On the Origin of Malakim

[Methariel]

Well, I guess Darwin will forgive me to caricature his book's title - if he notices it at all while strolling around Jordi's Savannah and Novalis' Glade, having a friendly chat with St. Francis of Assisi.

But I want to know what you think where Malakim come from. Of course, canon states that the first Malakim formed during the Original Fall in response to Lucifer's rebellion and the fighting in Heaven. But what enabled the first Malakim to change from whatever Choir to that of Malakim?

I think there are - at least - two possibilities, each having its own implications:

---

1. Uriel and the others changed their Choir spontaneously, their anger and rage being so great that it transformed themselves. The Choir-change was self-induced.

This opens up the question why all angels that became Malakim became Malakim - and not something else. Were Uriel's and David's changes models which they emulated while changing themselves? But how could they conceivably do that? Being in rage is a process which often prevents any rational thought. How could they still change themselves in a way that has them showing the same characteristics? Every Malakite is bound by four oaths, two of them being the same for every one. And how could they do that by emulating Superios, who are ineffable and thus even more difficult to understand - and copy - than ordinary angels?

Another question is: Could it happen again? Could angels again change their Choir spontaneously when experiencing an appalling fury of extraordinary magnitude? Or was the First Fall an event of such singularly shocking betrayal that there is no repetition conceivable? And if it could happen again, would they change into Malakim again - which would hint at something in angelic nature which made the original process inevitable - or could they develop into something else? (We're not discussing Falling here, only changing Choirs.)

---

2. Uriel, David and the other first-generation Malakim were unutterably sad, frustrated and, perhaps, above all else, furious by Lucifer's betrayal and the rebellion of a third of the Host. In response to those feelings, God intervened.

So the Choir-change was not self-induced, but the work of IN's Almighty. This leaves up two possible motivations I can see at the moment for him acting in such a way:

a. God saw the threat that Lucifer and his rebellion meant to the other angels, Heaven, and perhaps Himself. To counter this threat, he transformed the angels most deeply affected and most determined to stop the rebels into Malakim, creating a weapon for Heaven to fight the demons.

This leaves the question why Michael wasn't transformed. He was probably the angel who was most determined to stop Lucifer. In fact, it was him who defended God's Truth against Lucifer and threw him out of Heaven. He was probably angry and sad, too. So why was one Seraph Archangel changed, the other not? Maybe as a statement - Seraphim being embodiments of Truth - that Truth triumphs over the Lie?

And why do these new weapons need oaths?

b. God didn't act simply to create a weapon, but because he saw the anguish which put the rebellion many angels into. He wouldn't let his beloved creatures suffer that much from pain and fury and so changed them into something better suited to coping with rage.

This would perhaps explain why Michael wasn't transformed. He probably was able to adapt to the situation without a fundamental change in personality and outlook. Uriel, on the other hand, was Purity, and Lucifer's act spoiled the whole Symphony - something which the Seraph Archangel might not have been able to bear without changing. The same goes for David. After all, Heaven's brotherly unity was shattered and he needed help.

This might even explain the oaths. Malakim are born from rage and suited to give in to it and become violent. To counter that and give themselves something to hold onto, they're bound to Honor. This restrains them somewhat. Even for them there are limits. Mindless rage without limits is something for demons.

---

But after all, it probably remains ineffable. No. 1. has implications about the angels themselves, the alternatives of no. 2. about IN's God. Still, I'm curious what your take on it is and if you find a third (or fourth and fifth) possibility.

Personally, I'd probably go with no. 2., choosing between a. and b. with regards to the campaign's Brightness and Contrast.

With best regards,

M.

[Matthias Wasser]

3) The Host who transformed into the Dark Choir were "always already" Malakim, in that they were primed to Resonate at the Malakite chord of honor and expurgation. It's just that that chord wasn't humming through the Symphony until the Fall.

4) God saw which angels would be psychologically capable of existing apart from Her; those which could not, but were about to Fall anyway, were transformed into Malakim.

5) The wave of dissonance roiling through the Symphony at that moment destroyed a good fraction of the Host; God simply reassigned their Words and Forces to the newly-created Malakim.

6) Any angel who takes the Oaths the first time it has the opportunity to do so becomes a Virtue; Uriel swore volunteers to them in rallying counterrevolutionary troops, and all other opportunities come when new angels enter existence by Fledging, Redemption, or creation. (Although Oaths are freely taken, Archangels have middle knowledge of whether the souls they bring into being will choose to take them or not.)

7) The history you have been told is a Lie; Malakim have always existed.

[Methariel]

Originally Posted by Matthias Wasser

3) The Host who transformed into the Dark Choir were "always already" Malakim, in that they were primed to Resonate at the Malakite chord of honor and expurgation. It's just that that chord wasn't humming through the Symphony until the Fall.

[...]

6) Any angel who takes the Oaths the first time it has the opportunity to do so becomes a Virtue; Uriel swore volunteers to them in rallying counterrevolutionary troops, and all other opportunities come when new angels enter existence by Fledging, Redemption, or creation. (Although Oaths are freely taken, Archangels have middle knowledge of whether the souls they bring into being will choose to take them or not.)

7) The history you have been told is a Lie; Malakim have always existed.

The first two sound interesting and are - conceptually, at least - close to each other. They touch possibility no. 1, too. I like them.

No. 7 reminds me of the friendly philosophical chat I had with that tall guy who had almost radiant blond hair and so bright blue eyes. It was a pity that the place we were talking at was faintly smelling of brimstone the whole time... ;)

M.

[ISNorden]

Hmmm. I've always ruled that only God can cause other Choirs of angels to become Malakim, and that He did so in response to the affected ones' outrage at the Fall. That does raise the question of why Michael wasn't transformed, as the original post asked; I think it had something to do with the Words that Uriel and David represented. The absolute holiness of Purity and the unified strength of Stone faced a greater threat from Lucifer than the already divisive, competitive nature of War.

However, at least one rule implies that angels can gain the Malakite resonance by choice; a Master of Divine Knowledge (upper-tier servitor of Destiny) may choose to add the abilities of a second Choir, but is bound by that Choir's dissonance conditions as well. Of course, the few Destinians who get promoted that far would need to take a Malakite's Oaths in exchange for their secondary abilities.

Can newly fledged angels begin as Malakim? The core rules imply that yes, they can; God always needs new volunteers with the same incorruptible code of honor that Uriel, David, and Laurence pledged to follow.

Can ex-demons become Malakim on Redemption? It's theoretically possible in my campaign, under three exacting conditions:

1. He must have suffered through some dramatic moral outrage that drives him to correct the wrongs Hell tempted him to commit before. Simply wanting to get even with his old Prince isn't enough; he must resolve to stamp out any corruption caused in the name of Hell, whether that means killing demons or steering normals away from a Fateful choice in the wrong direction.
2. He must take the usual four Oaths expected of other Virtues: two that are the same for every member of the Choir, and two related to his new Superior's Word.
3. God must accept the Oaths as valid--yes, this means a Divine Intervention on the Redemption check. (Choosing a Malakite Superior improves the chances threefold; a roll of 112 or 113 still counts as acceptance in that case.) Servitors who Redeem without becoming Malakim are released from the Oaths and treated as new members of their "expected" Choir (Balseraph to Seraph, Djinn to Cherub and so forth).

[tHEhERETIC]

I've always run with the God-is-MIA concept, so let me fit the general gist of all of the above into that universe:

Going with the Malakim were created at the Fall idea, and that they seemed to come out spontaneously....I'm going to say that the taking of Oaths did it. I like to consider words as well as Words having power. It wasn't the outrage that created the change, though that certainly helped. It was the act of taking an Oath, a geas to the cause so to speak. "I shall not suffer Evil to live, Thy will be done (when it is my choice)." With the collective force of hundreds of angels, including at least two Archangels, making this pledge, the word became manifest.

I think of it this way--an oath is an act of commitment, but it's not inherently Good. There's coercion implicit behind it. The 'Heaven is fascist' rumor that the demons spread has that grain of truth in it. The Oaths made them incorruptible--not to be confused with Good. Good is often best served through compromise.

I know, I'm a cynic.

[Whitelaughter]

Redeeming a demon is a dangerous, expensive business...perhaps becoming a Malakite is God's improved "Redeem Demon" ability?

That would mean that Uriel - the AA of Purity - Fell when Heaven was sullied by 1/3rd of the Host becoming demons. I don't have a problem with that.

That David Fell when Heaven fractured. Again, NP.

Malakim would be the demons where God said NO, you *don't* get to Fall, you're MINE - which fits with their personalities.

That would also suggest that there's Redeeming as a Malakite is not only possible, but the smart choice....

[Archangel Beth]

Originally Posted by Matthias Wasser

3) 4) God saw which angels would be psychologically capable of existing apart from Her; those which could not, but were about to Fall anyway, were transformed into Malakim.

A variation of this might be that the Malakite state change happened to angels who were angry/grieved enough to break -- but who did not lose their faith in the Almighty or try to reject the Symphony. The less-nuanced form is, "A bunch of angels put their fists in the air, and found themselves Something Else," but if you postulate Falling as including a rejection (or, in the case of Habbalah, a twisting...) of God/the Symphony, then... Falling without rejection of Truth equals... Malakim?

If one takes this route, then perhaps the assumption becomes that never after was there a situation where angel fought angel in such a way that such fury could be turned against each other, and the defining characteristic
was whether love of the Symphony became hatred or not. If one assumes that, then one opens the possibility for Plot Macguffins such as a lone angel reappearing... as a Malakite.

Oh, and then there's...

8) Lucifer, outmatched by Michael, attempted to gain allies by telling them that they were HIS. Invoking Balseraphic resonance for the first time... in Heaven... in an attempt to twist the Free Will of Archangels and angels... was perhaps not the wisest choice. As Fate and Destiny have learned many a time since then, the Symphony objects to celestials trying to force it, and usually punishes the attempt by going back the other direction, harder.

On the other hand, it does mean that Lucifer gets to do the, "No, I am your father" line on any Malakite he feels like annoying.

[JCurwen3]

I think the visible appearance of the Malakim in their celestial form is at least part of the answer: they're chained, specifically one chain per oath. I can't help but feel that's significant.

When Lucifer initiated the events that led to the Fall, he created a new possibility, a new concept - that the Symphony itself (and its closest children, the celestials) could choose its path, its direction. Whereas corporeal creatures like humans had free will and could choose whatever before, the concept didn't seem even to exist in the Symphony before that the Symphony itself and Its angels could make choices to be what they themselves wanted to be, rather than what God (an external force) wanted them to be. After all, there's nothing to indicate that angels couldn't be dissonant before the Fall; I'm sure a Cherub saw an attuned charge die from time to time (old age, accidents, disease, etc.), or a Kyriotate possessing something ends up in an accident, or a Seraph begins to feel troubled when it first hears a human lie, and in the fullness of time almost every choir had its own opportunities to feel the sting of dissonance through no (or a nigh unavoidable) fault of their own. Yet no angel ever Fell - first, this is great ammo for a "no tripping" rule justification, but second, it needs to be explained. And the only real answer is that the first Fall Lucifer precipitated allowed such a thing henceforth.

The Malakim are all about choice, in a way, albeit choices that are often thrust upon them by social restraints (Superiors, the expectations of others, etc.). Each oath aside from the first two are chosen, after all.

The chains are barriers, leashes to Heaven, both self-imposed and other-imposed. Malakim are not demons, because they haven't Fallen; but neither are they entirely angels either because... they're in a state of being suspended by a set of spiritual bungee cords, namely, their oaths.

Uriel and then David and the others (especially Uriel), being so purely committed to Heaven and God, were the first to chain themselves, in defiance of the new choice that was available to them, and chose their oaths and servitude instead.

[Matthias Wasser]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

After all, there's nothing to indicate that angels couldn't be dissonant before the Fall; I'm sure a Cherub saw an attuned charge die from time to time (old age, accidents, disease, etc.), or a Kyriotate possessing something ends up in an accident, or a Seraph begins to feel troubled when it first hears a human lie, and in the fullness of time almost every choir had its own opportunities to feel the sting of dissonance through no (or a nigh unavoidable) fault of their own. Yet no angel ever Fell - first, this is great ammo for a "no tripping" rule justification, but second, it needs to be explained. And the only real answer is that the first Fall Lucifer precipitated allowed such a thing henceforth.

Alternative theory: there were Falls before the Fall, but this was treated as a matter of health, not politics, akin to a more severe form of Trauma. Every so often a Cherub's charges would die, and he would grow sullen, and his fellow angels would need to offer him counsel of good hope until he had the courage to forgive himself and be healed. Who had thought it would be the premonition of something more?

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by Matthias Wasser

Alternative theory: there were Falls before the Fall, but this was treated as a matter of health, not politics, akin to a more severe form of Trauma. Every so often a Cherub's charges would die, and he would grow sullen, and his fellow angels would need to offer him counsel of good hope until he had the courage to forgive himself and be healed. Who had thought it would be the premonition of something more?

Well, assuming we can believe what is written and what the oldest angels claim in the setting, the Fall caused at least two fundamental changes - one was the appearance of a new choir, the Malakim (with some angels like Uriel transforming into them), and the other is the creation of another choir that had not yet been known to exist before the Fall - the Grigori. The Angelic Player's Guide says God created the Grigori after the Fall to protect and look after humanity. Now, whether God was obviously and explicitly creating them, or whether they just sort of started appearing in the Symphony and the angels said it was God (or whether there were any existing angels that transformed into them) is not entirely clear. On the other hand, if there was direct and unambiguous evidence that God created the Grigori then it becomes at least somewhat less likely that the Seraphim Council would cast out the entire choir - the one choir God would have certainly and explicitly created as a response to the Fall.

So I'm guessing the origins of the Grigori are at least as mysterious as those of the Malakim, and for either the easy answer is to say "God did it" but really the angels don't know.

If angels could fall prior to the Fall, then over the fullness of time each and every choir would have had a few fallen members, and some bands are very different from their angelic counterparts. Dominic was sitting as Angel of Judgement and he didn't judge the occasional falling as a problem? That's not so hot judgement. Uriel was the Archangel of Purity, and we're expected to believe that he thought of falling as a mental / spiritual health problem? That seems... unlikely.

In addition, some of the angels that would have occasionally fallen could have caused either accidental or intentional damage and problems whilst in their spiritual turmoil (much like mentally ill humans can), and yet there is no hint of anything resembling Heaven policing itself (or sending the angelic equivalent of EMTs or guys with straight jackets) after them - otherwise Lucifer may not have come as such a surprise to everyone when he initiated the Fall in the first place.

And if angels could fall before the Fall, however rarely, then in their temporarily diseased state they could have posed a threat to humans. And yet the Grigori (humanity's greatest allies) didn't make the scene until after the Fall. I also feel like maybe some fallen angels might be able to pass in a pre-Fall Heaven as "damaged" versions of their choirs, but I just have a harder time believing that for Shedim and Calabim (the latter actually have a built-in Discord and spew entropy!).

All this makes me believe that the ability for angels to fall arose as a new possibility in the Symphony as a result of the Fall (or, if you like, it was an "unlockable" scenario as in some video games), and that they couldn't do so before. That Lucifer did something novel, and that led to the current ability of angels to Fall, and also to choirs of the Malakim's and Grigori's creation (both strikingly different forms that the new "celestial freedom" took).