IN> relic costs

[-=|horsefly|=-]

On 9/26/06, Josh Krutt <death.of.rats at gmail.com> wrote:
> >From Litheroy's e-book:
[snippage]
> So, no.  A Litherite Malakite could not say "Not on me."  That
> deceives.  He would have to say, "Yes, I have a weapon" or
> "Would you like to search me?"

i love the invitation you suggest, parsed in a question as it is.
the problem here is that i'm certain Litheroy accepts (grudgingly,
the ebook notes) that his angels aren't supposed to go around
telling folks they're angels and that there's a war between
Heaven and Hell going on.  it may not be in the Dissonance
Conditions paragraph, but i _really_ wish they'd included an
example of something a Servitor of Revelation is allowed to get
away with.  using a Seraph to compare and contrast between
a Servitor of Revelation isn't the most helpful, here, either.

<opening ebook file on computer, rummaging around> yes,
here it is, same page as you quoted to me, Josh, just the very
next paragraph: "The one secret these angels may not reveal
is their Heavenly nature" (pg 3) for which i'd suggest a
spontaneously appearing hammer would be heavy (no pun
intended) proof.  so a mundane security guard asking if the
Malakite is armed might get, "Would you like to search me?",
"You're free to check," or "Do you see me carrying anything?"
an infernal agent just gets a hammer to the face....

i do still want to nail down (ouch, okay, that's two...) whether
simply carrying it in otherspace (Limbo?) is dissonant in and
of itself, but i'll wait for our resident Archangel of Archives to
get back for that one.

  -=|horsefly|=-