in_nomine-digest Tuesday, May 14 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2638 In this digest: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Re: IN> Bad ideas... getting worse... Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Re: IN> Desperate Measures Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> Bad ideas... getting worse... Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" IN> The Demon of Little Chocolate Donuts Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Re: IN> little query Re: IN> little query Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:02:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II On Tue, 14 May 2002, Charles Glasgow wrote: > >From: Ryan M Roth > >Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II > >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:53:32 -0400 (EDT) > > >Keep in mind that Israphane is Lucifer's personal Servitor. > > Didn't I just get through acknowledging -- twice -- that that is the reason > why he ain't dead *yet*? Well, yes. I was agreeing with you in pointing this out to Janet. Surprised? Sorry if I wasn't clear. :) > And this status is at least as much a curse to Israphane as it is a blessing > -- for the kind of targets that are worth the Lightbringer's personal > attention are also usually worth personal Superior attention from the other > side. > > While it is entirely possible for the clever, low-Disturbance, and powerful > to get up the nose of a hostile Superior occasionally and survive, if you > plan to make a career of it... well, don't bother stocking up your > retirement portfolio. Undoubtedly all true. However, Lucifer has plans for Israphane, and will most likely not send him after an impossible target. And I don't believe all of the Archangels mentioned, combined, could keep track of _every_ Destiny that _might be_ a target. Yves is known for directing his Servitors to encourage every Destiny (while Kronos goes after very specific Fates) -- I believe this would leave his resources very wide spread. In addition, Israphane isn't attacking Destinies; he attacks faith, which may or may not influence Destinies. For example, he may destroy one person's faith, which doesn't lead to his particular Fate immediately. But, years later, his lack of faith leads to actions which lead several others to their Fates. Being one, two, or twelve-steps removed from the ending effect would help Israphane's survivability tremendously. Add to this the amount of time it would take Heaven to discover that all the 'attacks' are the work of one demon, and you have increased Israphane's lifespan a great deal, perhaps enough to give him time to grow powerful enough to confront Khalid. It's all in how you play it. > >He plans all his moves very carefully, for he knows that the devil is in > >the details. Israphane always keeps a low profile, because his attacks > >come in the form of words and conversation, not giant explosions. He > >rarely makes a Disturbance. And by the time the effects of his attack are > >noticed, he's long gone. > > And this pattern will indeed work, and work very well. For a while. > > Until Yves starts getting just a wee bit honked that the best and brightest > long-term Destinies are getting themselves sidetracked by a very subtle > demon, and proceeds to exercise a few of those brain cells and figure out > that for strategic Destiny targets above a certain magnitude, the angelic > detail handling the case should *expect* Lucifer to send this person in. Or > at the very least, to plan for the significant possibility that he might be > sent in. I would say that the time it would take Heaven to develop a detailed enough profile of Israphane would be considerable, given that Lucifer/Israphane/Secrets/Fate/Anybody Else Lucifer Directed to would be acting to directly cloak and misdirect any investigation. > c) ... specifically, a Vessel of Laurence with the ubiquitous Big Gleaming > Sword -- and, if necessary, a set of earplugs. I find this image incredibily humorous. "Now foul demon, you will die, for you blasphemous words cannot penetrate my Holy Earplugs of Ignorance!" :) Seriously though, I think the targets Lucifer would select would be different enough to make developing a profile hard. And the targets would be selected carefully so as to be important enough to win Hell victories, but not quite important enough to merit an Archangel expending the amount of resources neccessary to ferret Israphane out and destroy him. At least in the beginning. A truly Hellish plan would have the forces of Heaven second-guessing themselves constantly while Israphane hits someone they never expected. Heaven can't protect the faith of every person on the planet. > Israphane is a *working* demon. No doubt of that at all. But his tactics are insidious in the extreme, and he is not the only problem Archangels have to deal with. Concentrate too long on finding one demon, and the Princes of Hell can make progress against you. With enough care, Israphane can survive long enough to make his claim on Princely-levels of power, and perhaps defeat Khalid in the bargain. Ryan Roth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 17:29:50 +0000 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" >From: "Janet Anderson" >Subject: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 16:40:57 +0000 >A demon who does not remain in Hell, and is a sufficient irritant to >Heaven, *will* eventually be taken out. The record of the Order of the >Eternal Sword suggests that even staying in Hell *may* not be good enough. And for cases so extreme that even this isn't sufficient, there's always Moe's "Beyond The Pale". *Demon Princes* would have iffy odds of surviving that one... - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 10:32:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II - --- Ryan M Roth wrote: > Demon of Broken Faith: Israphane has learned to use his > resonance to attack faith itself. It is very similar > to the > way Calabim of Factions can attack relationships, > except that > in this case the relationship is with God. The damage > is also > permanent. By engaging a target in conversation about > any > particular belief that person has, Israphane can > attempt to destory that belief. Aie! Are your going out of your way to scare me, Ryan? }:> ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II On Tue, 14 May 2002, Charles Glasgow wrote: > >From: Ryan M Roth > >Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II > >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 12:27:52 -0400 (EDT) > > >You raise some good points, particularly about the extensive ground work & > >planning which Lucifer had a hand in. My question would then be: what > >makes you so sure Lucifer's plan stopped with Khalid's reconciliation? > > Because Lucifer's strategic objective was to get Khalid to Fall. That > almost happened during Final Trumpet... but it *didn't*. Khalid moved back > *from* from the precipice, Dark Khalid did not happen, and now he's further > away from that eventuality than he's been in centuries. > > Not only is the objective unfulfilled, and significantly less likely to be > fulfilled than it was before the plan was originally put into motion, but > Heaven has also had a notable net gain. By definition, this is not success. Again, it depends on the perspective. You could have things as you have said. Or you could have another perspective on the situation: Khalid, having been _so_ close to the precipice, is horrified. Horrified at what he _almost_ let happen. So he resolves to become careful in the future. He becomes cautious, reluctant to act without careful consideration. He hesistates at times. He may even become paranoid at making another mistake. All of which may have been the point of Lucifer's plan all along. To make him more vulnerable to Israphane. All of which may or may not violate canon. My point is that there is enough wiggle-room to have Israphane play any number of roles in a story, and it is _possible_ that he could confront Khalid and successfully defeat him. If your story wants to go that way. > God granted mankind Free Will... and all the inevitable consequences of such > an action. > > Remember, God did not allow the demons to walk the Earth freely. When they > originally Fell from Heaven, they fell into a *locked* exile in Hell. > *Lilith* set them free to walk the Earth. > > And Lilith is human. Well, I was just rattling off possible arguments from the top of my head. Undoubtedly these would be Khalid's counter-arguments. But Israphane is a smart cookie, so he's bound to enter the conflict with arguments that aren't so easy to refute. Ones that would, potentially, make Khalid stop and consider. If Khalid is caught off-balance, Israphane has the potential to cause some major damage. Even if Khalid eventually wins, if Israphane causes enough damage, Khalid might never heal. Heck, that might be Lucifer's goal the whole time. > [snip] > >There is often a trend to try and reject powerful villians, because we as > >people want to have the 'good guys' win. I disagree with that trend; we > >should let the villians be powerful and evil, as much as they want to be. > > The problem is, in this thread I've noticed a counter-trend to reject > powerful and intelligent *good guys*... which is equally wrong. I agree completely. In this debate I just happened to be baised in favor of Israphane, since he's my vile creation. :) > > Really? Then why do all of my most exciting and enjoyable favorite > entertainment products -- books, TV shows, and movies alike -- come with a > 99+% guarantee of the hero not dying, and a 99.9999999+% guarantee of the > villain not winning? And why, despite these genre conventions, are the > tales still interesting and compelling? Well, the more cynical among us would say it's the masses prefering cheap, safe thrills over realism. I would say that the guarantee you speak of is not so certain. Sure, you have a pretty good idea the good guy will win, But how will he do it? What will the victory cost? Will it even be worth it? The reader doesn't know, not for sure. As he reads a great story, he begins to doubt that orginal assumption just a little. There are uncertainties; uncertainties led to tension, tension leads to excitement, the wanting to know 'what happens next.' And there is always the chance that you were wrong and the bad guy wins. That's were your excitement comes from. So, I say that we should not blindly say "Khalid will crush him" or "Heaven will surely ferret him out and rip him apart". Say rather, "He's devious, he _might_ be able to pull it off." Or, "He's not that strong, but if he applies his strength in the right way, the diamond of Khalid's faith just _might_ crack." Give him a chance of winning, or there's no real conflict and no interesting story. Let the outcome be uncertain. Let the cost to Heaven be uncertain. Let the ultimate goal of Lucifer be uncertain. Try to get the reader to wonder if his orginial assumption of the hero's victory might just be wrong. That's when you have a great story. This is a fun little debate, Charles. I'm please that my little creative efforts have invoked such thoughtful commentary. Thanks for your input. Ryan Roth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 10:38:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II - --- Ryan M Roth wrote: > Eventually, one day Lucifer comes to Israphane and tells > him it is time to see how powerful he really is. They > plot and plan, and > arrange as situation where Khalid is goaded into conflict > with Israphane. > But it is Lucifer who selects the method of conflict -- > Khalid is to pit > his Faith against Israphane's ability to destroy belief. > No Songs, > no flaming swords, no help from the outside. Lucifer > makes > sure the playing field is leveled and there are no > interferences. And Khalid, being no more a fool than Israfane is, would not for any reason agree to a conflict on Lucifer's terms. > My point is that, while just looking at the numbers would > tell you > Israphane doesn't have a chance, role-playing isn't about > the numbers. > It's about the /story/ -- and the story can ignore the > numbers. Agreed. But the story does need to be internally consistent; it can break the game's rules, but not its own. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:42:42 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" Janet Anderson wrote: > I think the point that people wish to make about whatzizname (besides > the fact that yes, he's very evil) is that he is not, in canon terms, > invulnerable. No demon is, unless he's a Prince, and even then > another Prince or an Archangel might change that ... Heck, a Prince can fall to even a non-Superior. See Gluttony vs. Sloth. Or Theft vs. Rapine. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:43:11 -0400 From: "Rolland Therrien" Subject: Re: IN> Bad ideas... getting worse... "See, Eden isn't on any maps. Nor any globes. It's marked with a big old Question Mark, and even the Wheels can't seem to find it." Actually... Modern Archeology HAS found the Garden of Eden. Or, at least, the valley that was the original source of the Garden of Eden. A recent documentary (In Search of Eden) shown on TLC situated the Garden's past location right between Iraq, Iran and Turkey. http://tlc.discovery.com/convergence/eden/interactive/map.html Gee, I wonder how much time it took Litheroy to finally get the Seraphim council to allow him to make that documentary? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:48:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" On Tue, 14 May 2002, Janet Anderson wrote: > I think the point that people wish to make about whatzizname (besides the > fact that yes, he's very evil) is that he is not, in canon terms, > invulnerable. No demon is, unless he's a Prince, and even then another > Prince or an Archangel might change that ... Never said he was. I jsut opened the door on the _possibility_ that he could succeed. > > A demon who does not remain in Hell, and is a sufficient irritant to Heaven, > *will* eventually be taken out. The record of the Order of the Eternal > Sword suggests that even staying in Hell *may* not be good enough. And this > one works on Earth. Depends on the tone of the game/story. And, regardless of tone, 'eventually' can be a good, long time. > Especially think about the people Novalis, Marc, and Michael (just for > example) probably work with. Think about Novalis (regretfully but firmly) > shutting down her refuges and connections. Think about Marc doing a > boycott. Think about Michael ceasing to ignore those things he'd been > letting slide. > > Then think about the reactions of Princes like Andrealphus, Nybbas, or even > Asmodeus. And let's not even *discuss* Lilith. > > Lucifer's an absolute monarch, true, but like most absolute monarchs he > knows when he's got unrest on his hands and it's focussed on one person, it > might be a good idea to just let the next call for infernal backup go > unnoticed ... > An interesting implication I had not thought of. But it only encourages Lucifer to make sure the actions of this Servitor are not-quite-reaching the threshold where all of Heaven and Hell would be after his head. And remember that Heaven gains from those little 'understandings' as well; boycotts would hurt them too. Micheal ceasing to ignore the little fish would cause his attention to be divided. The actions you suggest Heaven as taking would be very extreme, and most of the Archangels would be reluctant to go that far -- that's how Armageddon could get started. So Israphane and Lucifer just have to be careful. Thanks for your input. Ryan Roth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:49:33 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: IN> Desperate Measures > > >>Again, Humans (canonically) can't go to Limbo. Of >>course, IYC, YMMV. >> >> Not true. GIN, p. 189. "Humans . . . have also found their way into Limbo on rare occasions." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 10:51:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II - --- Ryan M Roth wrote: > My question would then be: what > makes you so sure Lucifer's plan stopped with Khalid's > reconciliation? An excellent point -- immortals can afford to make plans that take centuries to mature. > As to the Elohite argument, I would hold that Faith > itself is a collection > of beliefs, made strong by their interconnections. That's not the problem. An Elohite's belief in God is based not on faith but on knowledge -- which Israfane's Attunement doesn't allow him to attack. > While it would be > highly difficult to convince an Elohite that God doesn't > exist In point of fact, it would be impossible. Even _Falling_ doesn't rob the Elohim of their belief in God. > attacking their belief that God cares about them would be > possible. This I agree with. > There is often a trend to try and reject powerful > villians, because we as > people want to have the 'good guys' win. I disagree with > that trend; we > should let the villians be powerful and evil, as much as > they want to be. > We should let the 'good guys' deal with them as they can, > even if they > lose in the end. Let the outcome be unsure, and you > capture the excitement of the story. Amen! Just be consistent while you do it. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:52:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" On Tue, 14 May 2002, Steven E. Ehrbar wrote: > Janet Anderson wrote: > > > I think the point that people wish to make about whatzizname (besides > > the fact that yes, he's very evil) is that he is not, in canon terms, > > invulnerable. No demon is, unless he's a Prince, and even then > > another Prince or an Archangel might change that ... > > Heck, a Prince can fall to even a non-Superior. See Gluttony vs. Sloth. > Or Theft vs. Rapine. Exactly. In the right circumstances, _anyone_ can be taken down. So the experiment is about engineering the right circumstances to give Israphane a chance. One of my favorite books has a character whose philosophy includes statements such as "Given time, skill, and resources, ANYBODY can be assassinated." and "There is no such thing as perfect security." Ryan Roth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 17:59:04 +0000 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II >From: Ryan M Roth >Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT) >Again, it depends on the perspective. You could have things as you have >said. Or you could have another perspective on the situation: Khalid, >having been _so_ close to the precipice, is horrified. Horrified at what >he _almost_ let happen. So he resolves to become careful in the future. He >becomes cautious, reluctant to act without careful consideration. He >hesistates at times. He may even become paranoid at making another >mistake. All of which may have been the point of Lucifer's plan all along. > To make him more vulnerable to Israphane. What would be the *point*, though? The objective is the same in both scenarios -- to get Khalid to Fall. It's just that in your scenario, the Lightbringer is taking a roundabout and protracted way of doing it. Lucifer ain't stupid. And deliberately overcomplicating a plan *is* stupid. The first counter-argument that comes to mind -- i.e., to argue that this is the only or the best way possible of success, and that the earlier 'precipice' could never be expected to work -- has a flaw of its own. Specifically, that said argument postulates that a PsyOp beyond the combined talents of the First Balseraph and the Prince of Factions to execute is within the ability of a senior Word-bound to. The first counter-argument to the paragraph above that comes to mind -- i.e., that it's really the combined talents of Lucifer, Malphas, *and* Israphane -- runs into another objection... i.e., that for the task of inducing a Superior to Fall, either Lucifer or Malphas would insist on handling the final phase themselves. (And Lucifer, at least, can mask his identity even from your average Archangel.) >All of which may or may not violate canon. My point is that there is >enough wiggle-room to have Israphane play any number of roles in a story, >and it is _possible_ that he could confront Khalid and successfully defeat >him. If your story wants to go that way. And if you wish to manipulate plot points like plot *puppets* in order to create a role for him within the story that could quite easily have been handled by already established characters, who are actually better-suited to the job and would (in character) not be inclined to either overcomplicate their plans or bring extra people into the loop. Remember Litheroy's favorite saying -- three people can keep a secret, but only if two of them are dead and the last one works for Alaemon. :-) [snip] > > Remember, God did not allow the demons to walk the Earth freely. > When >they originally Fell from Heaven, they fell into a *locked* > exile in >Hell. *Lilith* set them free to walk the Earth. > > > > And Lilith is human. >Well, I was just rattling off possible arguments from the top of my head. >Undoubtedly these would be Khalid's counter-arguments. But Israphane is a >smart cookie, And Khalid *isn't*? This is part of what I meant in my earlier e-mail re: 'rejecting smart good guys'. We cannot grant Ispraphane by plot fiat that degree of intelligence which would be reasonably expected of him by his station and background by unless we extend the same privilege to Khalid... who, as a Superior, and not one mentally limited by catastrophic insanity a la Saminga or Belial, would have an even greater amount of it. >so he's bound to enter the conflict with arguments that aren't so easy to >refute. By the same waving of the Plot Device Wand, Khalid would have Faith that wouldn't be so easy to destroy. Look, I'm sure you really *really* like this NPC you just designed. And that he's really cool. But he ain't gonna be smackin' around no Archangels -- not verbally, not mentally, not emotionally. That's like writing a Marvel fanfic character who starts out his story by drop-kicking Victor Von Doom and/or Thanos into a wastebasket... hello, Gary Stu. >Ones that would, potentially, make Khalid stop and consider. If Khalid is >caught off-balance, Israphane has the potential to cause some major damage. Given that Khalid is less than a decade after an attempted Malphas mind-screw, his first response to noticing that another one was in progress would be either a) "Wait here and I'll get back to you" as he goes and zips off to his nice safe Cathedral to think it over, rather than stay within range of demonic resonance and/or b) "INFIDEL! I SMITE THEE IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!" *whack whack whack* >Even if Khalid eventually wins, Eventually? If Khalid wants to tactically withdraw, he can do so in an instant and Israphane can do nothing. If Khalid wishes to summon reinforcements, he can do so in an instant and Israphane can do nothing. If Khalid wishes to soul-kill Israphane, etc, etc. The only way it can be 'eventually' is if Khalid does nothing except sit there and allow Israphane to keep taking free swings... which is beneath even Saminga's intellectual talents. [snip] > > The problem is, in this thread I've noticed a counter-trend to > reject >powerful and intelligent *good guys*... which is equally > wrong. >I agree completely. In this debate I just happened to be baised in favor >of Israphane, since he's my vile creation. :) Then please, turn the bias knob down a *little*, because so far you haven't given Khalid credit enough to possess either the strength of will or the intellectual gifts of a reliever. - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:00:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Bad ideas... getting worse... - --- Rolland Therrien wrote: > Actually... Modern Archeology HAS found the Garden of > Eden. > > Or, at least, the valley that was the original source of > the Garden of Eden. Hardly surprising. Of the four rivers mentioned in the Bible as forming the borders of the Garden, we already knew where two of them were. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:01:59 +0000 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" >From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" >Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:42:42 -0400 >Heck, a Prince can fall to even a non-Superior. See Gluttony vs. Sloth. Sloth, by the nature of his word, didn't even fight back. There's no other Superior who will let you do that. And it's *still* CDaU as to whether or not Kobal was slipping Haagenti a little help. >Or Theft vs. Rapine. I actually argued in favor of that once. IIRC, Beth then reminded me that it's CDaU as to whether or not that story is even true at all. After all, the only two witnesses to the alleged event in question are Valefor and Lucifer -- and to understate things vastly, neither one of them has ever felt overly compelled to truthfulness. - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:03:28 -0400 From: David Wood Subject: IN> The Demon of Little Chocolate Donuts Jekkijek is a demon caught in Hell's strangest and stickiest web of intrigue. He could become one of Haagenti's most powerful servitors, in an astronomical bid for power that rivals that of his own master. Not that his Word is enough to warrant a Princehood in the Infernal Lowerarchy, but to get a Word so early, that so supports the master's own Word is an outstanding achievement. Some admire him, some fear him, and some would like to take his place. Lucifer hasn't even been affirmed for his Word yet, and amazingly, he has an enthusiastic cadre of fellow demons supporting his bid. Of course, knowing how things are in Hell, some of THEM fear him, admire him, or want to take his place. See, he's still a gremlin. Seven forces and ready to become something bigger, but still just what some in Hell less-than-charitably refer to as a "snotling." He's never even been to Earth yet. And yet, Little Chocolate Donuts are all the rage in every Shal Mari eating establishment, and miraculously making big inroads into Earth cuisine. Demons of most Superiors might wonder how something like this could happen (if only to foster it or prevent it from happening in their own hierarchies). Angels may have heard of this new threat, and decided they want to get proactive all over it. If they could figure out how Jekkijek exerted that kind of influence over so many. And on Earth, people are going ga-ga over these miniature taste sensations, on the assumption that they're largely harmless because they're small -- a mirror image of Jekkijek's situation, if you think about it. In all, it sounds implausible, doesn't it? Almost like a... . . . S | P | O | I | L | E | R . . . ...*screwball comedy*? Things *are* in fact happening too fast for Jekkijek. He made a few boasts about the Word he wanted early on, and suddenly demons from all over have practically materialized out of the woodwork to pave the road to his self-claimed Word and push him along it faster than he might like to travel. He could admit that he's not in full control of the situation, but if he admits weakness like that, the entire group supporting him might suddenly throw him to the ground and tear him apart. So he's got to weather the storm, and from here on out the sea is only going to get choppier. Blame Tuzerol, Habbalah of Dark Humor. He first heard that Jekkijek was going to vie for the Word of Little Chocolate Donuts, and saw in it an opportunity for *incredible* mischief. First he offhandly encouraged Jekkijek to try promoting the Word. Jekkijek probably doesn't even remember who gave him the suggestion, but he remembers feeling *oddly pumped* about it. Then he started approaching every demon even remotely close to Jekkijek and saying, "Hey, play along with the little snot. It'll give him a sick little thrill, and it'll be funny when he finally falls on his face." Admittedly the comedic stylings of Kobal's servants can be a little highbrow, but everybody loves a pratfall (provided they're not the pratt that's taking the fall). So not surprisingly, Jekkijek suddenly got a LOT of enthusiastic support for his Word bid. More than Tuzerol expected, in fact, which is part of the problem. Haagenti is happy as a pig in barbecue sauce at suddenly having such a tasty little word promoted so effectively. They're chocolate! They're donuts! And you can eat dozens of them at a time! Kobal's reaction is, well, lukewarm. Tuzerol's setup is a funhouse reflection of his own support for Haagenti's Word. This in itself could be either flattering or insulting, but Kobal sees a great deal of potential in it so he's willing to let it go on. He's more concerned with the lack of planning on the punch line; sure, the gag has had a terrific buildup, but it's probably going to end less like a joke and more like one of Vapula's experiments -- in flames. Which wouldn't be bad either (considering the popularity of the 'Vapula's Funniest Experiments Gone Wrong' home videos), provided his own plans aren't changed in the process. And Lucifer? Don't think he hasn't noticed. On the one hand, he's noticed a lot of demons from a lot of different quarters offering their services to support what amounts to a cruel joke. It's rather wasteful, after all. But even he can find a bright side to the situation: the demons "helping" Jekkijek do so without significantly hurting their own projects, and they provide Heaven with a high visibility soft target. While they're planning how to take out Hell's newest rising star, Hell could pull off a number of little victories. Plus, it *is* fun watching the little snotling scramble around... Jekkijek is trying to put up a confident front, but this is incredibly stressful for him. Eventually when he goes to the surface to oversee his Little Chocolate Donut Empire, treat him as newly fledged, and being "helped" out by beings with far more forces than he has. This might tip the angels off that something isn't right. Who knows? Heaven might be able to swing Jekkijek into an early redemption. - --David http://skipjack.bluecrab.org/~dwood "This job is a learning experience. These days, I'm learning not to speak my mind, answer the phone, or respond to my own name." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:22:11 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Charles Glasgow wrote: > >I agree completely. In this debate I just happened to be baised in favor> >of Israphane, since he's my vile creation. :) > > Then please, turn the bias knob down a *little*, because so far you haven't> given Khalid credit enough to possess either the strength of will or the> intellectual gifts of a reliever. I wrote Khalid, so I think I have a better perspective on him than you do. There are some flaws in Ryan's writeup (IMO), but much as I know you hate subjectivity, this is not an issue where you have sufficient basis for declaring Ryan's opinion to be objectively wrong. And since when you do go into "Your opinion is objectively wrong" mode, it always signifies the beginning of an inevitable downward flaming spiral for a thread, why not drop it now, or at least offer an alternative writeup of your own that you like better, which would be a creative rather than a destructive contribution? - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:19:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II On Tue, 14 May 2002, Michael Walton wrote: > > And Khalid, being no more a fool than Israfane is, would > not for any reason agree to a conflict on Lucifer's terms. > I'm afraid you aren't being imaginative enough, Michael. There are plently of ways to get someone to do something they wouldn't naturally want to do. Blackmail. Bribery. Geases. Threats. Taunts. Kidnapping. Heck, Khalid would probably do it just to have a chance to destroy Israphane for good. Ryan Roth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:24:36 +0000 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II >From: David Edelstein >Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II >Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:22:11 -0500 >I wrote Khalid, so I think I have a better perspective on him than you >do. It's not a question of a perspective on *Khalid* so much as it is a perspective about *tactics*. >There are some flaws in Ryan's writeup (IMO), but much as I know you >hate subjectivity, this is not an issue where you have sufficient basis >for declaring Ryan's opinion to be objectively wrong. Actually, I do. His conversational scenario had Khalid committing the tactical error of sticking around to fight on 'bad ground' when there was no compelling reason *not* to temporarily withdraw and regroup. This is something that 12-forcers get flunked out of Laurence's intermediate tactics class for, much less Superiors. [personal issue snipped] - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:25:30 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> There is no such thing as "invulnerable" At 4:40 PM +0000 5/14/02, Janet Anderson wrote: NOTE: I haven't read what's up, and may yet shut it down. Therefore, I am going to get my licks in first before I know whether it's a flamewar or not. O:> >Lucifer's an absolute monarch, true, but like most absolute monarchs he >knows when he's got unrest on his hands and it's focussed on one person, it >might be a good idea to just let the next call for infernal backup go >unnoticed ... C.f. Legion. O:> (Now, oh gads, I get to go see what's sparking this. Man, I hope I don't have to go get the rolled up newspaper, and especially not the one that's rolled up around a lead pipe...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:38:48 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> little query At 10:56 PM +0000 5/13/02, Janet Anderson wrote: >>Asmodeus: If I deliver this Balseraph traitor into the hands of Heaven, >>you will wear this Will Shackle. Are we agreed? > >And the Malakite believes Asmodeus why? > >(Other than the Balseraph Resonance, I mean, and if he's going to go that >route ...) If you're in Hell, you can speak the angelic tongue, which will admit only Truth. Isn't that a fun Game? (The other option is to have the Bal ask someone to use a Celestial Song of Tongues to report that it's safe -- preferably someone like an Archangel.) It is, of course, a gamble -- but that's a Game too. Moral is, BTW: Don't Get Caught. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:41:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> little query At 6:10 PM -0500 5/13/02, Prodigal wrote: >From: "Janet Anderson" > >> >Asmodeus: If I deliver this Balseraph traitor into the hands of Heaven, >> >you will wear this Will Shackle. Are we agreed? >> >> And the Malakite believes Asmodeus why? > >It still flies in the face of the malakite's second oath, though... True. (In the case quoted, the Virtue in question had a subsequent oath regarding giving people chances -- finding an eminently redeemable demon, well. Talk about damned if you do, and damned if you don't.) (Though, to be truthful, the scene there had a twist that Azzie didn't know about, but that's a SSO.) - --Beth's SSO .sig: (Want to hear more about the Superior Soap Opera? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IN-SoapOpera ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 15:03:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan M Roth Subject: Re: IN> A Matter of Faith Part II Okay, Okay, Okay. Out respect to David, Beth and rest of the list, I will just send this one last email on the subject then let the matter drop. It was my intention to just express my points in a playful debate, rather than inspire a flaming argument. My apologies. Mr. Glasgow is of the firm opinion that I do not give Khalid enough credit. I respect that opinion. It was never my intention to force him to change that opinion. But, to me, it is only an opinion. One possibility, if you will. And I enjoy imagining more than one possibility. I enjoy imagining that possibility that Khalid might not be as secure in his Superiority as most Archangels. I imagined the possibility that he, having almost tripped, was perhaps more vulnerable than the other leaders in Heaven. I imagined the possibility that Lucifer would seek to further exploit this weakness. I imagined the possibility that the original Malphas ploy was part of some grander scheme, whose real goal was unknown. Did Lucifer want Khalid to Fall? Or did he simply want to guage Khalid's abilities? Was he trying to get rid of Israphane? Only he knows, and the question would be something fun for players to figure out. Throughout this whole discussion, I have tried only to speak in possibilities. Perhaps I didn't do very well in saying so, but I was only trying to suggest what _could_ be. Mr. Glasgow seems to be strongly in support of what is, and seems to be reluctant to entertain these possibilities. I apologize if I offended him or anyone else. Recently a friend of mine had a game where Furfur, in a bid for Princedom, summoned Lucifer, who then decided to settle the matter by having Belial and Furfur duke it out, winner take all. Furfur won. By many of the arguments presented here, it shouldn't have been possible. But it was a good story anyway. I imagined something similar happening with Israphane and Khalid. An exciting showdown to see whose world view was better, with an uncertain outcome. I suggested that in my view, Israphane might win, but I never said for a fact that he definately would. In a game setting, the best thing for a GM running it would probably be to let the outcome depend on the actions of the players, so that the PCs could have a chance to greatly affect the grand scale of the War through their own actions. It would have been a great game, I think, if it was done right. And the game is what all of this is about, right? So what if I had to bend some canon to get there, as long as the game was fun? So what if I restructured some past events, or introduced a new character where an old one may or may not have worked? It just the GM's perogative. It was my imagination. And I think the story would have appealed to a lot of people. Anyway, let me apologize again to everyone for starting this mess. Perhaps I should use this as a lesson to be careful what I post. Perhaps not. I certainly didn't think that my little imaginings would cause so much trouble. Respectfully yours, Ryan Roth ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2638 ********************************