Lord Stormer

I had many things I loved in childhood and most of them fade away. Astronomy is an exception. I think it was 2008/09 when I found the passion (I'm 24 today), and I remembered in those days I really wanted to find a game or simulator where I can create my own solar system from scratch. I still do. A decade and a half later I'm writing a space opera with a variety of (fairly realistic) hand-crafted planets in mind. I have a penchant for details, so I've assigned them all the features I can think of: geology, rotation, orbitals, seasons, temperature, atmosphere - and imagining them at work. It's not hard to guess my favorite field: exoplanetary research. The hunt for other Earths or life orbiting other stars is getting exciting lately, because we're approaching the technological capacity to make it possible. Also, I'm very interested in the search for Planet IX. The signs are tentative and the search has been around 10 years, but in the next few years we can either confirm or rule out its existence.

I really love how it induces a sense of wistfulness and loss. The feelings are strong but the narrative is incomplete, and that drives me wishing you continue after the last line. Who's the girl? Who's "they"? The questions I have makes me wondering if your poem is a first act.

Scientifically speaking, the phenomenon is not unprecedented. Radiation increases chances of mutation. While in most cases the subject (wolves) became ill and die, given enough time, one extraordinary genetic tweak will emerge - if the environment is not lethal enough to wipe out the population. The wolves that got this mutation also are more likely to survive and thrive, thus an evolutionary advantage. To be realistic, I'm pretty sure cancer-averse genes and cognitive functions are largely unrelated. Side effects, maybe a bit. I know what you're devising, but has the mutation to bio-apocalypse trope been overdone?

Reading this thread it seems to me there is something worth pointing out, but it's as slippery as soap. I'm not a good articulator. I do feel the same way as the Oathpact as to the WaT contest, because of the process of how agreed words earns its power, and that power is subsequently contested by interpretations that makes them seem technical and legal, or in my old OP "arbitrary." In the intent of my OP, I am comparing this sort of legal mechanic to the nature of fantasy, which I don't see so fitting. A reader should have their natural subconscious flow tuned to fantasy expectations when reading Stormlight Archive, but I felt "disrupted" by the debates of what words mean, and only for the truth - what happens in the end - to not be fully bound by these legalities. I just think there had to be a better way for power to be manifested in words than this.

I'd say your allegory is best applicable to desires. One who can't no longer do what he / she wishes (like paralysis or injury) will be mentally hurt, will yearn what if they can be like in the past - or the riverflow before where the dam stops them. The longer they are unable to do anything, frustration builds up, and souls can really break. The dam collapses. That man might find a small breakthrough that liberates, or the the river itself - life - will be out of water, its flow forever defeated. While not entirely in accord, at least my interpretation shows that natural systems - in its simple form - is being replicated in many unrelated aspects. To remind you, it's not a cycle unless something rebuilds the dam, a third power that intervenes in nature, or in my interpretation, other people.

Skyward was the one which made me reading again, and I'm very anticipating Riftwake (and gladly waiting a Skyward TV show!). In all honesty I don't really liked the direction of the series, but reading Janci's Skyward Flight, I can be hopeful. Wished for more pilot / flight team drama than showcases of cytonic abilities, but guess it was Brandon's preference for magic systems. I'll be fully invested if Janci gives us a fully fledged space opera with those dogfights. Here's some prediction (or expectations): 1. Backstories, mostly. Of course, where is Old Earth, and what happened to it. 2. What happened to other humans across the galaxy, and their colonies.

If we compare both quotes literally, taking into account what the words define, I'd easily agree. The problem is that Brandon might wrote them very much in a passing glance. Unlikely did he meant every word to be exact, so I interpreted the quotes as what they are essentially about, not literally verbatim. Talking context, Ham added "entire day's fighting" because he was commenting on how Vin inflicted 300 losses on Lord Cett's army out of his 1000 in 10 minutes. The italic quote is on the book, and it's purpose is to emphasize contrast. Thanks for the research. Some years ago I read a figure of about 10%, and that's why I initially believed Dalinar's claim more, alongside with its recency. But I am curious why would Brandon changed the figure when he intended to say essentially the same thing in both - which I do.

Found a light oddity while reading Well of Ascension last night, and came to a claim where I knew the same topic was mentioned in Oathbringer when I read it last year, but obviously at least one must be false. The quotes talk about military science, so if any of you are acquaintanced in this topic, I would like to hear your opinions. "Even on a battlefield, most armies will break if they take thirty or forty percent casualties in the course of an entire day's fighting." - Ham, taken from The Well of Ascension, chapter 44 "Many armies would break after suffering ten percent casualties, but here - reportedly - the Vedens had continued fighting after losing more than half their numbers." - Dalinar, taken from Oathbringer, chapter 100 Which one is right, or if any? The circumstances of the battle in Luthadel and Vedenar are obviously not similar, but these statements are a reference to military knowledge. I would personally favor the general Dalinar than crewmember Ham being right, and that the Oathbringer passage was written around 2015-2016, about 10 years after the Well of Ascension. I'm curious, not only which statement is right, but why the two differ at the time of writing.

Very well, and I do respect your comment. Thanks also for giving light on spoiler rules. I struggled to convey my thoughts with clarity, so I've spent many edits to the thread title and my original post's wordings. The day I'm writing when I wrote this thread hasn't gone well in real life. Now I'm reading Well of Ascension. The book has been difficult going through. It was slow and made worse as I always had this "white room" impression for Mistborn books. In fact, it was reading chapter 13 (where Brandon introduced us to kandras and their contracts) that gave me spark to ask your opinions about this topic. For all my understanding of soft and hard magic, I always see it as a spectrum. The Cosmere is not absolutely Hard magic, but it leans to that. Intent and interpretations give breathing room for flexibility. But since the universe is inherently built around magic, so I very much accept it works best that way. To make it straight, not favoring hard magic doesn't mean at all I don't like the Cosmere. I enjoy Stormlight to the end of Wind and Truth, despite criticisms, length, and pacing. So many other things to cherish than the negatives. I am proud to be with Kaladin as he spoke Ideals from the First to the Fifth. Hard magic doesn't deny wonder - I'll send you to the end of Words of Radiance to prove you wrong - but I want to be candid. I like to ask questions and be open with criticism. Regarding your first point, I have a lot of opinions, but one that stands out may be the expansion of the universe. As the scale becomes grander, an unforseen consequence is a dilution of depth. It's more appealing to read when magic emerges in a world that has mostly forgotten it, than when it comes to dominate the scene. It's exciting when we discovering something new about the magic or watching characters do what has never been done before. For you last point, it's what in essence what I worry. As conflict and character dynamics complicate (a pattern consistent from the Way of Kings), I fear that straightaway solutions might be the only way how to solve.

Very much agree with you when you said legalism has become necessary. The definitive and rational nature of Investiture allows for such mechanisms to arise. Brandon's structured writing style may encourage application of this, which I see as a potential drawback in the genre of fantasy where magic is intuitively supposed to be fantastical. While writing this response I thought of this: it may be up to the reader's subconsious expectation. I generally favor soft magic and worldbuilding. As I'm working on my own novel, I prefer things to happen naturally and organic. We readers who are exposed to Brandon's defined brand of worldbuilding tend to demand for more reasonable explanations for what's happening, that's why the 17th Shard always have burning questions on how Investiture works. If Brandon were to create the Cosmere through a softer worldbuilding approach, the pursuit for satisfying answers may not be so pressing as we can excuse it as part of the mystery and wonder takes over.

It's a topic I shelved in my mind for quite a time already, but now I feel compelled now to ask your opinions about. For those who've read Stormlight and Mistborn I think you'll understand which parts I'm referring to, but since this thread is not posted under Cosmere Discussion, I'm not spoiling anything. While I do respect and acknowledge Brandon's renown on hard worldbuilding, when I started the Cosmere last year, I felt foreboding I'm not going to get through easy. Brandon builds worlds like fixed frames - hard magic and something I can call closed lore. It doesn't fit well on me, but best if you want your world managable for future planning. For one specific aspect, though, he went too far. I'm not a fan of hard magic systems, I have little against it. However, I am uneasy how he overstretched the importance of binding contracts for storytelling. There's nothing wrong in letting characters to be legally bound or face reprecussions, but in Stormlight's case (you know this), a grand fantasy conflict is governed by a complex set of legal mechanics from an ancient agreement to the final resolution. It's not just confusing, but because it feels abstract and inorganic, especially when characters debate loopholes to exploit, and I think that crossed a red line. It's not the only example, as you might have read. Since Brandon has written about contracts early on, I have worries that it'll continue. I just want to know your opinions about this.

It's great to hear you've prepared so much for your story. I was a bit worried that your ideas are too simple at first glance, although I knew you've written a worldbuilding encyclopedia. I take notice of your quote I underlined right there. Something I wanted to tell in my previous post, but I was unable to articulate. It's about writing your worldbuilding asset. As you might have read from my reply at the Shattered World thread, I am at the same process of writing a novel. The draft is 37,000 words and counting. It seems we both prepared worldbuilding beforehand, then begin executing them when it seems right. Mine has 83 files regarding characters, magic system, planets (it's a space opera), timelines, etc. I enjoy adding entries, but these are the lessons I learned. 1. When you've added so much, you become increasingly discouraged to tweak important points because the implications spill over to the rest of the encyclopedia. It becomes an uncoordinated mess, because ideas change often. In my case, I became less flexible. I'm not guessing your problem, but I had this burden when my story planning became fragmented. My tip is to divide your worldbuilding info into two categories: one for ideas that are essential or unlikely to change, and another a tentative idea bank for things less certain, and they be useful when you look at it again in the future. 2. No one is wholly a discovery writer or an outliner. I thought I am a strict outliner. I still do sometimes, but it takes faith to realize that you can create effective ideas while you're writing your draft. I often sauce my outlines with heavy details because my instincts told me they are essential, only to be disappointed that jumble of writing ended up mostly not useful. Just be concise, outline and worldbuild with sentences as simple as you can so you won't be overwhelmed. Believe you are more creative as you write. If you wrote wrongly, know every author have subsequent drafts. I still struggle to apply this, honestly. Remember these tips may not work perfectly for you. Fit them the way most convenient for you.

I need to ask first. Does this magic system belong to the same Shattered / Dead World from another thread of yours I replied a few days ago? Regarding the two choices, both are equally good. I slight lean to Idea 1 because it is more suitable to your writing style. A question I love to ask too is how "hard" is the Starlight magic system. Like if someone touches a pool, will the magic they receive depend on something, or just their desire? I generally like softer magic systems, because they give flexibility and a deal of mystery. It might be a surprise to hear that in a Sanderson forum, but I do. Softer magic systems are essentially less deterministic, it depends more on factors not so predicted, or sometimes a character's intent. Contrary to the popular view, they aren't so prone to become plot devices. Another good question is what Starlight gives or does other than powers. Do you have more dynamic effects, or effects that can hardly be understood by the characters?

Alright. I see your world really has a potential. Efforts are never in vain when you have a personal purpose. I am also writing a story at the meantime - a sci-fi space opera with a flipside fantasy magic. One of the planets that I conceived is similar to yours: an air world with layers and floating spaces (though in my case, little magic is involved). My first thoughts, the Cosmere influences on your worldbuilding are too conspicuous. They're fine, but people might notice them quick. Or maybe the elements that I percieve inspired from the Cosmere are actually prevalent in the wider fantasy genre. I haven't read so much recent fantasy books. I'm most interested in the gap between the Shattered Skies and the Dead World. Is it transitional or a hard border? Do you have creatures that hop by islands? Does the inhabitants build gliders? Thought experiment: Someone living at the lowest island of the Shattered should cast down the longest rope possible, and ask a volunteer to dangle on the bottom. If inhabitants of the Dead World try to cut that rope, make their motive part of the worldbuilding, I guess?

Yep, right, but that's universal regardless of the type of reader. One of the most reliable constants in the Sanderson community is HoA being S-tier.