in_nomine-digest Sunday, January 20 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2520 In this digest: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths Re: IN> A quick question for you all... IN> Kyriotate Q. Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. IN> Furry In Nomine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:08:17 -0800 From: Vaughn Romero Subject: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths Howdy sagacious list members, I'm working on a heretical IN campaign-setting/story-idea/net-book-thing and have a question about how angels who transformed into Malakim during the Fall took their oaths. Did these Malakim have to declare all four oaths at the moment they transformed, or could they have taken the two mandatory oaths to cause the transformation and then later taken two more oaths after a bit of reflection? I ask because I want to have a Malakite character that transformed during the Fall by taking the two mandatory oaths, and then after the immediate crisis had passed, took two more oaths based on his reactions to the events. How much bending or breaking of canon would be involved in granting this character a slight delay in taking his third and fourth oaths? And my final related question, would a Reliever fledging as a Malakite take all her oaths at once, or could the fourth oath be the act that transforms the reliever into an angel? Note: I don't own a copy of the Angelic Player's Guide, so I apologize if I am asking questions that have been answered there. If that is the case, let me know and I'll make sure I put in an order for the APG from Warehouse 23. Thanks, Vaughn - - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - "5 force human, force 5 hurricane." Wishful thinking on the part of mundane munchkins everywhere. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 20:29:11 -0500 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths > Did these Malakim have to declare all four oaths at the moment they > transformed, or could they have taken the two mandatory oaths to cause the > transformation and then later taken two more oaths after a bit of reflection? Although it isn't listed specifically in canon as far as I know, I would think that the four Oaths were sworn during the transformation. They are integral to what a Malakite is. > How much bending or breaking of canon would be involved in granting this > character a slight delay in taking his third and fourth oaths? Bah! Bend, break, fold, spindle and mutilate it to your heart's content if that is what works for you. > And my final related question, would a Reliever fledging as a Malakite take > all her oaths at once, or could the fourth oath be the act that transforms > the reliever into an angel? I would rule that all four Oaths would be sworn once the Reliever fledges as a Malakite. They would have enough years as Relievers to think about what they would swear anyway. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 21:59:11 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths A line in Blandine's write-up in Superiors 3 says that there is a particular staute where newly-fledged Malakim of Dreams go to swear their oaths. I believe the first two, the ones all Malakim have, are integral to the Choir. The latter two are probably taken as part of the fledging process. Perhaps the first Malakim only have the basic two! Also, a little heresy I thought about once... Malakim can take oaths to remove Dissonance. Perhaps an astute demon could whisper that Dissonance is somehow part of the process of creating Malakim, and to be complete angels they have to swear the Oaths to rid themselves of that and finish becoming Malakim. Boy, the blackwings would probably get pissed at that suggestion.... William ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 20:17:05 -0800 From: "Brian Rogers" Subject: Re: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths I think I recall the APG (or somewhere) saying that if a Malakite has an oath removed, or completes an oath that can be completed (such as "overthrow a specific government") the Malakite has until sunrise to swear a new, replacement oath, or suffer a point of dissonance every sunrise until he does. I would think that a newly formed Malakite would have the same less-than-a-day grace period to choose the new oaths. Brian - -----Original Message----- From: Vaughn Romero Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:08:17 -0800 To: In Nomine Mailing List Subject: IN> Questions about Malakim oaths > Howdy sagacious list members, > > I'm working on a heretical IN campaign-setting/story-idea/net-book-thing and > have a question about how angels who transformed into Malakim during the > Fall took their oaths. Did these Malakim have to declare all four oaths at > the moment they transformed, or could they have taken the two mandatory > oaths to cause the transformation and then later taken two more oaths after > a bit of reflection? > > I ask because I want to have a Malakite character that transformed during > the Fall by taking the two mandatory oaths, and then after the immediate > crisis had passed, took two more oaths based on his reactions to the events. > How much bending or breaking of canon would be involved in granting this > character a slight delay in taking his third and fourth oaths? > > And my final related question, would a Reliever fledging as a Malakite take > all her oaths at once, or could the fourth oath be the act that transforms > the reliever into an angel? > - -- _______________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup 1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.! http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 23:56:06 +0800 From: Manny Nepomuceno Subject: Re: IN> A quick question for you all... At 03:45 PM 1/16/02 -0500, you wrote: >At 3:31 PM -0500 1/16/02, CsHoneyman@aol.com wrote: > >Is anyone else at college/university, or are y'all old folks? :o) > > > >I know that's not specifically a list topic, but I was just curious... > >Tie it to IN, tie it to IN -- general gaming threads happen all over >the place like puppies and kittens, but IN is right here... Hehehe. Yeah, this is my response...AND it's IN related. http://www.geocities.com/angeloffools/manny.html I WAS saving this for something else. ;P Thanks, ;) Manny Neps http://www.geocities.com/angeloffools "One alone is much less than half of two." -- Dave Duncan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:48:05 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: IN> Kyriotate Q. Does a Kyriotate have to touch something to possess it, or does it just have to see it? What's the range? How does this apply to Kyriotates of Jean, who can't really "see"? I've read it over a few times in the book but I must be missing it. :-) I suppose one could manifest its free forces in Celestial form, drift over and possess something, but that seems a bit risky. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:16:43 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. Ben Glickler wrote: > > Does a Kyriotate have to touch something to possess it, or does it just have > to see it? The latter. > What's the range? Line of sight (or through artificial media). > How does this apply to Kyriotates of Jean, Same. They're scary. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:25:42 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. > > What's the range? > > Line of sight (or through artificial media). This is the one that wigged me out. I know many resonances are penalized or can't be used through artificial media, but could a Kyriotate possess someone if they have a picture? Or is it just TV? I imagine possessing someone over the phone is out... Thanks, Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:39:40 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. Ben Glickler wrote: > This is the one that wigged me out. I know many resonances are penalized or> can't be used through artificial media, but could a Kyriotate possess> someone if they have a picture? Or is it just TV? I imagine possessing> someone over the phone is out... You can possess someone over a phone, and over TV. A picture is more iffy. Yes, resonances through media can be pretty abusive. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:14:18 -0600 From: toadpooka@juno.com Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate Q. On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:39:40 -0600 David Edelstein writes: > > You can possess someone over a phone, and over TV. A picture is > more iffy. Yes, resonances through media can be pretty abusive. I think the APG said that Kyrios can only use artificial media if it's "live;" photos and video recordings don't work, but if someone's on the phone, security camera or live radio, they're fair game (I'd probably rule that live TV or radio that uses a seven-second delay doesn't count as "live"). I think that the TV angle has a lot of potential. How many times have cast members from SNL or news reporters been possessed? Need to make a quick side trip to Afghanistan? Turn on CNN. >From Whom It May Concern, Rich Ranallo "Rock and Roll will be the new planetary culture, believe it or not." - -Prof. Michio Kaku ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 08:44:43 -0500 From: "Rolland Therrien" Subject: IN> Furry In Nomine I've recently gotten to like a very good furry comic with some theological themes, called quite simply, Jack. It's primarily the story of the "Sin" of Wrath, known in life as Jack, who for his sins in life, was condemned to serve as the Grim Reaper, going to the living world to reap souls, witnessing the tragedies of their death day in, day out, 'till the ends of time. Through his eyes, we see the traumas of death and suffering, and the condemning to hell of souls Deserving and not so Deserving. We see Wrath interact with the other "Sins", other completly corrupt souls who've risen to positions of power within Hell, with the torments appropriate for their positions. But of all the Sins, only Jack is truly repentent. Fortunetly, Jack has a companion of sorts in Hell. Fnar, a young boy who's mother died before he was born. So he died as well. But special circumstances arose, keeping Fnar from going to Judgement. Jack brought him straight to Hell where he now resides, as a bit of a special case: He never lost his innocence, and as such, Hell seems to have no effect on his spirit. he is frightened of nothing, and nothing really seems to phase him in Hell. Jack likes to keep the kid around, as he's the only Island of good in the Horrors of Hell for him... One thing about Jack's Hell that really got me hooked is that it IS Hell. Souls Suffer there, and we're shown it... The current storyline involves a game favored by Drip/Lust called "Musical Holes", which really must be seen to be believed... The comic can be found here: http://jack.keenspace.com/ But warned, it's for mature audiances only, due to violence, nudity, profanity and mature subject matter. Of course, Jack's Hell is very different from In Nomine... Jack's version of Lust, Drip, used to be a rapist in life, and as Lust, he enjoys tormenting the souls of Hell in very sexually deviated ways. In other words, he lacks all of Andrealphus' style and charms. Likewise, the Sin of Greed is less of a wealth hoarder then a manipulator of people, a cult-master who's built a religion of personality around himself, gathering and controlling many of Hell's damned. And I've yet to see an actual Lucifer being even hinted at. But it got me to thinking... What if In Nomine was set in a furry Universe? What if instead of Humans, the Corporeal Realm was populated by many varieties of Anthropomorphic Animals, such as dogs, skunks, ducks, cats or even elephants? Let's assume Jordi takes care of non-sentiant beasts (and of instinctive responses in the Anthro ones. Call him the Archangel of the Wild) Now, how different would the Celestials be? My guess is, the Celestials would look somewhat different: Seraphim/Balseraphs: Dragons. I can't possibly see the Holiest of Angels and most Damned of Demons being anything but Dragons, really. Michael, Baal, Mammon, Lucifer... Even Dominic and Litheroy would make good Dragons. Cherubim/Djinn: Probably going to follow Jordi's lead and make this Choir/Band felines of various sorts, like Lions, Tigers and Leopards. Ofanim/Calabim: I'm honestly considering birds for this Choir/Band. I can definetly see Janus as sparrow and Gabriel as a Pheonix. And Valefor would make an excellent magpie... And how about Haagenti as a Chicken? ^^ Elohim/Calabim: Kinda hitting a blank here... Should I go with Jordi's option and make them reptiles? Or should I go with Bovines? Oo Malakim: Wolves, Dogs and other Canines. Lillim: I'm leaning towards favoring Mustelids like skunks and minks, actually. Kyriotates/Shedim: Another blank, although I'm leaning towards insectoids here, preferably in insect swarms. I can definetly see Saminga as a swarm of flies... Mercurian/Impudites: Here, I'm thinking rodents, like rabbits, beavers and mice... Although I'm open to suggestions here too... Anyone have any comments on my idea? ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2520 ********************************