own body like say a Mistborn? I think I've found the root of our disagreement. The way I view it there are two options. Your anti-Investiture is derived from some non-Adonalsium source or it is derived from Adonalsium. As I mentioned before, there is no evidence for an Anti-Adonalsium apart from a few cryptic comments about an opposing force, and there are other problems as well, which I shall describe later. If it is derived from Adonalsium, there is no reason to make some distinction between Investiture and anti-investiture. For instance, each person has a small amount of Innate Investiture within themselves. This Investiture stops interferes with Allomancy, preventing a person from Pushing and Pulling metals within a person (for the most part). This would seem to fit within your definition for anti-Investiture, but there's need to invoke a second category. The powers are even derived from the same place. The majority of the Investiture inside a Scadrian is of Preservation, the source of the Investiture for Allomancy. There's no distinction necessary. I'm intentionally leaving out a bit about the definition of anti- as I don't think us quibbling about what precisely our made-up words should mean adds much to this conversation. I maintain that the word itself is not easily intuited by simply looking at it. I do think that I made the point in my first post that that while they may appear similar, when you burn aluminum you do something different than what the presence of aluminum does. Aluminum acts weirdly in all the systems but the act of burning it is part of Allomancy, so I do not believe the two properties to be related. In addition to that, the effect of an Allomancer burning aluminum, as per the Alloy of Law Ars Arcanum, is "instantly [metabolizing] all of his or her metals without giving any other effect". So there is not even a nullification effect going on here, as far as the books give evidence. They are metabolized, not counteracted or blocked in anyway shape or form. I did not mean that it is a half-shard, I meant that it is like one. Just like how ancient Soulcasters are like modern fabrials but also different in ways we don't fully understand. The emphasis here is mine. As far as I can see, I made no such claim in my argument, and if I did or I implied it somewhere, I apologize. I do not, and never have believed that Stormlight powers Shardblades. They are Splinters. They don't need Stormlight, they have their own inherent energy to them. I think trying to separate Shardblades and Surgebinding makes absolutely no sense. The spren grant the ability to use Stormlight and are the Shardblades. Also, "metal" really isn't a magic system. As you've so astutely put it, the Blades are spren. Following that logic, the guards would have to be spren based as well. The guard also fails to nullify the power of the Blade entirely at least, as they remain super light. It wouldn't even be a perfect cancellation. Also you say that an anti-investiture must be of the same type as the thing it is cancelling. Would not the guard have to be spren-based as well? It's not as if a Shardblade is metal that has been Invested, it is something else entirely. I'd like to add that ralkalest is a metal, not a rock like Soulstone. However, you state that Soulstone creates a stamp that works better because it is Soulstone, just like a pure alloy burns better because it is pure. This is not supported by my reading of the text. Soulstone is easily carved, Soulstone can be carved to have clean edges, Soulstone can be made durable. All of these properties are useful in making a durable functioning stamp. It's not better because of some spiritual thing, it's better for all the same reasons that making a Soulstamp out of talc would be a terrible idea. Shai even admits at one point that crystal makes better stamps but it's annoying to carve so she prefers Soulstone. It's just got useful physical properties, it doesn't have something inherent in it for better stamps. Regardless of this, the seals are the basis of Forgery, not the stamps. To say otherwise would be like saying that your finger or the stick you use to draw an Aon is the most important part of AonDor. Your anti-investiture should be a symbol or something that cancels out the stamp, not a metal, so this does not fit your definition of anti-investiture. I agree, lets leave the black sphere out entirely. No point in arguing over something we literally know nothing about. As I mentioned above, I do truly think that Aluminum's Allomantic effect and its physical effect stem from two entirely different things. They don't do the same thing. Metabolizing metals in Allomancy is not the same thing as nullifying a variety of other magics. I think you mistake me. Silver has no properties on Scadrial where it nullifies nothing. However on Threnody, from Shadows for Silence in the Forests of Hell, it has the ability to damage and kill shades, the natural Investiture of that world. That's cancellation as far as I can see, but it is admittedly not of the same type, which would disqualify it according to the definition you supplied early on. I think that this is a flawed reasoning. We can say that it hasn't been definitively stated to be true. However without any real evidence otherwise, there's no reason to suspect that it should be something different. Maybe each power from every individual metal in Allomancy comes from a different source. That's never been stated as false, so we technically don't know the truth of the matter. However, there's never been any evidence to point to this, so there's no reason to suspect it to be true. Also I'll just throw this out here. Everything is related to Adonalsium in the cosmere. I consider this fairly damning evidence against an Anti-Adonalsium. So in conclusion, the only things you would call anti-investiture are ralkalest, aluminum, and the guard on the Shardblade? I think I've offered up fairly good evidence that Forgery/ralkalest shouldn't count as "anti-investitures" based on your definition. I've delved quite deeply into the issue of aluminum and shown evidence that it cancels nothing, it simply metabolizes metals instantaneously as its Allomantic power. The fact that it does this and happens to have a resistance to other Investitures is simply a coincidence. Whereas copper, if anything is closer to what you're trying to get at, as it actually neutralizes emotional Allomancy at the very least. In the case of the guard, I honestly think we have too little evidence about it as well to truly discuss it, but as per your definition it really should be spren based, which again we really have too little evidence to prove or disprove. If I may be perfectly honest, to me this definition doesn't feel like it organically contains all these items within it. I just really don't think they belong together and don't seem at all alike except in a few coincidental ways. It's just Investiture messing with other Investiture. No new terms or Anti-Adonalsium necessary.

All right, here it is for anyone interested! Got a little long, but I'm excited to hear your thoughts!

I've seen the term "anti-investiture" thrown around a lot lately and after a request from another member, Sirce Dawnwielder, I've decided to share my opinion. I'd also like to preface that this is not intended to be an attack on him for asking the question about anti-investiture or anything like that. The term itself was useful in the moment and I thank him for reporting the question, I simply believe that it is not a non-canonical term that should become commonly used. Also forgive me if I repeat myself or overstate a point. My theorycrafting skills are a tad rusty. xD Let's start by examining the quote in question so that we can refer back to it later. I would like to briefly note that from the quote, Brandon did not necessarily intrinsically understand what "anti-investiture" refers to, rather several examples were given and Brandon seems to have understood what they were saying. After that moment he made no comment about the veracity of the "anti-investiture" categorization and simply stated that we would see more about the black sphere in book three (Yay!) but otherwise neatly dodged the question, like he always does when pointedly asked about the black sphere. This is just another example of him being clever in not saying RAFO but not necessarily giving a useful/spoilery answer about the mysterious black sphere. Anti-investiture as a Term: I believe the term anti-investiture to be a tad nonsensical. In my knowledge of cosmere canon, the word Investiture is used in two specific contexts. Firstly, it can be used to describe a source or type of spiritual energy. Breath is Investiture, Stormlight is Investiture, the Dor is Investiture. The other context is has been used is to refer to a magic system as a "manifestation of Investiture". Allomancy is a manifestation of Investiture, so is Surgebinding, ChayShan, and so on. So one usage appears to refer to a spiritual energy, and the other refers to a method by which the energy is accessed or utilized. " (Invest is also used as a verb to refer to the act of transferring Investiture to a person or object, but that's not really important here.) "Anti-investiture" would at first glance not even really make sense. I'm not physicist, so perhaps I am wrong, but I see an equivalent real world term being "anti-energy" which doesn't make any sense either. I believe this in and of itself is confusing.The alternate interpretation which seems to be the one being used is a sort of inverse of Investiture, something that counteracts or cancels it. Assuming that's the case, let’s look at the examples provided. I will also add a few other examples that would apparently seem like they should be included if we accept anti-investiture as a valid categorization. Anti-investiture as a Classification: The first example we see is aluminum. Now aluminum actually has two properties that at a first glance seem very similar. The first is activated when it is burned. All metals in the Allomancer's stomach, including aluminum can no longer be accessed Allomantically. That power is due to Investiture, it is powered by the energy of Preservation shaped by the molecular structure of the metal. This is not some power intrinsic to aluminum, chromium does a very similar thing externally. If that destructive quality makes aluminum an "anti-investiture," then chromium should be considered one as well. Still the fact that both are powered by Investiture, is at the least a confusing dichotomy. The other use for aluminum seems to be a material one. It interrupts various Allomantic and Feruchemical powers, and if other quotes are to be believed, has other effects in different magic systems. Yet this is not really some sort of "Anti-investiture" or even regular vanilla Investiture, which is a source of spiritual energy. If anything it has some sort of innate disruptive property. Parallels here can clearly be drawn with ralkalest (as mentioned in the quote) or silver. The fact remains that there does not appear to be any sort of inverse energy or "anti-investiture" involved. They're weird and have funny effects, but there is no evidence that this is due to some external power source that disrupts investiture. The next example mentioned is the guard on the Shardblades. The nature of these is not entirely clear but the way I see it there are two probable explanations. One is that they are made out of some material akin to ralkalest or aluminum that has inherent ability to cause Invested things to act funny. I tend to think that one is false, but it matters not. If it's a material property, my same arguments from above apply The other option is that they are more like the half-shard fabrials and have been designed to dull the Blade. If so, like these half-shards, and Shardplate itself they would be powered by Stormlight, which again is Investiture not some sort of anti-investiture. (However there is no sign of a power source for these guards either, so I am stumped as to what their true nature is and it is possible that neither of these explanations are valid.) Either way neither of these seem to fit with the description of anti-investiture as I understand it. That brings us to the black sphere. This devolves into speculation a bit at this point since its nature is unconfirmed, so you may not agree with me. At the very least we can say that we know too little to properly comprehend the black sphere. My understanding of it, based on small hints we've recieved and my own reading of the text is that it is some spiritual energy akin to Stormlight, but not of Honor/Cultivation/wherever Stormlight comes from. My suspicion is that it is from Odium, the most obvious interpretation. That would make it not of some nebulous other being or power, but simply another of the Shards of Adonalsium, another type of Investiture. Just like Breath is not Stormlight, but still comes from Adonalsium. Again, it makes little sense to call this anti-investiture. The second major problem I have with the term is that I don't believe that the energies and materials listed actually deserve to be listed in the same category at all. We've come full circle back to the fact that anti-investiture is not a clear term. Some of them, including burning aluminum, and potentially the black sphere have powers that counteract or block magic the ability to do magic. If this is the measure of anti-investiture, then we must include burning chromium, the Dakhor ability to counteract Aons as anti-investiture. The others seem to have some material property that defies Investiture, such as ralkalest, the presence of aluminum, and silver. These two things are not the same at all. The Shardblade guard adds more problems. Should anything that blocks any Invested object or power related to Investiture be considered anti-investiture? Is Shardplate an anti-investiture? Should half-shards be counted? Nightblood? Burning copper to protect your emotions? There is no real distinction between these examples and that guard. So right now, we have both objects and magical abilities in this odd "anti-investiture" category. Some are directly powered by Investiture and others don't seem to have a power source. If I was forced to, I would divide this group in half. The specific materials like aluminum, silver, and ralkalest, could potentially be grouped together, although I still think "anti-invesiture" is not terribly descriptive. Investiture-cancelling materials (wordy but more accurate) would be my personal preference. The powers like burning aluminum, chromium or the dark sphere (if that's what it actually does) and those type really don't need a term. They're just times when one Investiture interferes with another. After all, dismissing an Aon or lashing could under that definition technically be an "anti-investiture" under our broad definition. You can call them "anti-investiture" if you really want to, but they're just different Investitures; it's misleading. I've already seen speculation about this relating to some sort of "Anti-Adonalsium" which is clearly not the case. Anti-investiture has the opportunity to be mistakenly interpreted a multitude of ways. Conclusion/Too Long Didn't Read: Unspecific non-canonical terms like "anti-invesititure" do us no favors. Firstly, the term itself does not makes sense based on our current understanding of Investiture's definition. The things that "anti-investiture" refers to fall simply into three categories: Investiture cancelling materials - Aluminum, ralkalest, and silver. Abilities from Investitures that interfere with other Investitures - burning aluminum, chromium, copper, Dakhor disruption Half-shards/Shardplate/etc - Things specifically designed using one Investiture to counteract other Investitures You can ignore my feelings that anti-investiture as a term makes no sense, if you want. The fact remains that these do not belong in a category together. They produce similar results, but are unrelated in cause. So that's my viewpoint on the subject? What does everyone else think? I'm interested to hear other people's arguments for or against this?

All right. I started typing an in-depth explanation of why I disagree with the term, and came to the conclusion that it would neatly derail this topic. xD It's also not quite done yet and I have Spanish in fifteen minutes. I shall start an in-depth topic later tonight where I'd love to have this discussion with everyone. Perhaps there are reasons that this term exists that I'm missing. I'll edit the link in here when I make my topic!

Sorry Aoibbhean, accidentally downvoted you there. I evened it up below. My bad!

We're not in the Elantris board, so I'd say yes. People still come here that haven't read it. They should be able to keep up with Q&A's without the end of Elantris being ruined. Also I agree with Zach. In addition to that, I personally feel that the term "anti-investiture" is not particularly useful or descriptive.

I honestly think looking at that quote that it should be interpreted as the moment the Well began to refill. A man was killed by the mists in the very beginning of Well of Ascension, long before the Well was completely full.

It used to be Gavland, but Brandon changed it to avoid confusion with Gavilar. I think this one is a coincidence.

As Adonalsium has been referred to as a "he" multiple times by Brandon, including here. Personally I think it's actually probably beyond gender, but I do doubt that it's a place.

Finally got around to backing! Not sure what extra dice I'd vote for. Personally I'm leaning towards malatium, because that would encompass all metals known in the first Mistborn book (except for that aluminum cameo, but I'm ignoring that xD) or lerasium, so both god metals are in the set.

I'll just take care of it!

We probably have to wait until Peter finishes editing them xD

Huh, Skaa: Tin and Ash supplement. That's interesting too.

I'd honestly be shocked if he managed to answer the Elantris cities question without referring to his notes.

I already did. Brandon refused to say why, but he did confirm that Hoid wanted it and it was not just to set Shai up.

Here it is! http://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/20880-idaho-falls-signing-sat-1129/page-3#entry205144 Sorry that it's not pretty, I just got a new phone and I'm not used to the Android OS. There's some good stuff a few pages prior to that too!

We actually have confirmation that Odium got at least one more Shard in addition to those three.

Didn't that happen in the Final Empire when Kel and Vin pushed on the coin while he was training her?

If you accompany Brandon to WorldCon this year, I'm sure you'll get quite enough of me. xD

I'm gonna go with that. After all, as Brandon explains in the annotations, he uses the phrase "mooning" over someone, and Scadrial has no moon. It's just a translation quirk.

Megan did really die, but it wasn't due to the fire. Suspecting a trap, she rigged David's gun up, pointing at the window of the room he was supposedly in. When she went inside, realizing the trap she used the remote control to fire the gun at herself, so she was killed by a bullet rather than by the flames, so she could reincarnate. Does that make sense? I personally thought it stretched the bounds of plausibility, but that's just me.

I just noticed a tweet of Brandon's from this month. I thought this was rather interesting. To me, this seems to be a quiet confirmation that Hoid had the chance to take a Shard but decided against it. What do you guys think?

Journey before destination, my friend. We've got three main cosmere books within the next two years or so, which is already pretty great. We're years away from needing to worry if all the series will get finished. I'd prefer Brandon coming up with too many stories to ever write them all to him running out of ideas. Just think about all the stories we've yet to hear. It's gonna be great!

@Kurk The Perpendicularities were mentioned in that little Jasnah POV that Branon wrote after the assassination attempt.

Just popping in with a friendly reminder that we should all try to keep our posts fairly civil and polite. On the other hand, if it's not profane, an attack on another member, or in some other way problematic, everyone is free to express their opinion. If there is a genuine problem with a post, please report it rather than calling that person out or anything of that nature. Staff members can take a more unbiased look at the situation and actually resolve problems. Clicking report doesn't hurt anyone, it isn't a black mark on their profile or anything, we just get a little icon that lets us know there's something we might want to look into. If anyone has any further concerns here please feel free to get ahold of the staff and we'll help you out. Moving in a more positive direction, I agree that the maps are looking pretty great. I'm impressed that you've drawn this. Personally, I couldn't freehand anything to save my life.