In this digest: Re: IN> Alternate Factions Re: IN> Seraphim of Flowers (Was Re: Dueling Sequels) Re: IN> A Sequel... Re: IN> David and Peace IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? IN> A Simple Artifact Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? Re: IN> Seraphim of Flowers (Was Re: Dueling Sequels) Re: IN> Crosstraining, Part I IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> Wallpaper IN> Dueling Sequels Re: IN> Dueling Sequels Re: IN> Dueling Sequels Re: IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> Dueling Sequels Re: IN> David and Peace Re: IN> David and Peace Re: IN> David and Peace IN> Silly question Re: IN> David and Peace RE: IN> A Sequel... Re: IN> Wallpaper Re: IN> A Sequel... Re: IN> Silly question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 15:37:18 -0400 From: "S.D." Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Factions >> Now, does anyone have an idea where, outside of Warehouse >> 23, I might be >> able to acquire the core rulebooks? > > E-bay sometimes has IN books for sale. Local game stores >can also order the stuff for you if it's not in stock. Try www.half.com - if you can't get them for at least five bucks American off, you aren't *looking* hard enough. I got Superiors 1 and 2, *two* copies of the core rules (I was trying for Fall of the Malakim on one of those...), The Final Trumpet, and the IPG from it, usually for $5-$10 off. Incidentally, use www.half.com for your first resort for *anything*. I got the Dictionary of Angels in almost perfect condition for *five dollars.* That thing usually runs - what, $20? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 14:50:41 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Seraphim of Flowers (Was Re: Dueling Sequels) Eric Eves wrote: > > By contrast, a little less than one percent of all angels, all things> > being equal and assuming 16 Archangels, have the Seraph of Flowers> > attunement. > > Yes, but every one of them is more useful to the demons than to the > angels in a close combat situation they're at, even if they don't want > to be. > > Some might find that to be less than a good thing. Like any angels who want to go smack demons. Which is why one generally doesn't bring Seraphim of Flowers along when one wants to go smack demons. The Seraphim of Flowers attunement is not intended (by either game design or by Novalis' nature) to be a tactical combat power, and therefore how "useful" it is to demons relative to how useful it is to angels in a fight is, well, rather obviously irrelevant. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 14:52:57 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> A Sequel... From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" > >> > >> I still don't see the problem here. > > > It was that Rose was being unknowingly used as bait. > > Please don't take my comment out of context, I understand Rose was being > used as a stalking horse. My comment was about what was upsetting about > killing vessels. I thought you meant that you did not understand the reason for Rose's upset; I apologise for my own misunderstanding. But the reason for the upset was not so much that one demon's vessel was killed; it was primarily about unknowingly being used as bait. > Because if you vessel > kill a demon and he comes back in a bigger/badder vessel he had in a body > bag that you didn't know about, then you've released an evil on earth. > You've caused it. Why would anyone just blast something away when they > didn't know the full details? Because if the demon is sent back to Hell, whenever it recovers from Trauma it will have to explain why it A: Lost the vessel assigned to it, B: Caused a number of other demons to be captured by angels and taken in for interrogation, and C: Was dealing with demons loyal to superiors hostile to its own in the first place. None of which are going to be terribly comfortable for it. And if it does have a spare vessel ready, it then has to deal with the possibility that the Game is going to want to find it for questioning. > > The question then becomes "Will losing track of the demon that organised > > the gathering in the seraph's apartment outweigh the benefits of capturing > > its companions, and preventing the demons from further terrorising the > > soldier staying there with the seraph?" > > I think the replies to the set up have proven that the Seraph of Flowers > wasn't in any danger. But what about the soldier? > So, vessel killing the demons in this situation means you're Swordie is the > one making the inexperienced and foolish decision. The only demon that was vessel-killed was the one organising the meeting. The others were put in Will Shackles and taken away for interrogation. If the djinn of Nightmares had a spare vessel, then it may have gotten away. But the intelligence gathered from its captive fellows allows for a tangible benefit that more than offsets the possible drawback of letting one of a number of evils get away. > >> But this scenario seems, to me, like a way to make Novalis > >> majorly upset. > > > Given her being a cherub, I suspect that she might at least slightly > > appreciate having two of her own saved from harm. > > Given that you still have not proved adequately to me that your Swordie > interfered for anything resembling an intelligent reason, Given that you seem to think that all the demons were vessel-killed, I think you may have misread my original post to this thread. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 16:50:51 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> David and Peace >On Tue, 07 May 2002 17:30:27 +0000 Janet Anderson >said unto us: > >>>One of the things I've never understood is why Novalis (according to the >>>books) really, really doesn't like David. I can understand her feelings >>>about Laurence and Michael, but you would think she could get along >>>reasonably with an Archangel who won't initiate combat nor allow his >>>Servitors to do so. > >They won't initiate combat, but they will engage in it a lot faster. >Novalis' Servitors will still try to find peaceful solutions after combat >has been initiated. Once the first punch has been thrown at a Stoney, all >bets are off. > >In addition, David has more of a tough love approach with humanity than >Novalis does. David seems to see her as coddling humans and she views his >approach as too brutal. I see reasonable things supporting both positions here, and I'd imagine how well Servitors of those Archangels would get along would depend on the setting and the mission. Take, for example, a rural setting, say a small town in a Midwestern American state. It's just large enough that there are a few angels and a few demons who are regularly around. Angels of Stone and Flowers both fit wonderfully here. David's angels would support the integrity of the community, and possibly even actively attempt to keep it somewhat isolated from the rest of the world. People working in the outdoors, or doing manual labor, fall under their aegis. Flowers would very much appreciate the agrarian ethic and the quiet peace of the small town. You probably couldn't tell the difference until the first punch is thrown. The bouncer at the local bar is just as likely to be a Flowerchild as a Trog; his job, after all, is to keep fights from starting, or stop them if they do, and a big, tough Vessel is might handy for both. And since other kinds of violence would send shockwaves through the whole community, both of the sets of angels are going to try to avoid it as much as possible. Sure, maybe the buyer for the local co-op (demon of Greed) was skimming, but beaten up?! Murdered?!? Oh no, I think it's time to leave this town.... No, far better to deal with him sub rosa. Now, when dealing with humans Novalis and David are going to diverge much more. David would see Novalis' approach as encouraging weakness, while Novalis would see David's approach as heartless. (In Sup1, it mentions that she thinks he lost a great deal when he changed from Cherub to Malakite.) If you just consider, for example, a drug addict, there is almost no overlap in the two angels' methods. I'd see Davidians including a pummeling of the addict's supplier in their array of techniques, whereas the Flowerchildren are probably going to be looking into more formal rehab. Since guiding and protecting humanity is after all the core mission of angels on Earth, I can see this leading to the two Superiors' mutually poor opinions. Finally, one thing I'd like you to consider is the long-term effect of living under David's Dissonance Condition. After a few times gearing up for battle and then looking like an idiot when your opponent refuses to throw the first punch, you're going to start laying plans that either try to avoid battle, or simply prepare for battle if something goes wrong. Both are understandable to an angel of Flowers. William ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 17:04:52 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? I know that this submission might get lost in the current Novalis/Kyriotate/Factions/David/Laurence/Moe threads that are floating around, but my muse has been demanding that I write this up. Falemeris Elohite of Creation In Service to Stone Corporeal Forces: 3 Strength 8 Agility: 4 Ethereal Forces: 3 Intelligence 6 Precision 6 Celestial Forces: 3 Will 7 Perception: 5 Vessel: 33 year old man/1 Role: Dr. Joshua Volpato (Status 2/ Level 4) Skills: Dodge (3), Knowledge (Psychology/5), Fighting (3), Large Weapon (Sword/3) Songs: Ecstasy (Corporeal/3, Ethereal/1), Shields (Corporeal/2) Attunements: Elohite of Creation, Transubstantiation Falemeris was one of Eli's favored Servitors that made it to Earth back in the 40s. He had a fairly successful career until an unfortunate encounter with a group of demons that strong armed their way into the community he lived in. When he managed to free himself from Trauma, Eli had been gone from Heaven for two days and his fellow Creationers were applying for service to other Archangels. After careful deliberation of all available paths, he decided that he would be best suited for David's service. He took his Heart to The Catacombs and was taken into the ranks of Stone, making him one of the first Servitors of Eli's to join David. He began his lessons in the finer points of killing with the enthusiasm of a scholar and the Archangel of Stone has recently allowed him back to Earth. The Power wanted to return to Earth, but he was interested in fighting in a slightly different field of battle than most Stone angels look for. As a Creationer, Falemeris had a good deal of knowledge about human sexuality (In the academic sense as well as the... practical.). He also knew of the mental and physical damage that the Servitors of Lust could do to angels and humans. With David's blessing, he was allowed to work as he wished. As Dr. Joshua Volpato, Falemeris is becoming a relatively well known therapist. He reaches out to people whose sexual preferences are not quite mainstream and helps them come to terms with their own sexuality. So long as the person's tastes are legal and not harming others, they find Dr. Volpato to be professional and understanding. Falemeris helps his patients find groups of people with similar interests and will periodically check on their well being. If the person is seeing him in an effort to justify infidelity, they tend to leave the Elohite's presence in tears from the guilt that comes up. If they are human and their activities are illegal, they are turned over to the police. And if they are humans or demons that served Lust, they don't last very long. As a Servitor of Eli, Falemeris has a special place in his Heart for Andraelphus' minions. The special place that causes most angels to blanch when they deal with Elohim. The other Stone angels regard Falemeris as something of a curiosity both because of his Role and his chosen arena. Sex and love are not usually things that are associated with being strong but they do recognize the need for some kind of affection with humans and angels. But why would David so easily grant a Servitor's wish for a certain Role on Earth? The Archangel of Stone would prefer to play to the strengths of his angels. And Falemeris's duties put him in the best...position to kill demons of Lust. It seems to be a good solution. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 17:38:09 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: IN> A Simple Artifact ...almost too simple, really. But effective. I got the idea while flipping through the Liber Canticorum. Large Shield Corporeal Artifact/1 Unbreakable +5 Automatically Detectable -3 Boom, 2-point artifact. (I'd say 5 points in GURPS.) No nasty problems with it being on the wrong plane for you to track if it gets lost, or being hideously expensive. And what does it do? It's a shield. An unbreakable shield. That's what the ideal shield would be, no? (Well, skip notions of ablation or whatnot -- in most combat, you want something permanently sturdy.) While this could presumably be applied to a small shield, it's really best if it's large enough to crouch behind. After all, we're talking about something that can stop a grenade blast or a gunshot. Oh, there'll still be some knockback, but that's a lot better than having it all concentrated on you. With the simplicity and usefulness of this artifact, there could be quite a few of them out there. The automatic detectability, of course, is to cheapen the artifact and get it out there for people to use -- presumably the traditional angelic versions are all silvery and decorated with icons, and demonic versions are black iron carved with flames and blades and so on. Ethereal versions would probably differ according to the Ethereal. I could see, for example, a giant turtleshell being thus modified. In modern days, one might use a full-body riot shield, to admirable effect. Naturally, you get the usefulness of the item without the Detectability, it's just more expensive in terms of character points. On the other hand, if you *really* wanted to knock one off fast, you could make the artifact's connection to its ownder "loud": add the Tracking feature (celestials can track owner with the shield, as per Cherubic resonance), and make it a 1-pointer. (Even in GURPS; this "cheap" version would normally have 0 points.) Demons would probably have a ball with such versions, especially Vapulans who like their gadgets cheap and plentiful, regardless of the bugs. William ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 21:36:58 +0000 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? >As a Servitor of Eli, Falemeris has a special place in his >Heart for Andraelphus' minions. The special place that causes most >angels to blanch when they deal with Elohim. *chortle* >Sex and love are not >usually things that are associated with being strong a) Sez who? b) Certainly not David, who believes in and supports the bonds between beings wherever they are found ... Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 18:14:04 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? > b) Certainly not David, who believes in and supports the bonds between > beings wherever they are found ... Hmmm...good point. I stand chastised. Although Falemeris' focus might be seen as somewhat odd by some Stoneys. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:14:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> He's serving WHO and doing WHAT? - --- Cameron McCurry wrote: > Falemeris's duties put him in the > best...position to kill demons of Lust. I nearly choked on this line. Nice one, Cameron. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:46:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Seraphim of Flowers (Was Re: Dueling Sequels) - --- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Malakim of > the Sword are far too > busy to bust into the houses of people who use house > rules. Seeing as I'm playing one, I would be forced to agree. ;) Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/13/02(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:50:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Crosstraining, Part I - --- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Yes -- but do try to keep the big posts one to a > day, for these? I had > a digest-bounce _right_ after the pair of them > showed up, and they > _were_ over 20K together. O:< Sorry about that. I'll behave myself in the future. Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/13/02(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 19:57:12 -0400 From: "S.D." Subject: IN> Wallpaper http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/in_nomine/images/lilith_broken-chain_800x600.jpg Background image by Michael Whelan with edits by me, lyrics from October Project's 'Adam and Eve', Lilim and Bright Lilim symbols taken from Tafka J.'s character sheets (Lilim edited by me.) Opinions? And yes, if I can find the images, I'm planning more. I've got another Michael Whelan one that could be Marc, Jean, or Vapula, depending on how I go with it... I'll take requests, though, if you can supply a decent-sized background image. ^_^ ~S.D. Ryukage ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "But dying's not all that bad when you don't have anything left to live for." Yunalesca, 'Mercy Street' ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 20:08:32 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper > Opinions? *applause* I like the sand with the footprints. Seems very appropriate. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 10:21:50 +1000 From: "james walker" Subject: IN> Dueling Sequels I can answer each point in turn, if you really want, but rather than clog up people's email, let's deal with the fundamental point: > My rock-bottom, fundamental point is this. There exist situations in which > pacifism or at least nonviolence make the best options of attack. Yes. A perfect example of using a Seraph of Flowers efficiently would be to deal with an atrocity during a war, imagine: An officer orders his troops to slaughter some civilians, much to the delight of The War. Seraph of Flowers turns up, and says - 'No, you don't'; Short term effect: lots of innocent lives are saved. Of course, none of the soldiers admits that they *couldn't* obey their commander orders - Mid term effect: angel builds up a Role as 'nameless Bigwig" because he successfully overruled the officer; this he immediately uses to praise the soldiers for obeying rules of war, causing: long term effect: after they retire, the soldiers have a war story - "this stupid officer tried to get us to commit an atrocity! Of course, we refused, and the officer got taken away to be court martialled.." which means their sons will take obedience to the rules of war for granted, as "that's what dad did". The Words to assign Flowers to fight are The War & Death: and maybe Fire & Hardcore. Words that are *hurt* by stopping violence! *But* that means that the Novalines would have to operate in war zones, and not try to stop the *fighting*, only the *atrocities*. >many of > them serve Heaven. Yep. >Once Laurence recognized this, ? What makes you think he doesn't? Read his Superior Opinion for Marc. Think about the churches he supports - he's got access to most religious charities, which means that for non-violent solutions he can nudge St. Vincent's etc to deal with the problem. >he would be dissonant > not to use Novalines in those situations. Only if they are the best tools for the job - *that*, I think is the fundamental point of difference here. Consider your own example: > Or take the generic Tether, the Alley. Junkies, gangsters, rapists. The > latter was what set up the Tether, one particularly bad year. A direct > attack on the Tether would be as fruitless as any other -- violence is not > only common here, but actually part of the Tether. Malakite with a truck > bomb? Yeah, right. Maybe he'll fork the the Tether between Fear and > (Infernal) Fire. On the other hand, if the neighborhood gentrified, headed > toward suburbia, got cleaned up, fixed the junkies, the people started > standing up against the gangs... well, bye-bye Tether. Yes. It would. So Laurence is going to ask Marc to fix it, isn't he? Certainly if he's aiming for gentrification. And how would he destroy it? Marc buys up the shops on either side of the Alley, gets approval to build a mall - bulldozes the shops and alley, digging out a few underground levels. Once the mall is built, it acts as a central point for the community: the mall CEO offers the police free space if they will have shopfront there, and employs locals, creating jobs and encouraging people to shop there. Infernal tether dies - phut. Cheers, James. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 18:01:49 -0700 From: WonderGecko Subject: Re: IN> Dueling Sequels [snip] > Yes. > It would. > So Laurence is going to ask Marc to fix it, isn't he? Certainly if he's > aiming for gentrification. > And how would he destroy it? > Marc buys up the shops on either side of the Alley, gets approval to build a > mall - bulldozes the shops and alley, digging out a few underground levels. > Once the mall is built, it acts as a central point for the community: the > mall CEO offers the police free space if they will have shopfront there, and > employs locals, creating jobs and encouraging people to shop there. > Infernal tether dies - phut. > > Cheers, James. *cough* I think you both have perfectly valid opinions. :| And that might be why the thread's persisting, and persisting, and persisting... And, given the situation, I can see /both/ Traders and Novalines working on that one. No way you're going to evict a den of scum and villainy without violence, which would, as was pointed out, exacerbate the situation of the Infernal tether. Add to that the possibility of very emotionally damaged victims somewhere in there (fueling the Tether to Fear, I should think), and you have a situation in which pure monetary charity ain't gonna handle it. Leading into my own little point: Laurence does not need to send any single Archangel's forces in alone to deal with a problem. I mean, what...assuming 16 Archangels, that gives you...some number I can't calculate right now of permutations (never was good in math with those) of just /two/ forces working together to solve a sticky problem. Of course the Novalines will have situations in which they would be miserable alone. So would the Swordies, the Traders, etc, etc, etc. Same deal if you only sent angels of a single Choir to deal with a problem. But you don't. QED. And, as a friend of mine said: There are few things more frightening than a pacifist scout with a radio and air support... - --Kim, Angel of Random Enthusiasm Attempting to figure out what's with the small dog running in and out of the room she's in... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 18:26:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Jennifer Shih Subject: Re: IN> Dueling Sequels - --- WonderGecko wrote: > Leading into my own little point: Laurence does not > need to send any single > Archangel's forces in alone to deal with a problem. > I mean, what...assuming > 16 Archangels, that gives you...some number I can't > calculate right now of > permutations (never was good in math with those) of > just /two/ forces > working together to solve a sticky problem. 16 choose 2 = 16!/(2!*(16-2)!)= 16*15/2 = 120 Jennifer the Mathematician __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 01:39:10 +0000 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper Nothing happened. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 18:14:19 -0800 From: "Brian Rogers" Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janet Anderson" > Nothing happened. > > Janet Anderson Yeah, I couldn't get the pic either when I clicked the link. I had to physically cut and paste the URL to get there. Rev. Brian - -- _______________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 22:26:17 -0400 From: "S.D." Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper >Nothing happened. > >Janet Anderson The link didn't work? Huh. It does for me... copying-and-pasting straight from the image in my browser now. http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/in_nomine/images/lilith_broken-chain_800x600.jpg Alternatively, I can private e-mail it as an attachment if anyone's interested and can't see it. Just ask. ~S.D. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 02:31:33 +0000 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper Copying and pasting works. Very handsome. I look forward to seeing what you do with other angels and demons. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 23:48:35 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Dueling Sequels >--- WonderGecko wrote: >> Leading into my own little point: Laurence does not >> need to send any single >> Archangel's forces in alone to deal with a problem. >> I mean, what...assuming >> 16 Archangels, that gives you...some number I can't >> calculate right now of >> permutations (never was good in math with those) of >> just /two/ forces >> working together to solve a sticky problem. > >16 choose 2 = 16!/(2!*(16-2)!)= 16*15/2 = 120 > >Jennifer the Mathematician > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness >http://health.yahoo.com I count 17, by the way. Christopher, Zadkiel, and Litheroy are 3 minor Archangels, with 14 major ones. That'd be 156 pairs. And of those pairs, 22 have at least one Archangel hostile to the other; of *those*, 5 are mutual. (Among the 14 major Archangels(with 91 possible pairings), there are 19 sets of hostilities, of which 3 are mutual.) A quick note on my counts: 1.) I don't have info for Zaddie, hostilities to or from. I didn't count any. Those she has would simply add to the above totals. 2.) Christopher is said to have the same associations as Yves, with exceptions(on the positive side) for Novalis and Jordi. I couldn't see Michael being hostile to someone who so readily took up arms for his charges, though. If Michael is hostile to Christopher, add one unrequited hostility. 3.) I am using the Sup3 version of Khalid, which has Novalis ("warily") neutral towards Khalid. 4.) The return reactions on Litheroy are a little vague, but I gather that neither Janus nor Jean likes him very much, so I listed them as Hostile. If not, leave the number of simple pairs total, but subtract two mutual hostilities. 5.) None of these figures count anything for Song, Death, or other very low-profile or semi-canon or whatever-the-word-is Archangels. In case anyone wants an all-in-one reference, here are the pairs. When I write A/B, I mean that A is hostile to B; I'll make note of which are the mutuals just after the main list. They are alphabetized by the originator, alphabetized by recipient within those. Blandine/David Blandine/Jean Blandine/Marc Blandine/Michael David/Marc Dominic/Eli Gabriel/Dominic Janus/Litheroy Janus/Laurence Jean/Jordi Jean/Litheroy Jean/Michael Jean/Novalis Jordi/Marc Jordi/Michael Khalid/Dominic Laurence/Eli Laurence/Novalis Michael/Dominic Michael/Novalis Michael/Yves Novalis/David The mutual hostilities are: Novalis/Michael Michael/Blandine Litheroy/Janus Litheroy/Jean Jordi/Jean Blandine is hostile to the most major Archangels, with 4. Jean is hostile to 4 Archangels, counting Litheroy. Michael is on the receiving end of the most hostilities, with 4. Michael also holds the record for being involved in the most pairs (6). Michael is also the only major Archangel involved two sets of mutual hostilities. Litheroy is the only minor Archangel involved in mutual hostilities. The only other minor Archangel for whom a hostility is guaranteed is Khalid, and this is not mutual. Although this is totally beyond the canon statistics given above, here's one more tidbit. I have personally written up scenarios combining Servitors of: Blandine and Jean; Gabriel and Dominic; David and Marc; and Laurence and Novalis. And I fully intend to fill out the list above. I *like* repairing relationships. O:^) Tthis doesn't I'm calling dibs, of course, just that I intend to do it. Doubtless I'd enjoy reading your versions as well. :^) William ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 22:10:50 -0700 From: Vaughn Romero Subject: Re: IN> David and Peace > One of the things I've never understood is why Novalis (according to the > books) really, really doesn't like David. Whee! I can answer my own Game Mistress's question. [ *Spidey-sense tingles* ] Nah, no harm to be done here; that's what my in-game posts are for... I think a large part of the animosity Novalis feels toward David is the result of disappointment. David was the first Cherub and as such was a role model for all other Cherubim to follow. When he choose to become a Malakite he called into question the Cherubic way of doing things by abandoning his attuned. As any good Cherub knows that is *wrong* *wrong* wrong*! David chose the "big picture" (i.e., God's plan) over the narrow focus of a Cherub ("My attuned, My word"). It's ironic really because as a Malakite, David cannot fall and is thus always loyal to Heaven, but from a Cherub's point of view he committed the ultimate act of disloyalty, he severed his connection to his wards and slaughtered those of his former-attuned who had Fallen. Such behavior is not only anathema to Novalis' choir nature, but also her word. There is also David's post-Fall behavior to consider. While his oaths are consistent with his Cherub background, he no longer has the dissonance conditions or priorities he once did. He is foremost a judge and executioner. He may be a slow-to-provoke-judge-and-executioner, but his primary purpose these days is to prepare others for adversity, conflict, and confrontation. Add to this the fact that his preferred way of doing things is to *withhold* protection and support, and I think you can see why Novalis is not pleased with David and yet, as her nature would dictate, always loyal to him and hopeful that he will change. For some reason I'm reminded of the Marine Corp slogan "Semper fi." I think David would interpret that phrase differently than he used to. Consider that the two younger Cherubim archangels, Blandine and Novalis, remained loyal to their original mission, while David did not. Coincidently neither Cherub gets along well with David now, or he with them. I'm not sure if there is any intended deep meaning to be derived from that detail, but it is interesting that there are *no* masculine-aspected Cherubim Archangels. I wonder how the peace/war, judgment/mercy factions in Heaven would change if there were a masculine-aspected Cherub archangel around? Hmm, that is another post for another time, I'm all Vaklemp, talk amongst yourself... Vaughn - - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - Chatty Seraph and Elohite in training ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 02:55:08 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: IN> David and Peace Janet Anderson wrote: > One of the things I've never understood is why Novalis (according to > the books) really, really doesn't like David. I can understand her > feelings about Laurence and Michael, but you would think she could get > along reasonably with an Archangel who won't initiate combat nor allow > his Servitors to do so. "She saw his transformation into a Malakite as a betrayal of all he stood for, and she loathes his stern attitude toward humans." -- Superiors 1, p. 17 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 08:12:40 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: Re: IN> David and Peace > interesting that there are *no* masculine-aspected Cherubim Archangels. Christopher. - -- Casca "Many people hear voices when no-one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at the walls all day. Others are called writers and they do pretty much the same thing." --Margaret Chittenden, writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 08:24:18 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: IN> Silly question If a Kyrio of Novalis with Nothing But Flowers hides inside a tree, is this a case of not being able to see the tree for the forest? - -- Casca "Many people hear voices when no-one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at the walls all day. Others are called writers and they do pretty much the same thing." --Margaret Chittenden, writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 05:35:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> David and Peace - --- Vaughn Romero wrote: > I'm not sure if there is > any intended deep meaning to be derived from that detail, > but it is > interesting that there are *no* masculine-aspected > Cherubim Archangels. Ummm... no books with me, but isn't Christopher a Cherub? ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 06:56:35 -0400 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: RE: IN> A Sequel... - -----Original Message----- From: Prodigal [mailto:res0axj6@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 3:53 PM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> A Sequel... > >> But this scenario seems, to me, like a way to make Novalis > >> majorly upset. > > > Given her being a cherub, I suspect that she might at least slightly > > appreciate having two of her own saved from harm. > > Given that you still have not proved adequately to me that your Swordie > interfered for anything resembling an intelligent reason, > Given that you seem to think that all the demons were vessel-killed, I think > you may have misread my original post to this thread. Did I ever say that? No; I never said that. I said I don't know why a Swordie or any member of the War Faction would ever consider vessel killing the only solution to every problem. This is an attitude I have often seen, both on and off the list. It was still a violent solution that interrupted the Seraph of Flowers plans. She was there to protect her servant. He was HER servant. Why any other angel would think she required help without waiting for an actual threat to appear sounds like bloody minded lunacy. The original post, providing Demonic answers to the first situation, was interesting in an exercise of "possible demonic responses", the follow up replies were also interesting in showing how each might be countered. I just considered the "sniper version" as particularly upsetting to Novalis. I think it demonstrates clearly why the Peace Faction maintains their point of view. I think it demonstrates quite clearly Laurence's contempt for Novalis, or at least that contempt his servitors have for hers. And I think it shows a weakness in Heaven's responses to the War in general. Demons are constantly infighting and trying to one-up each other. I could easily see Baal's people using some of Malphas' as stalking horses and simply blowing away an angel that Mal's guys were trying to set up for a Fall. It's in their nature to be selfish and abusive of one another. Angels are supposed to be better than that. DS1 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 05:51:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Wallpaper I, too, had to cut and paste the URL. But the image was worth the effort. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 08:47:19 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> A Sequel... From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" > > > Given that you seem to think that all the demons were vessel-killed, I > > think you may have misread my original post to this thread. > > Did I ever say that? You wrote about vessel killing in the plural in your last reply to me, so you at least seemed to. > No; I never said that. I said I don't know why a Swordie or any > member of the War Faction would ever consider vessel killing > the only solution to every problem. How is this apropos to what I wrote, which involved a single vessel being killed, in order to facilitate the capture of a number of other demons? > It was still a violent solution that interrupted the Seraph of Flowers > plans. She was there to protect her servant. He was HER servant. Why any > other angel would think she required help without waiting for an actual > threat to appear sounds like bloody minded lunacy. Did you read ANYTHING in my last reply to you beyond what you quoted above? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 14:47:37 -0000 From: "Chris Anthony" Subject: Re: IN> Silly question Eric Bertish said: > If a Kyrio of Novalis with Nothing But Flowers hides inside a tree, is this > a case of not being able to see the tree for the forest? If he uses the Celestial Song of Shields (with a Reliquary to generate the requisite Essence), would it then be a case of not being able to see the forest for the tree? ;) - -EDG ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2627 ********************************