Otherkin Glossary

[Shiari]

Actually, I consider most human mythology about dragons to be complete and utter balderdash. ^_^;; Most of the boards I frequent, once you get past the purely superficial aspects of the dragons there, are filled with so many 'outliers' that there's practically no "in" dragons at all. Those that do follow the mythos closely are typically found on the boards that full of extreme levels of mind-numbing fluff.

[Terro]

can't say that I can agree with that, with the exception of you, most people that deviate greatly from the mythology end up somewhere along the lines of being billion year old "Blood Dragons" or super-powered video game heroes.

Then again, I don't frequent many dragon specific boards, Chai would have to comment more on the matter.

[Archer]

"2. A goodie two-shoed, sinning group of cloud-humping-hippie choir boys who wear dresses and play harps."

I'm having a whole mess of issues with this. I'm sure its a joke and that's cool but it shouldn't be in the "articles" section for serious viewing if that's the case. Maybe a better definition would be:

2. A being that is positive energy based and serves many facits of the greater benevolent good.

That way its vague enough to fit a varying view of angels.

Only if your "varying view of angels" is limited to, you know, people that agree with them.

Why the need to assign value judgments to a definition of a race?

[Salaiek]

can't say that I can agree with that, with the exception of you, most people that deviate greatly from the mythology end up somewhere along the lines of being billion year old "Blood Dragons" or super-powered video game heroes.

Then again, I don't frequent many dragon specific boards, Chai would have to comment more on the matter.

I do think that modern things such as D&D, modern fiction stories, and video games can be considered as 'human mythology' here, along with such tales as that of Tiamat and Fafnir, since they've all shaped the mainstream's current standard for dragons. So billion year old "Blood Dragons", all-powerful dragon gods, and such would actually be playing right along with mainstream ideas of dragons. Then there's the more animalistic, limited-lifespanned, non-magickal dragons like Shiari and I which are generally not claimed that often by those who are just in it for the 'cool' factor or false ego-stroking.

[lemur]

"2. A goodie two-shoed, sinning group of cloud-humping-hippie choir boys who wear dresses and play harps."

I'm having a whole mess of issues with this. I'm sure its a joke and that's cool but it shouldn't be in the "articles" section for serious viewing if that's the case. Maybe a better definition would be:

2. A being that is positive energy based and serves many facits of the greater benevolent good.

That way its vague enough to fit a varying view of angels.

Only if your "varying view of angels" is limited to, you know, people that agree with them.

Why the need to assign value judgments to a definition of a race?

I was gonna point this out, too, thanks Archer! I mean whether angels work for "the greater benevolent good" is debatable.
Maybe a better definition would envolve how they tend to be beings of order (although I'm not 110% on that one, I don't read a lot into angelics because it's... confusing, honestly, it's beyond me how you guys can get all the choir and types and roles things).

[Archer]

I was gonna point this out, too, thanks Archer! I mean whether angels work for "the greater benevolent good" is debatable.
Maybe a better definition would envolve how they tend to be beings of order (although I'm not 110% on that one, I don't read a lot into angelics because it's... confusing, honestly, it's beyond me how you guys can get all the choir and types and roles things).

Beings of order? Says who? Chaos gods not allowed messengers now, huh?

Strikes me as the only sensible definitions of "angel" are either the very narrow Judeo-Christian sense of "groups of beings created by JHWH before humans who perform certain roles in His service", or the very wide "entity created by some form of higher being or divine power to carry out some form of service on its behalf."

[lemur]

I was gonna point this out, too, thanks Archer! I mean whether angels work for "the greater benevolent good" is debatable.
Maybe a better definition would envolve how they tend to be beings of order (although I'm not 110% on that one, I don't read a lot into angelics because it's... confusing, honestly, it's beyond me how you guys can get all the choir and types and roles things).

Beings of order? Says who? Chaos gods not allowed messengers now, huh?

Strikes me as the only sensible definitions of "angel" are either the very narrow Judeo-Christian sense of "groups of beings created by JHWH before humans who perform certain roles in His service", or the very wide "entity created by some form of higher being or divine power to carry out some form of service on its behalf."

My apologies, I DID say I was not "100%" on that one -- I don't read a lot into angelics because I find them "confusing" (they probably find Fae confusing as well and so on. Hey, diversity is the spice of life). I was just pointing out that the whole "great good" part is debatable. The "order" part was mostly because from what I have gathered that seems to be their main characteristic, thank you for correct me on that one (not being sarcastic. I'm serious; otherwise I'd live believing that one. Hey, it's what we're here for, right? To learn about these kind of things). But wouldn't a Chaos god reject any sort of hierarchy or organization?
And I know, that is at least better than the "great good" definition (about the second paragraph).

[Archer]

But wouldn't a Chaos god reject any sort of hierarchy or organization?

Possibly - but why does that mean no angels (as in beings created to carry out its will)? It might well be more likely that chaos angels of a chaos god wouldn't all look alike and have strict choirs, ranks, etc. But that is just one specific view of what it is to be an angel anyway.

[lemur]

But wouldn't a Chaos god reject any sort of hierarchy or organization?

Possibly - but why does that mean no angels (as in beings created to carry out its will)? It might well be more likely that chaos angels of a chaos god wouldn't all look alike and have strict choirs, ranks, etc. But that is just one specific view of what it is to be an angel anyway.

Mmm, makes sense... Thanks.

[Shiari]

doing the bidding of a thing is a type of order, however. A truly chaotic "servant" for a deity might, might do part, or might not do its creator's bidding simply because that would be part of its nature as a being of chaos. Thus, a chaotic 'angel' would most likely have to be created and then simply let loose, with no instructions given. That would make things pretty damn chaotic.