Not terribly. Usually if provoked, they'll run off, and they're not very territorial either. But if one were to rile an aerophin up enough, it could fight back and cause some nasty bites. Go to Comment
You can't say "evolutions" it implies a unit, and I don't think it is a word. Try saying derived. The use of the word "beyond" works if you have a defined starting point, an intermediate and a end point. Go to Comment
I knew what he meant, and that is exactly why I think he can't use the term "evolutions". My understanding is that evolution is on going process, and that during this process organisims derive novel traits that will eventually seperate them for their genetic ancestor or even their contemparies. You can't say a tree is several growths taller than another tree. Go to Comment
I suppose you could say evolutions if you are talking about several discrete paths. For example "Anaylsis of the gene pool of spotted moths, nonmigratory pigeons, and the common mouse species Mus musculus indicate that both moths and pigeons have been under intense selective pressure since at least 1700. The Mouse population however has maintained a degree of diversity predicted by our null hypothesis. The evolutions of the moth and pigeon population....."
Here you can use plural because you are discussing two evolutions, the evolution of the moth and the evolution of the pigeon. Above he is wants to state that his space dolphin shares a common ancestor with the earth dolphin. He a discussing a macro evolution relationship, the use of the terms "evolutions" and "beyond" should not be applied.
If the creature evolved from a dolphin population or reached a dolphin like state via convergent evolution then you are simply discussing the evolution of that population. They did not go through multiple evolutions. Beyond is unfortunate because it suggest a linear relationship, when really it is a branching relationship between related species. Beyond isn't wrong, I just think it should be used carefully.
Writers of speculative fiction deeply effect the general publics understanding of science. When discussing a topic such evolution is it not important that one deals carefully with academic question and considerations? Go to Comment
This appeals to my twisted sense of humor - a divine, potent holy weapon, forged with the heart of evil hidden within it. A clever way to cheat death, even if they way to unlock it isn't exactly something I'd expect to be easy.
A question: does 'unlocking' it make it possibly to revive/restore Vautu in some way, or does it just make the maul a weapon of darkness and evil? If the latter, I could see it being insturmental in the fall of a Guardian from being a paladin to an anti-paladin/blackguard... Go to Comment
In restoring him, transforming the Guardian into Vautu's new form - a fallen paladin become host to a dark god - would probably be an intriguing twist. Perhaps the restoration would be incomplete, with the fallen Guardian becoming host to Vautu's power and spirit, but hybridized with the original mortal, or sharing space with it somehow, egging the unfortunate on to fully restore and release the god into the world once more, if only to be rid of the darkness suffusing him. If the Guardian is still somewhat himself, it might even make for a troubling issue for the PCs - the Guardian can be redeemed, in theory, but to do so you have to purge him of Vautu's spirit and power - which just might bring the god back to corporeal form. Picture the fallen Guardian, manipulated like a puppet, fighting to kill the PCs while pleading with them to destroy him and Vautu... Go to Comment
Now this is the sort of thing I was thinking we need for the quest; not made by a wizard, in this case being made by a demon as a quasi-phylactary and then being reforged by the divine into a holy weapon. I like the role of the guardian and an entire knighly order built around tht position and the hammer. Excellent work Dozus and well done. Go to Comment
It's primary purpose is to restore Vautu to strength after his defeat, yes. Then the "Gavel" - or, in this case, Seraph Hammer - would function as an evil weapon, but it's main purpose would be to act as a focusing point for Vautu's power. It had never actually occurred to me to have a Guardian be the one that restores Vautu's power, but that would make for a fascinating turn of events. Go to Comment
Great one, Dozus! Intricate and absorbing and evokes great imagery. Then again, I am a sucker for anything Sectarian Wars related. Got to this one late, so I will also echo Scras' comment. Go to Comment
I like the weapon, and the idea of using in a 'fallen Paladin' quest is a great idea. I will post this as a alternative to the weapon causing the fall: A fallen Paladin finds the Maul, unlocks the evil within, but turns away from its power? In doing so he could break the curse, and seal Vautu's power away for good, and restore his own nature. This 'fallen' guardian could have been chosen for exactly that reason.
Second note: its implied in the article that each guardian is chosen, but what if that's NOT the case? What if it requires some special property of the wielder to use, perhaps a sufficiently tormented soul with both good and evil in their soul, to match the weapon they wield? Choosing a guardian could be a much more difficult proposition if each and every choice to wield this immense power has, by definition, a tendency to 'Fall'. Go to Comment