Thus Spake Zaranephilpal/EclipseLegitBusiness
Nephilpal - 09/14/2003 21:15:11
I rule that you can flash your Caste Mark in the presence of sentient ghosts, Fair Folk, demons and other beings hostile to Creation by intent or nature. Once you do that, you are assures they will not attack you and they must treat you with a modicum of hospitality. That won't protect you from spectral animals or bestial hobgoblins or random demon creatures, who don't understand the mark, though such creatures must be restrained by a sentient being if it is a pet or otherwise part of the sentient's retinue.
Enemies of creation must assume you are on legitimate diplomatic business unless you demonstrate otherwise by acting in a hostile manner. They don't get to make a judgment call on the matter. Also, the moment you break protection, protection is lost for the rest of that encounter or as long as you are on their "turf" (whichever lasts longer).
Now, with critters native to Creation, you don't get any pact-related protection without sealing an oath, but that doesn't mean you aren't protected. Most spirits who have any idea what that mark means will treat you courteously so as not to create a diplomatic incident.
The net effect is that the protection isn't absolute in Creation, but close enough that it's all too easy to take it for granted. In the other realms and among the denizens of those realms, you're good as gold if you behave.
-- Neph
Nephilpal - 09/14/2003 23:19:11
"I go one step farther in regards to summoned creatures. If a demon/ghost/elemental is summoned and told to kill an Eclipse, it doesn't really have an opportunity to deny that request. Therefore, the pact immunity doesn't work in these cases."
I'm with you on that.
As for warning shots ... I'm probably going to be as proportionally lenient or harsh with those as the player deserves.
-- Neph
Comments
The first quote, 09/14/2003 21:15:11, is wrongly attributed to Neph. I'm not sure where this mix up began. It was, in fact, my post... I started this thread initially on the old WW boards. STs may want to consider that before considering those statements pseudo-canon. Neph did, I seem to remember, respond with general approval as to some of my core ideas. As a caveat emptor, I also vaguely recall his agreement was not unanimous. Sadly, I'm a bit foggy on what he took issue with (It was four years ago). Unfortunately, I no longer have a copy of the rest of the thread, so the more extensive discussion is lost to history. -- Maddy
