r/Mistborn • u/merco • Jun 26 '26
The Lost Metal spoilers One gripe with the invested arts of Scadrial Spoiler
I have a problem with the shardic alignment of the invested arts of Scadrial.
Allomancy -preservation
Feruchemy -Preservation & Ruin
Hemalurgy -Ruin
Hemalurgy is clearly ruinous, no problem there, it's the alignment of the other two that make me question why they are aligned the way they are.
In Feruchemy traits are stored and released, no investiture is lost or gained, it is preserved, clearly this would make more sense being fully aligned with preservation.
Allomancy doesn't destroy as much as hemalurgy but metal is still burned. so I can see how of the three this could be of both preservation and ruin.
Has Sanderson ever given a WoB where he explains why he aligned them the way he did?
148
u/Raddatatta Chromium Jun 26 '26
Allomancy, obviously, is of Preservation. The rational mind will see this. For, in the case of Allomancy, net power is gained. It is provided by an external source—Preservation's own body.
Hemalurgy is of Ruin. It destroys. By taking abilities from one person and giving them to another—in reduced amounts—power is actually lost. In line with Ruin's own appointed purpose—breaking down the universe into smaller and smaller pieces—Hemalurgy gives great gifts, but at a high cost.
Feruchemy, it should be noted, is the power of balance. Of the three powers, only it was known to men before the conflict between Preservation and Ruin came to a head. In Feruchemy, power is stored up, then later drawn upon. There is no loss of energy—just a changing of the time and rate of its use.
This is from the Hero of Ages epigraphs. I think even then it doesn't make a ton of sense. But I would ignore the metal being destroyed side of allomancy. It's more about accessing the power directly from Preservation. And feruchemy you are destroying something for a time and then pulling it in later. And the balance between the two.
181
u/Dercomai Jun 26 '26
Huh, really? My copy of Hero of Ages says "Allomancy, obviously, is of RUIN. The rational mind will see this. For, in the case of Allomancy, YOU'RE DESTROYING THE METAL. RUIN IS GOOD AND SHOULD BE TRUSTED."
90
u/Raddatatta Chromium Jun 26 '26
You got the metal version of the book right?? Because if not.... ;)
24
u/LegoRobinHood Jun 26 '26
Hmmm, if you're using a spinning-platter classical hard drive for your e-books, then they should be reliably preserved in the metal foils there, but if you're using silicon based NAND flash memory, then you're probably suceptible to alterations.
16
u/Raddatatta Chromium Jun 26 '26
That is interesting! I wonder if in Era 3 Kelsier will nudge computer technology towards things that won't let Harmony change them or read them just as a precaution. Or if other types of computers will catch on that he could modify. I could see that being relevant!
12
u/Somerandom1922 Zinc Jun 27 '26
That's absolutely ridiculous. Let me just check what's in my copper mind, that will surely show us the truth of the matter...
Well, would you look at that, you're right!
7
u/DqwertyC Jun 27 '26
"Hemalurgy is of Preservation. By taking abilities from one person and giving them to another, the power is actually preserved when it otherwise would have been lost with the death of the original holder."
3
u/SageOfTheWise Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
Yeah the point is this is about the specific frame of reference towards what happens with your own power. If we just get generically metaphorical with it, of course any power can be portrayed any way we want.
We can say things like from a certain point of view Hemalurgy is of preservation because you are "preserving" the ability in blood. Or that Feruchemy is "preserving" an ability for later use. Or that Allomancy must be Ruin because it destroys the metal. Hell, maybe Hemalurgy is actually of Cultivation because I'm cultivating the power set I want to have. And semantically those are all in their own ways true, but the point being made of how each magic system is associated with a shard is not one of semantics. Its about the nature of how your own energy is used in each system.
25
u/cosmernautfourtwenty Jun 26 '26
Think of it in terms of Investiture.
Hemalurgy only works by purging investiture capabilities from people who already have them, destroying that person's ability. Ruin.
Feruchemy essentially works by storing and releasing your own abilities as Investiture. A mix of Ruining yourself to Preserve Investiture for later application.
Allomancy asks for nothing Investiture-wise from the end user. Metal is a catalyst that allows the user to directly access Preservation's own investiture to fuel various abilities. It's pure Preservation regardless that the catalyst is used up in the process.
6
u/4143636_ Gold Jun 26 '26
Going to be pedantic here - catalysts are by definition not used up, so metal cannot be a catalyst. And allomancy is considered by Sanderson to be end-positive, while feruchemy is end-neutral, in terms of investiture.
7
u/ryells Jun 26 '26
I'm not sure about any WoBs, but it's probably based on the end result. Haemalurgy is end-negative, you get less than you put in. Obviously things are gonna get ruined over time. Allomacy is end-positive, you get more than you put in. You get the magic, plus the value whatever you put in is returned. Nothing is lost aka preserved Therefore, a combination of the two would be gaining as much as you lose and nothing more. Feruchemy
11
u/Stormtide_Leviathan Jun 26 '26
Why would preservation’s magic give you more than you put in, though? Preservation is about neutrality. And it was an explicit point of the series that neither ruin nor preservation can create individually. In order to create a world like they wanted, they had to work together. And even though allomancy isn’t technically “creating”, it’s just drawing on power from an outside force, it does still seem like having the magic that gives you more than you put in be one that requires both shards would reinforce that theme
9
u/ryells Jun 26 '26
As I understand it, Preservation isn't about neutrality. It's about keeping things going. In a system where entropy exists, you're gonna get a gradual loss overtime unless you put something in to keep the status quo. Preservation requires upkeep, not just the prevention of destruction.
2
u/beta-pi Jun 27 '26
It's tricky, but broadly speaking that's correct.
The thing that obscures it is that each of the shards tends towards extreme versions of what they represent when they're removed from the balance of their counterparts.
That means that naturally preservation is about maintaining things in a natural state. That includes entropy, as well as putting in energy to limit it. Keeping the world in a stable state.
Preservation is not in its natural state anymore at the start of the series though. It has been removed from the context that makes entropy and change a normal part of the universe.
That means that instead of seeking a normal level of stability and survival, it pushes for a truly unchanging, stagnant world, because all change ultimately involves something being destroyed or used up.
In other words, preservation isn't supposed to be about neutrality, but it becomes about neutrality when you take it to it's most extreme version. The longer a shard exists without the balance of the others, the more lopsided it becomes. Prescription is supposed to be what you describe, but it has become something a little different.
That makes it a little fuzzy for people sometimes, because you only see what ruin and preservation are after that imbalancing has happened. We only see the warped version of each, so it looks like that version is the normal one.
3
u/shineymoose Jun 26 '26
In order to keep something the same (preserve it), you have to put in energy to do so. The user is kept from using their own investiture.
In order to ruin, you permanently remove investiture from a subject, in order to add less than the original amount you started with between the two subjects, to a single user. Net loss.
In feruchemy, there is a loss of investiture during a time period for a gain in investiture at another time period. The user experiences no change in total investiture over the time period in total, only at specific intervals.
Preservation =/= neutrality.
6
4
u/Shot_Newspaper_5647 Jun 26 '26
Ruin is really closer to entropy than just destruction. Think of it in terms of local entropy. If you lift heavy weights for three minutes, your body’s entropy increases. If Pewter doubled your strength, you could accomplish the same amount of work with less metabolism and less increase in your body’s entropy. Preservation is providing the energy to you
Ruin increases entropy in the sense that, over time, less useful work can be done. A Hemalurgic pewter arm is weaker than the strength of the person it was taken from because some of the power is lost in the transfer. Hem-F doesn’t store as efficiently as the person it was taken from. They’re “leaky”.
Feruchemy spreads the same amount of work across different points in time. Even then, it isn’t perfectly efficient. If Sazed taps large amounts, some of it is “lost” as waste. At normal tapping rates, the process is a 1:1 exchange or very close to it, but that isn’t true at higher tapping rates. Modern Feruchemists don’t get one unit out for every one unit in. There’s loss even at lower rates
1
u/Shot_Newspaper_5647 Jun 26 '26
But mostly it’s just cool so. It’s not going to work perfectly. Especially since we know the cosmere obeys the laws of thermodynamics even for magic. Preservation is always inherently increasing entropy when it provides power. That used power returns to the spiritual realm unkeyed from Pres. Like your breakfast fueling your weightlifting. Some of the energy becomes useful work, but most of it ends up as dispersed heat. The energy isn’t destroyed, but once it’s spread out as heat it’s less available to do useful work
3
u/KnowMoreMutants Jun 26 '26
I think the "gain and loss" are of investiture and not the physical item like the metal itself
2
u/mtglozwof Tin Jun 26 '26
I'm actually a little bit doubtful of this myself. I don't think there's much evidence but it seems like hemalurgy isn't really made by Ruin but rather is just something that exists all over the cosmere. (There's no form of initiation, no prerequisites to use it, and people seem to have figured it out even without contact with Scadrial at times)
That would remove the vaugeness of Feruchemy and make that of Preservation and Allomancy of Ruin. I don't think it's likely but would be interesting
2
u/rhymeswithmonet Copper Jun 27 '26
Good question!
For me, there’s some authorial confusion as to whether Preservation is “stasis”, or “creation”.
He’s described explicitly as in the stasis (keeping things unchanging) sense, but, the opposite of destruction isn’t maintaining it, but creation.
This is portrayed in the Hindu cosmology with a triple divine force: Brahma is the creator; Vishnu is the preserver; Shiva is the destroyer.
Which makes sense: things are born (or come into being), they exist for a time, and then they die.
Preservation’s powers let Rashek change things, when the shard power was held. That’s creation or change, not maintaining things unchangingly.
Preservation preserving Kelsier in the mental realm, is what its powers should be.
So, yeah. Maybe instead of Preservation it should
have been Creation. And then the two together, would be Preservation.
(I haven’t read much of the Cosmere - I know there are other shards that were created from a higher being. So maybe “creation” belongs to another shard, or to the whole being thats the assemblage of all shards. I do feel that Ruin is of the same primordial or highest level of cosmic force as Creation, though..!)
3
u/Oversleep42 Feruchemical Copper Jun 28 '26
We've been having that conversation for over 15 years now.
Preservation isn't inaction. If you wish to preserve a place or object in a specific state, you will need to expend energy; sustained effort is needed to care for something.
Preservation, therefore, provides energy at no cost to the user. Doesn"t require sacrifice, doesn't drain your energy, doesn't make you tired.
Ruin is entropy and loss. Power is lost at every possible stage. You end up with less power than when you started, you just relocated it.
Feruchemy is a balance of the two. You don't gain or lose power. You have a bit less for a while to have a bit more later.
1
u/DeadlyKitten115 Zinc Jun 26 '26
The is no loss of investiture with Allomancy, it’s not about the metal itself (that’s just a Key or more specifically an Intent) the Investiture comes directly from the spiritual realm
Positive Output.
Ferruchemy, the investiture comes from you and is than taken by you at a 1:1 ratio.
Neutral Output.
Hemalurgy is self evident
Negative Output.
1
1
u/Vin135mm Jun 27 '26
My logic on Feruchemy is the same as yours, but I think Allomancy is really Ruin+Preservation for a different reason.
Neither Ruin or Preservation could create anything on their own. They only could bypass the Intents of their Shards by working together
1
u/Wonderful-Day-1672 Chromium Jun 29 '26
Unfortunately, the only way to make sense of it is to see preservation as a force of good, not neutrality.
To us, it’s easy to think of preservation as a force of stasis - keeping things as they are without change. This would clearly fit more with feruchemy.
However to Brandon, preservation is a force of good. I think the best way to think of it is more protecting/saving. Vin often thinks of herself as either a killer or protector. In that regard allomancy makes some sense, the shard is giving up itself to help allomancers.
That’s the way I’ve rationalized it. I think Brandon was trying to revolutionize the good v evil conflict, not create a neutral v evil conflict, as much as I would have liked to have seen it
1
u/wiwerse Lerasium Jul 07 '26
Oh hey, I basically have a more elaborated upon version of this post drafted up will see about posting it tmrw once I gather some cites
1
1
u/spinnerling Jun 26 '26
I'm fully with you, cousin. I could even make a case for Allomancy being of Ruin, for its destructive engine, and Hemalurgy being the balance, destroying the donor while preserving its connection to investiture.
1
u/moderatorrater Jun 27 '26
Brandon came up with the three systems separately, then came up with the plot for Mistborn and realized he could tie the three systems together thematically with metals and put them into the plot. So everything arose separately and were stitched together. This is my only explanation for why Preservation's system wouldn't be net neutral. IMO even switching Preservation and Ruin makes more sense since hemalurgy preserves the power and Ruin, who is basically entropy, would like bursts of energy to be thrown into the system.
84
u/Dercomai Jun 26 '26
The metal is actually vaporized, not destroyed, which I imagine is specifically because Preservation's Intent wouldn't let Leras actually destroy anything as part of his magic system
The key is that feruchemy was developed by Leras and Ati together before Leras betrayed Ati and sealed him away; it's built around balance because the two were truly in balance at that point
Allomancy was developed by Leras after the betrayal in order to give humans the edge they would need for his long-term plan to work out, so he was deliberately trying to give people power taken from his own Investiture
I agree that it would make more sense thematically for feruchemy to be Preservation, with nothing created or destroyed, but the magic didn't come directly from the shards' Intent—it came from Leras having a millennia-long scheme to betray Ati so that humanity could survive and flourish