But what if it was ruby + sapphire + pearl all together but ruby and sapphire aren't already fused?
i still think it would be a different fusion altogether. because ruby + sapphire + pearl still doesn't equal garnet + pearl
just because ruby and sapphire are the components to make a garnet doesn't mean that all three would still equal what garnet + pearl equals.
the reason i believe this is because i assume that when they fuse it all happens simultaneously. if it happened like two fused and then the third fused then i feel like it would equal the same thing. but since i assume that's not what is happening then i can't assume you'd get the same outcome.
say for instance ruby + sapphire fused and then pearl fused with them. then we'd get the garnet + pearl scenario. because ruby and sapphire already fused to make garnet. change it and say ruby + pearl fused first and then added sapphire. they wouldn't create the same fusion because we have whatever a ruby + pearl fusion is plus a sapphire.
now the reason that i assume that they all fuse at the same time is because if they didn't then when garnet + amethyst + pearl fuse they could have a minimum of three different fusions together. but since they only have one once they all fuse at the same time i can assume they are fusing simultaneously.
the only way i can see my theory being disproved is if garnet + pearl or garnet + amethyst or amethyst + pearl were fused and then the third was added in to create the same fusion as when they all fuse at the same time.
but i still don't see that being the case because it makes more sense in my head to have them all fuse separately into different entities.
the way i see it once they fuse they are a completely different gem. so if two are fused you have a completely new gem altogether. therefore the third fusion would make a different fusion. because we aren't starting with the same gems we did start with.