Timewaster's Guide Archive

I like your post, Phaz but I also disagree with some of it.

So, Inquisitors.  We know that they can be made from allomancers (Marsh).  We know that they have the powers of a mistborn.  We know that their abilities are usually stronger than normal Mistborn.   We know that they use allomancy.

We do not actually know that they have the powers of a mistborn, at least from what I recall. If you have a passage to support this, I would appreciate it. As is, we know that they can push/pull metals and that they can use atium. It is likely that they strengthen themselves with pewter. However, I can't recall an inquisitor ever using emotional allomancy. They would have no need of tin as it would not help their "blue line" vision anyway, and hearing better wouldn't really help them. They don't need aluminum, and likely not duralumin as they are so powerful in the first place. I would say that it is possible that they have the powers of mistborn, but has by no means been proven.

The other debate is whether or not they use allomancy. I would think that some of them would be mistings and thus could use allomancy. However, we have yet to see an Inquisitor actually ingest metals. They could possibly be allomancy/hemalurgy mixture users, but there is just as much evidence to suggest this as there is that they are pure hemalurgists.

The reason the two systems are so incredibly similar is because, quite simply, I couldn't think of anything at all for hemalurgy to give them. We just haven't seen much of the inquisitors. I personally think that they are too similar as well. I think that they would naturally have similarities, as well as with feruchemy, but I couldn't think of what other powers to give the inquisitors.

I don't see a reason to have two magic systems that have the same powers, just different sources of that power.

Neither could I, but then I noticed something...

In Allomancy, Pewter supplies the burner with added strength and speed. In Feruchemy, Pewter stores strength and steel stores speed.

In Allomancy, tin increases the users senses. Tin allows a Feruchemist to store senses.

Allomancers use atium to see the future, but it also speeds up their thought process. Feruchemists can accomplish this thought speeding with zinc.

There are several similarities between the two systems, wouldn't you say? And what's the real difference? The source of power.

Likewise....

Using hemalurgy, you can push and pull metals. This is also possible in allomancy.

Using hemalurgy, you can see the future (though possibly differently than allomancy, we don't really know). This is also possible in allomancy.

Using hemalurgy, you can rapidly heal yourself. This is also possible using Feruchemy.

I think the overlapping is fairly justified considering what we've already seen.

It is entirely possible that Inquisitors use allomancy, but until I see something that gets rid of the possibility, I personally will believe that the Inquisitors are primarily hemalurgists.

This leaves me with the following conclusion.  Instead of Hemalurgy being this complex system involving using your blood to fuel powers or something, what if it is as simple as a process that let's you 'steal' powers from an Allomancer or a Feruchemist.

It very well could be, and I actually quite like this idea. It explains fully the necessity for a sacrifice. However, it also has its problems.

My interpretation of this is that you would kill a skaa misting with a particular allomantic power and put his/her blood on a spike. Then you stick the spike in yourself and you magically gain their power through their blood. This would also apply with a Feruchemist, allowing inquisitors to use feruchemy.

However, feruchemy doesn't have the all-or-nothing limitations of allomancy, so if Inquisitors are "stealing" Feruchemial powers, they should have all of them, not just healing. We have seen no evidence of this thus far, and you would think we would have, particularly when marsh is fighting Sazed. Also, the Inquisitors wouldn't be so fascinated with feruchemy and its capabilities.

 

We could assume that if you 'steal' a power from someone that you already have, it would make you even stronger at it.   This could explain why Vin can pierce copper clouds, just as inquisitors can, but she can't heal like them.  Maybe if you stole the power from 3 coin shots, your power to push metals would be far above what a normal coinshot would have.  Also, like with Marsh, if he had the ablity of a seeker, then stole the powers of a seeker, he would have even more seeker power.  Brandon mentions in his annotations that the ability to pierce a coper cloud and affect metals inside the body isn't something special, it's just someone being very very powerful with that particular skill.

I originally really liked this, but the problem comes with someone who already has a particular skill. From my above mentioned interpretation, you would gain the ability to burn metals. However, if you already have that particular ability, i can't see why it would make you any stronger. The only way of doing this would be if it provided a continuous power source, which I don't see how that would work.

Overall, it's a very good idea, but I just don't see how it would work. If I am misunderstanding or you think of a way it might work, I would love to hear about it. It's good for us to discuss all options. 

I really like how you defined Allomancy and Hemalurgy in terms of Ruin and Preservation. I mean, it seems so OBVIOUS now. I am steadfastly certain the Lord Ruler picked up Preservation at the Well, so, if he got that and "created" Allomancy, it would naturally be based in Preservation. The Ruin-Hemalurgy link is very well explained, so that works for me.

I was thinking about this today, Chaos, and I thought myself that it may have been preservation he touched. I'll go into my full theory over on ruin and preservation.

I still don't really like that sacrifice explanation though. Just... seems weird, I guess. More stuff to work on, then.

I've always felt that this is the weakest point in my theory. I just haven't been able to come up with any other reason yet, although if the Inquisitors actually do gain allomancy, the thing about killing mistings makes the most sense. I have a hard time believing the inquisitor allomancy thing, but I have yet to find a better explanation. I'll keep thinking.

Comatose does have something, though. The spikes are all touching. That's important... we haven't gotten onto that point yet.

My initial thought when I read that was that as the spikes sever the spinal cord, They are the only connection to the brain. If the inquisitors have to think about using hemalurgy to heal themselves, then once they lose the ability of their brain to communicate with the rest of their body (i assume the gold spike is in the chest, as the lynch pin is steel and no one remarks about inquisitors having gold sticking out of their eyes...) they are no longer able to heal themselves. Could be wrong, but this makes a lot of sense to me.

Phaz, I really like your idea, but I just don't feel there's all that much to support it. So for now, I stick with my original theory of hemalurgy. Now to work out all the bugs.....sacrifices.......mist repelling......yes

As a side note, you guys really aren't nearly brutal enough in tearing me apart. I encourage you to do so at the end of every post and I get like one thing each time. How am I supposed to fix it if you guys don't tell me what to fix? It also makes me feel kinda bad when I start picking on phaz, here....(*contemplates deeply on the matter of tearing posts apart....*)

I've wondered about this myself. It would be very helpful if someone could supply the exact location of the quote in question. I'll look, but no guarantees....

I would like to once again state that I am decently sure that Preservation is not good, but is simply the embodiment of order. This may be good most of the time, but it could theoretically also be bad (a tyrannical dictator who has thousands of skaa killed would be supported by preservation, which in itself implies resistance to change).

Basically, I have always assumed one of two things here. Either A) the Lord Ruler didn't actually create the kandra, he just found the way to control them, or B) the kandra are misinformed about their origins, and believe they are of preservation but are actually of Ruin. Either one works, it just depends on the slant you want to take.

Not to put so geeky a point on it (but it's done already), you're trying to say that they more closely resemble the neutral aspects of Law and Chaos? If so, it seems like it may work a bit better than strict Good v. Evil, but without that black and white moral definition, we begin treading on uncertain authorial ground.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say. Think about it a bit, and you'll see what I mean. This is kind of my instinctive reaction from wheel of time, but Ruin = Chaos/destruction, not necessarily evil. At the same time, Preservation = Order and resistance to change, but not necessarily good.

It is true, however, that due to the nature of each force, Ruin would tend to come across as being more evil and Preservation as being good. However, if saving a person's life (something good) led to that person becoming a leader and absolutely bungling things up so that the entire area just fell apart, Ruin would help that person live, even though at the time,  it was a good thing that he did. This is a really bad example, but I think you can get what I'm trying to say from it. Something opposite could happen in the same way for Preservation.

This does indeed start to grey things up a bit, but that's what makes it fun, right?

Also, people, please don't let this totally dominate this thread, it's a good thing to discuss, but there are other things too, like what Ruin and Preservation actually do, and what they actually are. What they represent is important, but not all-important.

This is entirely possible. He may have been trying to get the volcanoes to spew up metals from underground, which makes a lot more sense than anything else we've come up with so far. Excellent Suggestion!

AvalonDreamer, you should add inquisitors to the poll. They are arguably similar to mistborn, true, but there are enough differences to warrant it, I think.

Before I go to far on this, I would like to clarify something that has been irritating me. Several people seem to be taking the stand the Ruin is evil, Preservation is good. This is not the case. Rather, ruin just wants to bring the world into as much chaos as possible (and will do good things if it furthers his goal.), while preservation is the force of resistance to change, the force of order (and will do evil things to do it). This same misconception happens all the time in the WOT. But anyway, with that explained, to the main body of my post.

The way I see it, this could work out two ways. Either Ruin and Preservation are actual forces/powers that are controlled by other beings (including possibly people), or they are the beings themselves and control other forces and people to get what they want.

If they are forces, one would have its highest concentration at the well of ascension. The other would have a high concentration elsewhere.  After all, these forces must be very equal in nature, or one would have overpowered the other by now. The amount of control each force has over the world is determined exactly by what those who used the power did.

If they are actual beings, on the other hand, they control the world through other forces, such as the mists and hemalurgy. This makes more sense than the other theory in many ways. 

I think it is most likely, however, that they are some type of blend between the two. The force itself is Ruin/Preservation, but it is conscious. They are able to affect the world based on the amount of freedom they have at a given point in time. As one becomes more free, it naturally forces the other back into its prison. I agree that it makes the most sense that preservation is also somehow bound.

But other than that, there isn't much to go on. Does anyone have the annotations where Brandon actually mentions this? It would be much appreciated.

This makes sense, but the fact of the Lord Ruler allying himself with Ruin does not. Why would he ally himself with someone who wants to destroy the world? After coming to power, Ruin would be his enemy, as it wants to bring Ruin and Chaos. Instead, the Lord Ruler would more naturally ally with preservation, who would help maintain his throne. True, Ruin would more likely ally with him in the first place (He did pretty much completely remake the surface of the earth, and preservation implies resistance to change), but who wants to be stuck with an ally who's going to spend the next thousand years plotting your destruction?

So really, the most logical idea is that the Lord Ruler just used the power at the Well of Ascension, be it Ruin or Preservation (though most likely Ruin) and forced it to do something. However, if we are going to assume that the Ashmounts are intentional creations, then we also need to find the reasoning behind the intent. You don't just randomly decide to throw up a couple of active volcanoes in a perfect circle.

Perhaps, he predicted the effect the ash would have on morale, and used it to control the skaa? He may have just been trying to change the world completely so that people would not remember the "old days," and would be less likely to rebel. This tactic has been used before by new governments coming to power that felt the people wouldn't really like them (particularly in France, but I guess it's because those French tended to go through governments pretty quickly).

So yes, these are my thoughts on the matter.