Are the immaculate Dragons actually gods?

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

I'm going to send rulers to you all, then you can truly compare your e-penises.


And no, you're not going to find much detail on Creation's beginnings, ever. The only way you'll find any info with an inkling of truth is in Infernals.

 

[Haku1]

Or the malfeas book... :roll:

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

Well, they plainly state WHY they built Creation in the Infernals book when speaking of Malfeas.

 

[cyl]

The WHY doesn't explain the HOW which is much more essential to get a clear view on the origins of the Dragons and what the hell they are... which is what I am trying to get with all the (so very chaotic) elements in the books.


And I follow the metric system so I'd need a converter :lol:

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

That's most likely the point, the writers don't really have an "exalted bible" to follow writing the series. That's plainly obvious. The developers keep them in line and set certain details, the rest is made vague and contradictory because they want the STs to decide or they genuinely miss that when editing the books.

 

[cyl]

Well I wouldn't want to sound pretentious but... when you create a universe and its cosmogony... you need and want a solid base for it to be coherent.


Example:


Zeus (god) son of Chronos & Rhea (titans) children of Ouranos and Gaia (Primordials).


I mean that's the first step... and it's rather easy to do and simple to set.


Why they couldn't do it... I still wonder.

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

You're never going to get an answer, best lay it to rest.

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

Found the actual answer. Read Aspect Book: Air.

 

[cyl]

Uh ?! :|

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

To the original question. It's in the beginning of the book. The current Immaculate Philosophy is a revisionist religion on the original worship of the Dragons. The Immaculate Dragons are just avatars the religion made up to venerate.

 

[Haku1]

Found the actual answer. Read Aspect Book: Air.

What page?

 

[cyl]

This is also in the corebook 2e I saw it yesterday.

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

Page ten, Haku.

 

[cyl]

Page 16 of the 2e corebook

The Immaculate Order venerates the Elemental Dragons as the Immaculate Dragons, the apotheosis of spiritual development and the lords of Creation.

 

[The zombie cat]

Or perhaps the elements, the core 5, were based on -her- subsoul elements. In which case, they predate Creation. And which is why Gaia rejected the acidic element as it wasn't part of her and she was one of the ones what made Creation...

it is also possible that she did create them after the the building of creation. and that she created them as new third circle souls, or modified some of her souls to preform there tasks. the number and nature of a primordials souls need not be static and can be changed by deliberate choice.


of cause at this point i am confident that the books don't give a concrete answer. i suspect all the theory's posted thus far are valid theories and a GM could choose to use them.

 

[Heaven's Thunder Hammer]

Or perhaps the elements' date=' the core 5, were based on -her- subsoul elements. In which case, they predate Creation. And which is why Gaia rejected the acidic element as it wasn't part of her and she was one of the ones what made Creation...[/quote']
it is also possible that she did create them after the the building of creation. and that she created them as new third circle souls, or modified some of her souls to preform there tasks. the number and nature of a primordials souls need not be static and can be changed by deliberate choice.


of cause at this point i am confident that the books don't give a concrete answer. i suspect all the theory's posted thus far are valid theories and a GM could choose to use them.

Seems kinda like that to me too. No really clear cut answers depending on how you look at things.

 

[The zombie cat]

Or perhaps the elements' date=' the core 5, were based on -her- subsoul elements. In which case, they predate Creation. And which is why Gaia rejected the acidic element as it wasn't part of her and she was one of the ones what made Creation...[/quote']
it is also possible that she did create them after the the building of creation. and that she created them as new third circle souls, or modified some of her souls to preform there tasks. the number and nature of a primordials souls need not be static and can be changed by deliberate choice.


of cause at this point i am confident that the books don't give a concrete answer. i suspect all the theory's posted thus far are valid theories and a GM could choose to use them.

Seems kinda like that to me too. No really clear cut answers depending on how you look at things.

to be honest i find the vaugnes rather annoying. because i know they will one day make the world hinge on the fact that it is the way the developers think it is and another of my really cool campaign ideas will be down the toilet. they did it when they changed autothonians in the south from an option in a supplement to a fact in the 2ed cor book, destroying my idea for a campaign in the south that required the lack of autothonians (one of my players thought the campaign could be modified slightly to accommodate them and was planing how he could respond to them), they did it with the infernals books (i had 2 major story's conseved involving plots by the ebon dragon. nether of which work with the fluff from internals, one called for an alliance between the first and forsaken lion and the ebon dragon against malfius)


this is why i always preferred running settings my players don't know. because then i can get away with changing things just because it fits the story. or more often because i didn't reed the right book and thought i was filling in blanks. of cause my players decide they like the setting and start reading and then i get in trouble for running the setting wrong.


</rant>


Edward

 

[Haku1]

So... don't use 'em? I mean, hell, I'm running a game and I can tell you that the Infernal, Alchemical (future), and Abyssal books do NOT exist in my campaign setting.


And if you tell your players that outright.. that such and such book does NOT exist, you should be fine. And if your player meta-knowledges such stuff in... screw him or her upside down.

 

[krrackknut]

I always thought that the Elemental Dragons were children of Gaia in the way a son is to a father. Similar, but not the same, and did not require disassembling.


And the Immaculate Dragons are the first of the Dragon-Blooded, the first elemental heroes. But oral tradition, misleading documents and a great deal of head-scratching associated the heroes with the source, and so Hesiesh has been the dragon of fire ever since.


But really, it's all up to us. We can fit it as we see fit.

 

[The zombie cat]

So... don't use 'em? I mean, hell, I'm running a game and I can tell you that the Infernal, Alchemical (future), and Abyssal books do NOT exist in my campaign setting.
And if you tell your players that outright.. that such and such book does NOT exist, you should be fine. And if your player meta-knowledges such stuff in... screw him or her upside down.

that's what i do when i know in advance that i am changing something. the real problems ocure when i don't. for example I read in the first ed autothonians book where it stressed for half a page that none of this was included in the setting unless the GM specifically wanted it. so i didn't tell my players that i wasn't using it. then a player started making plans based on rumors that you would expect to hear in the south based on the fluff in the second ed main book.


Edward

 

[Haku1]

Did you -give- said rumors?


Also... shrug and pull out a tribe of locust beastmen or worse a locust fey army...

 

[Supergrunt]

If you look at DotFA: Lords of Creation page 77 you find the following line concerning the dragonblooded charms.


"... can unlock awesome and terrible vestiges of the Primordial power that flows through Gaia's greatest souls."


And I highly recommend you all to read the chapter The Immaculate Order in the Blessed Isle book, it's very good for understanding the immaculate philosophy.