Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25539649-20150620190612/@comment-26824317-20150707235841

InariOgun wrote: Sunnydacat66 wrote: InariOgun wrote: I really can never take the "sard and onyx fusion" theory seriously. Ruby and Sapphire fuse so well BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME STONE. And guess what? GARNETS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. You don't combine Jasper and Lapis to make Malachite. The fusion draws some concept from the source, but not in a strict geological sense. They dont have to make " geological sense " Yes, that is what I'm saying. It's pointless to try and guess a fusion based on what it's made of, beause that isn't how they seem to be basing the fusions. Garnets aren't made of Rubies and Sapphires, Opals aren't made of Pearls and Amathysts, and Malachite isn't made of Lapis Lazuli and Jasper, so there is literally absolutely no precedent that says Sardonyx should be a fusion of sard and onyx; ''unless it was literally a forced fusion made the same way as the cluster but more complete (as in, sard shards and onyx shards literally fused together, and not gem-fused like the ones we've seen so far). ''

that makes perect sense!

oh how i wish i knew what saradonyx is gonna be