Solf J Kimblee (
explosivecombat) wrote2012-10-04 01:10 am
Entry tags:
NIETZSCHE; DEAD PHILOSOPHERS' INBOX
The offer for conversation is always open, should you desire to take me up on it; I can't guarantee that I'll respond immediately, nor will it necessarily be the response you want, but I'll always respond in some way.
In the name of enlightened discourse.

no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
- Undermining the stability of the building somehow, usually by destroying large amounts of the ground directly beneath the building itself.
- Causing some sort of chemical reaction that would render the air around the alchemist flammable, and then setting it ablaze. I've seen this used in ways that were either widespread or incredibly targeted, from the same alchemist; his control was impressive, I'll admit.
- Forcing an unstable reaction within the materials provided, causing the materials themselves to explode.
Of course, there are also forms of destructive alchemy that aren't driven toward the destruction of property - there was one alchemist that was said to be able to destroy your soul itself, and another who was able to kill you through touch by freezing or boiling all the water in your body.
Destructive alchemy is never clean, Locke.
no subject
Present company excluded.
no subject
Although I admit that I do find it interesting that you haven't asked your teacher exactly what it is he specializes in.
no subject
My guess is that your specialty is destructive alchemy, and one of the methods you named is your own. Would I be wrong?
no subject
Any further guesses?
no subject
Of the remaining three, I don't see you favoring the first — you strike at the targets you're given directly, as opposed to undermining them and letting them fall as they may. Which leaves the last two, and I think that comes down to a question of your arrogance.
My inclination is the second, but playing coy and implicitly lauding your own abilities — that's something I would do, not you. So while I think the second sounds more like your method of choice, the dicta makes me doubt that's so.
no subject
The third method is mine, however, you're right.
no subject
What made you choose explosions? I assume you chose them, given the variation in method from alchemist to alchemist.
no subject
And of course I chose them; anyone who claims that the method "chooses" the alchemist is either lying or greatly romanticizing the process. However, what I've told you so far doesn't give a proper indication of what it is I do, and for that I apologize - my specialty isn't so much "making things explode" as it is energy conducting and manipulation. It's a discipline that's largely unexplored and incredibly difficult to utilize without running the risk of killing the alchemist.
With that in mind, it was the challenge in doing something unique, something that no one else had done, that drew me to it at first. The explosions came later, and were admittedly accidental at first; as my own drafts and theories progressed, I found ways to weaponize them. My methods are entirely unique, much to the interest of my country's military; as of this point, my efficiency and power have yet to be replicated by anyone else, and I remain the only person to have mastered the discipline.
[That might be because channeling large enough amounts of energy to blow up a city block through one's own body is generally recognized as a really bad idea by most, but details...]
no subject
And yet you've managed to master it with no adverse effects? Consider me impressed with my teacher.
no subject
no subject
Sooner or later, you're going to run out of negative things to caution me about, and you'll have to start naming some of the positives instead.
no subject
no subject
no subject
But very well, then. Shall I tell you about the Eastern Sage? It's a far more positive story, I promise.
no subject
And I do like stories. Please do.
no subject
However, reasonably few people in my nation have heard of Xerxes by name; it's more commonly referred to as the nation that disappeared in one night. The king of the land craved an artifact said to bring the wielder immortality; in attempting to obtain it, an array was constructed, the people of Xerxes sacrificed in an attempt to satisfy the king's greed. Ironically, the king also perished, accidentally killed by the rebound caused by his own array.
However, the attempt wasn't entirely in vain; the artifact the king sought after so badly was created, at the expense of most of the country; very few people survived, and almost all of them fled upon realizing what had happened. Perhaps to Xing, perhaps north; I'm not really sure where they ended up. But there was one man who remained, who sought answers to what had happened and found the artifact that the array had created. In finding it, he received the coveted gift of immortality; however, knowing it was at the cost of literally a million of his countrymen, he was determined to see that the tragedy at Xerxes wouldn't be repeated, and to ensure that the souls of those who had perished could be returned to the Gate properly and not remain bound to the earth due to the nature of their demise.
And so he traveled to the west, toward the center of the world, where alchemical power is at its strongest; he met a small group of individuals that were settling there, establishing their independence from the countries they'd left behind. After some time, he began to teach them the wisdom that had been present in Xerxes, teaching them how to cultivate the land and thrive despite harsh conditions; after some time, he taught them alchemy. However, there was a law that he laid in place for all alchemists to follow, that wasn't to be questioned and should be taken as one of the vital life-concepts: alchemy was only to be used to benefit mankind. Not to satisfy one's lust for power, or to allow one to cause wanton destruction as they saw fit; alchemy was a gift to humanity, and it should be treated as such - it should be cherished as a blessing, not made into a curse. The people called him the Eastern Sage, or perhaps the Philosopher from the East, depending on the speaker; he's still greatly revered among the people of my country.
The Eastern Sage still lives today, seeing as how he still has immortal life; he's still present within our country, though very few know who he is or would recognize him if they saw him. He's still conducting his own research; it's said that he intends to return the souls from Xerxes to God himself, once he has the means.
It's a bit dark, admittedly, but then, a lot of origins are; at the very least there's hope in this one, which makes it a bit better than most of my stories.
no subject
If you know so much about this Eastern Sage, then would I be wrong to assume you've met him yourself?
no subject
As for your question...I have, yes.
no subject
And as for the Sage: did you like him?
no subject
As it stood, I only spoke at length to him twice, during which times he imparted a good amount of valuable information to me; for a time, I was something of an assistant to his children, and I called the Sage himself 'Father,' as he requested - not through any sort of implied familial affection, but just because it was the title he preferred. Unfortunately, however, I'm not really on good terms with the family anymore.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)