It's a common theory that Denna's mysterious patron (Master Ash) is either Cinder or Bredon. So far, there's no conclusive proof of it being either, but there are a number of hints (physical and thematic) that align with both possibilities.

There's also a third (and less popular) theory that Cinder and Bredon are the same person. Hints include them both having white hair and dark eyes, Bredon being away from his estate when Kvothe fights Cinder and the bandits, and Bredon teaching Kvothe tak, "a beautiful game" (Bredon makes a point that playing a beautiful game is more important than a quick and easy victory - could this parallel with Cinder not killing Kvothe together with the troupe, only to tie him up in a more masterful trap, setting breadcrumbs and involving Denna in the process?)

The above has all been suggested before, and the most common argument against it is the Cthaeh.

While in the Fae realm, the Cthaeh, who cannot lie, says that Kvothe meeting Cinder again is a "twice-in-a-lifetime-opportunity." But Kvothe had met Bredon multiple times by that point. If Bredon is Cinder, that completely contradicts the Cthaeh's statement, right?

Not necessarily. The Cthaeh is known to bend the truth to nefarious ends, setting the pieces in play to ensure maximum misery and destruction ("a beautiful game?") If he told Kvothe that Cinder was Bredon, this would lead to an immediate confrontation when Kvothe returned to Severen. This is sure to be destructive, but the Cthaeh can see all future paths, and perhaps the more destructive option is to keep Kvothe in the dark, only for him to find out later that Bredon/Cinder is Denna's patron (potentially with Denna involved).

But wait, the Cthaeh can't lie, right? It couldn't simply pretend that Kvothe's meetings with Bredon didn't happen. My theory is this: It bends the truth. It considers Cinder in his Chandrian form and Cinder in Bredon's form to be separate entities. Kvothe encountered Cinder in his Chandrian form after the killing of his troupe (1 meeting), and again at the bandit camp when his body and face were obscured behind chainmail (which could have been hiding his Chandrian form, making it 2 meetings). This could be setting up a third and final meeting in book 3, a third time that pays for all.

Now, this theory isn't impossible, but it seems nitpicky, right? Can the Cthaeh really suggest that Cinder in his Chandrian form and Cinder in his Bredon form are separate entities?

My answer is yes. And what's more, the Cthaeh does this more than once.

When it speaks about Laurian, the Cthaeh says "she was always a trouper, that one." I believe this is more than a play on words. The Cthaeh is explicitly stating that Laurian was always a trouper (and it cannot lie). However, we know from Kvothe that this isn't the case - Laurian was once a noblewoman who left to join the troupe. There was a significant time in her life when she was not a trouper. And if the Netalia Lackless theory turns out to be true, then she must have changed her name to Laurian upon joining the troupe.

So Laurian was "always a trouper," but we know that Kvothe's mother wasn't a trouper her whole life. For the Cthaeh's statement to be true, it must be considering Netalia Lackless and Laurian as separate entities (one wasn't a trouper, the other was always a trouper). What makes them separate?

Their names.

And if Laurian and Netalia can be considered separate, Cinder and Bredon can too, using the exact same logic.

I've only read the series once (I finished yesterday and I've been really enjoying reading the theories posted by this community). Let me know what you think on this, and if there's anything I might have missed!