in_nomine-digest Wednesday, October 2 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2794 In this digest: Re: IN> The Event RE: IN> The Event IN> Re: Servitor of Eli RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> The Event Re: IN> The Event Re: IN> The Event Re: IN> The Event RE: IN> The Event--the Two Worlds Re: IN> Expanded Resonances: Malakh(ite) Re: IN> Accumulate Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> Accumulate Re: IN> The Event RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> The Event RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption IN> Archangel of Fear. RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> Accumulate RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 00:09:09 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> The Event From: "David Edelstein" > > Impudites can be fairly non-revolting. I even played an Impudite who was > in his own way a pretty sympathetic character. I can attest to that - It was sad to see the game you played him in come to an end, I have to say. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 00:03:38 -0600 From: Julian Mensch Subject: RE: IN> The Event << >>I am one of the >>rare In Nomine conservatives who, for example, think that Lilim are no >>cooler than any other Band. The Michael-Novalis lovefest is another list-ism >>that I don't agree with. > >> > >Oh, good, I thought I was the only one. > Are you kidding? I've been a Lilim-bashing curmudgeon WAY longer than Casca has! ;) >> I can't really say I'm in either camp, but I do think it pays to acknowledge the strict difference between the two distinct "In Nomine" worlds frequently talked about on the list. At least, that's how I see it. In the first world, In Nomine is a fairly serious game of angels and demons locked in a Biblical war. Dominic is a harsh figure of old-testament justice eager to root out heresy (as per his dissonance). Lilith is a collaborator with a regime as harsh as Stalin's, and her Word is a twisted irony that is better translated as "consensual enslavement." Malakim are angels of blood and vengeance, while Lilim prey on people's hidden desires to bring them to betray themselves and humanity's Destiny. Novalis loves Michael about as much as Janis Joplin loved Ronald Reagan, and they really do both have legitimite reasons for their genuine antipathy. Most significantly, Superiors are in- comprehensibly alien beings who transcend humanity, though they may appear human-like at times to avoid unsettling those around them. They aren't, in general, strongly tied to any human cultural facet. And so forth. In the second, In Nomine in a whimsical game, seeming perhaps like fluff on the surface but like much of the best comedy with a hidden depth inside. Dominic is a big sweetie with a pet cat and careful system of checks and balances to ensure he does his solemn duty well. Lilith is a hottie, and her morality is better described as "free-spirited naughtyness" then "evil." Malakim are romantic cheesecake fantasies (though they still get to play Batman in their off time), and Lilim are the valley girls from a really deep, dark valley. Anyone who makes the perfect odd couple (Michael/Novy, Blandine/Laurence, Marc/Lilith, etc.) is certainly snogging, not just cause it's funny and romantic, but because it's a symbolic representation of Heaven: a place where people can be in genuine conflict and still _love_. Most significantly, the Superiors are all widely drawn comedic architypes that are very human in nature and very familiar to the players: macho but big-hearted war hero, hippie chic, sultry temptress, straight-laced Catholic knight, psycho avenger babe, tight-assed cop, stoned slacker artist, slick yuppie stock trader, sleazy nightclub pimp, jingo-spouting shallow Hollywood bigwig, classical megalomaniacal evil overlord, embittered comedian, etc. The War may be *important*, but it's certainly not as grim, brutal and dehumanizing as a war is IRL, or as the War is in world one. I really like both worlds a lot. In fact, the reason that I turned to In Nomine is that it's so flexible, and I got sick of the World of Darkness-fans' attitude that This Is The One Correct Theme Of Vampire And Any Vampire Game Without It Is A Munchkin Twinkfest For Fourteen-Year Old Losers. I do think that the second world has more depth then it might be given credit for, though; it's not just a sitcom, it's a parable. Much of Moetica, Beth's SSO and general list-filk seems to draw on world two, and I have to say I'm impressed a great deal with it. It's _hard_ to write non-shallow comedy well, and at it's best some of the world two stuff seems reminiscent of Terry Pratchett (that's a high compliment, BTW). I do think there's a lot of good, serious occult-supernatural stuff for IN too, but it tends to come in big sagas and heresies. Tattered Symphony, Queen of Hell and Dark Victory come to mind here, and of course the excelent "And I Feel Fine" series for genuine Biblical impact. I guess my point is just that you really can't hold either world to the other's standards, because they're different. To pick an obvious point, Lilith is quite clearly a Light Grey Hat in one and a fairly gruesome Black Hat in another, so it doesnt make much sense to argue the case for either abstract of which world you are talking about. (Truthfully, I like both liberator- Lilith and collaborator-Lilith as distinct characters, but they are really _not_ the same lady in my mind.) In short, In Nomine's "dials" just rock. I really hope the fan community never decides there's one "right" setting for them the way many WoD fans seem to have. - -- Julian Mensch Though I must say I personally prefer the dynamics of a Mike/David 'ship to Mike/Novy. And yes, I'm quite straight. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 18:32:02 +0930 From: "G N E Z D A" Subject: IN> Re: Servitor of Eli He is a character I plan on using in the rpg myself and, no the GM (myself and another player joint-GM the adventures) isn't running a particularly high-powered campaign. In fact the majority of the characters are either Saints or that equivelant in power (with one other celestial). Keep in mind, age and power aren't necessarily the same thing. My character may be thousands of years old, but hasn't had much of a net gain in power (what with battling various other nasties, thus keeping his Forces down). However, with that much age and experience behind him, he should have at least a considerable number of additional character points to spend. In this case, though, he doesn't because right now he's very much a broken celestial. His Word (or Protectorate is probably a better word) is very much tied up with the Marches. Thus, when the Host came in and wiped out heaps of ethereals, my character's abilities plummeted. Point in case, we allowed him to have both the Ethereal song of Life and Ethereal Creation (we figured, if any celestial apart from Eli could still use those powers, it'd be the appointed protector of the Ethereals), however both songs are at level 1. Surely, he'd have gotten them up to level 6 in his prime, but he's now a shadow of his former glory. Things he could do two thousand years ago without thinking, he has great trouble doing now. Basically the only advantages we gave him over a normal celestial are those two songs, plus we allowed him a more eclectic range of songs and attunements, and allowed him some discord. But, otherwise, he is a standard nine-force Ofanim of Eli. As far as role-playing goes, he will come across to most who don't know of his past as being a fairly friendly, slightly dim-witted mutt-looking creature who has a real knack for building things, seems to disappear mysteriously and re-appear when he's needed. Those who know his past, however, will notice he has a lot of hidden sadness and is really quite a wreck. Everyone who gets to know him, though, will definitely realise that he has a lot more power and wisdom than he lets on. - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 2/08/2002 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 12:46:13 +0300 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption - -----Original Message----- From: sirea@softhome.net [mailto:sirea@softhome.net] > Espira was a special case. All of her dissonance was from her attuned being slaughtered, and from her trying to defend them. She wasn't going to Fall, but a bad string of Infernal Interventions and just plain -bad luck- pulled her down against her will. She didn't wander away from the Truth of God, Lucifer just decided to yank this one little angel down, selfless and kind or not. She was Pushed you could say. --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity DS1 (All of this is my opinion, YMMV) I find this prospect distasteful. Falling should be a choice. Especially when it turns out of all the beings in creation she is the onnly one given no chance at redemption. No one should be exempt from the chance of falling. No one. Not even Malakim are immune to temptation, they just police themselves so strongly that none have fallen, but there should be no guarantee of salvation. It should be a choice made and proved every day. One of the earliest messages I ever put on list was in response to someone that had posted a vignette about a Malakim and how good it felt to know he could never fall. My response was a vignette of a Malakim who knows that temptation is always there and only his personal commitment was there to save him from damnation, because the struggle to remain good and to be all that is good is a struggle that Malakim commit themselves to every single day. Falling should be a conscious choice. Sure, a bad Intervention at a really bad time can be a game mechanics that allows an angel to got straight from Heaven to Hell, but if there is not compelling character reasons for it, Falling should never depend on a whim of the dice. You can say Espira made her choice when she chose violence, and that was how I interpreted your presentation, but Lucifer himself does not have the power to damn anyone to Hell, he can only offer them the choice. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 08:55:00 -0500 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> The Event - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julian Mensch" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 1:03 AM Subject: RE: IN> The Event [snip] > Anyone who makes the perfect odd couple (Michael/Novy, > Blandine/Laurence, Marc/Lilith, etc.) is certainly snogging, > not just cause it's funny and romantic, but because it's a > symbolic representation of Heaven: a place where people > can be in genuine conflict and still _love_. *Exactly*. This is the main reason I wrote Michael/Novalis in the first place. It was symbolic of why Heaven is Heaven -- love can cross all lines but one, and if you're on the other side of /that/ line then you ain't /in/ Heaven any more. The minor reason, of course, is that it was funny. :-) - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:37:51 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: Re: IN> The Event Loved this! I did like the little romance Moe had come up with and you had expanded upon and in general I tend towards stories about the Superiors. Thanks for feeding this like. Jeff =) New email, no more bouncing or digest (I hope!). - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:43:14 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: Re: IN> The Event The actual story came out of an idea I had for a future post. Basically showing what I considered the general feeling of Heaven/Hell to be whenever I read a bit of fan fic or when I think of the game. Josh Hi Josh, I hope you intend to go ahead with your future post even after all of the critism (made with love I'm sure). I, for one, would be very interested in your view. Particularly in light of what you have written. Jeff =) - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:09:44 -0600 From: sirea@softhome.net Subject: Re: IN> The Event Julian Mensch writes: > In short, In Nomine's "dials" just rock. I really > hope the fan community never decides there's one "right" > setting for them the way many WoD fans seem to have. > > -- Julian Mensch > Though I must say I personally prefer the dynamics > of a Mike/David 'ship to Mike/Novy. And yes, I'm > quite straight. > *claps* I'll hear to that. I too love how IN can be adjusted so much, and never is held to any one "dial" like many other game worlds tend to be. --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 23:13:03 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: RE: IN> The Event--the Two Worlds I can't really say I'm in either camp, but I do think it pays to acknowledge the strict difference between the two distinct "In Nomine" worlds frequently talked about on the list. At least, that's how I see it. >From what I post, people can see that I am not of either camp either. However, I want to thank you for such a concise and well thought out differences of the two worlds and its made quite an impression in helping me to define what I want out of the game. Thank you Julian and I also hope there is never an 'only' setting--for any game...sad to hear about WoD went that way. While the setting is too dark for me, the company does some great work that I enjoy adapting from. Jeff =) - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 19:04:54 +0300 From: Mervi.Hamalainen@uta.fi Subject: Re: IN> Expanded Resonances: Malakh(ite) Sorry that it's taken me so long to answer. Anyway.. > From: Julian Mensch I also like EDG's suggestion to restrict the CD. snip > Obligations: Speaking as a GM, I'm not too sure about this. It just seems that the GM needs to come up more info and that the info isn't going to be very useful. > Sensing the Guilty: Now this one I like! I might even change the Malakite resonance to this in my next campaing. However, I dislike the time factor in CD 4 and up. It seems that it's useless or that the Malakite should have a way of tracking the guiltiest person who isn't there right then. OTOH, that would make them too powerful. Maybe instead of sensing people who aren't there anymore, the higher CD could dictate how specific the crime in question could be. > Moral Paradigm: This is good, too, althoug it would once again mean more work to me :). > - -- Julian Mensch Mervi ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 23:01:30 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: Re: IN> Accumulate Spirit Bomb: Secret Purity Attunement. Sirea Wow! That was very nice. And yes, I am actually thinking about trying to adapt it for the game I have. Uriel has come back, based heavily on Uriel-Ozma (lost the original email but thanks to that person who wrote it up!!!) post for a year (more?) ago, though I have adding even wilder aspects by making Uriel a Bonkim, Bright Malakim, written up by Kingsley Lintz, and with an anime twist looks like a Bonakim version of Neo-Queen Serenity/Sailor Moon. *ducks from even vaguely canon inclined thrown stones* So all of that to say...Thanks Sirea! My players are not list members, and so don't realize where some of my insanity comes from but as it comes up I love to give credit! Jeff =) - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:19:17 -0600 From: sirea@softhome.net Subject: Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption > DS1 > (All of this is my opinion, YMMV) > > I find this prospect distasteful. Falling should be a choice. Especially > when it turns out of all the beings in creation she is the onnly one given > no chance at redemption. No one should be exempt from the chance of > falling. No one. Not even Malakim are immune to temptation, they just > police themselves so strongly that none have fallen, but there should be no > guarantee of salvation. It should be a choice made and proved every day. > > One of the earliest messages I ever put on list was in response to someone > that had posted a vignette about a Malakim and how good it felt to know he > could never fall. My response was a vignette of a Malakim who knows that > temptation is always there and only his personal commitment was there to > save him from damnation, because the struggle to remain good and to be all > that is good is a struggle that Malakim commit themselves to every single > day. > > Falling should be a conscious choice. Sure, a bad Intervention at a really > bad time can be a game mechanics that allows an angel to got straight from > Heaven to Hell, but if there is not compelling character reasons for it, > Falling should never depend on a whim of the dice. You can say Espira made > her choice when she chose violence, and that was how I interpreted your > presentation, but Lucifer himself does not have the power to damn anyone to > Hell, he can only offer them the choice. > > > No, you have a good point, I explained my reasoning behind her Fall rather poorly (doesn't help being sick :D). Let me explain. She did Fall because she choose violence, but she -shouldn't- have. What was going to be simple dissonance and Discord escalated into a slip and slide downwards, as she started to Stumble, and lost her footing, and took a headive into demonhood (all this metaphorically speaking of course). She tried to resist, and she -did- take the first steps to Falling, but it was as if she got caught in a mud slide on the way down, and even though she tried to stop it as much as she could, she was too far in and her nature twisted itself, lest she become a puddle of Discord. Bad luck, Infernal Interventions (symphonic landmine versions, not Lucifer personally), and personal weakness made her Fall. So it was her choice, but she tried to change her mind halfway through, and it didn't work. Falling is -always- a choice, I believe in that very much, but Espira has a very unlucky day. Besides, I -wanted- Date and the Dark Powers that Be to abuse the little Cherub, I was feeling mean and nasty that night :D --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:16:28 -0400 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption >Let me explain. She did Fall because she choose violence, but she > -shouldn't- have. What was going to be simple dissonance and Discord >escalated into a slip and slide downwards, as she started to Stumble, and >lost her footing, and took a headive into demonhood (all this metaphorically >speaking of course). She tried to resist, and she -did- take the first steps >to Falling, but it was as if she got caught in a mud slide on the way down, >and even though she tried to stop it as much as she could, she was too far >in and her nature twisted itself, lest she become a puddle of Discord. Bad >luck, Infernal Interventions (symphonic landmine versions, not Lucifer >personally), and personal weakness made her Fall. So it was her choice, but >she tried to change her mind halfway through, and it didn't work. Falling is > -always- a choice, I believe in that very much, but Espira has a very >unlucky day. As a kind of coup de grace on her angelic status the night that she went violent, you could have her first employ the Djinn resonance without even realizing that she had done so. It was just that this was the first time she attuned to someone not out of the love Cherubim feel towards their charges, but out of hate and a need for vengeance. Josh ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:24:15 -0600 From: sirea@softhome.net Subject: Re: IN> Accumulate > Wow! That was very nice. And yes, I am actually thinking about trying to adapt it for the game I have. Uriel has come back, based heavily on Uriel-Ozma (lost the original email but thanks to that person who wrote it up!!!) post for a year (more?) ago, though I have adding even wilder aspects by making Uriel a Bonkim, Bright Malakim, written up by Kingsley Lintz, and with an anime twist looks like a Bonakim version of Neo-Queen Serenity/Sailor Moon. *ducks from even vaguely canon inclined thrown stones* > > So all of that to say...Thanks Sirea! My players are not list members, and so don't realize where some of my insanity comes from but as it comes up I love to give credit! > Your welcome ^^; just please... one thing... for the love of refried beans, do NOT makle the thing as powerful as it is in DBZ, my write-up, or anywhere! ;-; unless you like people dealing in excess of 10,000 damage :D (j/k) --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:31:34 -0400 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> The Event >> In short, In Nomine's "dials" just rock. I really >> hope the fan community never decides there's one "right" >> setting for them the way many WoD fans seem to have. >> >> -- Julian Mensch >> Though I must say I personally prefer the dynamics >> of a Mike/David 'ship to Mike/Novy. And yes, I'm >> quite straight. ::after the little incident of rolling around on the floor, clutching sides and laughing at the sudden mental picture of Michael and David clutching hands and skipping in the Groves:: He he hee... Yes, I think one of the things of main importance in In Nomine is that there is no canonical "World of Darkness". In White Wolf, there's a set universe, it sucks, it's coming apart, things are going to Hell, and it'll only get worse. The only born heroes, the Garou, are told the moment they realize what they are that everything they do will probably be for nought. The Mages have to contend with a world that slaps them down every time they do anything against consensus and now if they try to go to the 'spirit plane', there's a chance they'll have their soul accidentely flayed from their body. Lets not even get into the Fae. And the vampires? They're practically mundane in the World of Darkness. IN allows the players freedom to go where-ever they want- even to the other side, if that looks like it would fit in the story. There seems to be a general feeling of freedom lacking in other systems, but with a story and depth that you don't get in the hack'n'slash of other RPGs. Josh ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 20:45:13 +0300 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption - -----Original Message----- From: sirea@softhome.net [mailto:sirea@softhome.net] Infernal Interventions (symphonic landmine versions, not Lucifer personally), and personal weakness made her Fall. So it was her choice, but she tried to change her mind halfway through, and it didn't work. Falling is -always- a choice, I believe in that very much, but Espira has a very unlucky day. Besides, I -wanted- Date and the Dark Powers that Be to abuse the little Cherub, I was feeling mean and nasty that night :D --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity DS1 I still mislike the "can never redeem" aspect as much as I mislike the "can never fall" concept of Malakim. "Have never fallen" and "purify their ranks so that none fall" is different. It shows they still struggle against evil within themselves, because the temptation is a part of free will, which all angels must have or none would never have fallen at all. The complacency that sets in with "can never" just vexes me. I think it leads too easily to hypocrisy, which in my mind is one of the greatest sins. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:53:10 -0600 From: sirea@softhome.net Subject: Re: IN> The Event > Yes, I think one of the things of main importance in In Nomine is that there > is no canonical "World of Darkness". In White Wolf, there's a set universe, > it sucks, it's coming apart, things are going to Hell, and it'll only get > worse. The only born heroes, the Garou, are told the moment they realize > what they are that everything they do will probably be for nought. The > Mages have to contend with a world that slaps them down every time they do > anything against consensus and now if they try to go to the 'spirit plane', > there's a chance they'll have their soul accidentely flayed from their > body. Lets not even get into the Fae. > > And the vampires? They're practically mundane in the World of Darkness. > > IN allows the players freedom to go where-ever they want- even to the other > side, if that looks like it would fit in the story. There seems to be a > general feeling of freedom lacking in other systems, but with a story and > depth that you don't get in the hack'n'slash of other RPGs. That's another point I agree with. In Nomine is a set world, but it has a sense of freedom, and this is evident the most when you see you have those little dials called "brightness" and "contrast". Want Heaven to be evil tyrants, and Hell the good guys? Yoink. There you go. Maybe you want everything to be so bright and happy that even -Novalis- is getting a cavity? Twist. Done and done. Point is, instead of having a set brigtness and contrast from the start like other games, In Nomine has is flexible to begin with (with a "default" setting for those who want to follow the book or not have to tweak of course). Making something like WoD Bright or Dark kinda messes with the mood, and it's hard to believe (and not many fans seem to enjoy that happening I hear). It's one of the biggest reasons I love IN- it's the War between Heaven and Hell that I always admired and dreamed about for stories and such, but there's no set road to walk down to see it. You have unlimited AA's, DP's, world options and campaign settings you can tweak to create a huge spectrum of settings. I really like it. Okay, I'll stop praising now ^_^; just sending my point of worship Essence for the day... ^_~ --- Sirea, Free Cherub, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:58:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption - --- "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" wrote: > I still mislike the "can never redeem" aspect as much as > I mislike the "can > never fall" concept of Malakim. [snip] It shows they > still struggle against evil > within themselves, because the temptation is a part of > free will, which all > angels must have or none would never have fallen at all. Here's another way to look at it. Malakim can't Fall because to do so is to cease to exist. Remember their first Oath; "I will not suffer an evil to live if it is my choice." By becoming evil, they become that which they have sworn to destroy. By binding their souls to that Oath they may not make it impossible to Fall so much as they make it impossible to _survive_ Falling. This leaves them room to struggle against evil within themselves, but for Malakim losing that struggle means being recycled back into the Symphony. =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

"If you succeed, you will make some false friends and some true enemies. Succeed anyway." - -- Bishop David M. Copeland

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 14:07:15 -0400 From: EDG Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption At 08:45 PM 10/2/2002 +0300, Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW) wrote: >I still mislike the "can never redeem" aspect as much as I mislike the "can >never fall" concept of Malakim. "Have never fallen" and "purify their ranks >so that none fall" is different. It shows they still struggle against evil >within themselves, because the temptation is a part of free will, which all >angels must have or none would never have fallen at all. Faulty syllogism. Just because not all angels have free will doesn't mean none of them do. Further: The fact that Malakim can't Fall doesn't restrict their free will any more than the fact that a Seraph can't turn into a Lilim restricts the Seraph's free will. Falling and serving Hell are not synonymous; one can exist quite easily without the other. In point of fact, I can see a Malakite rationalizing that the only group he cannot possibly surrender to or be captured by is the group he already works for, and that if he needs to work for them in order to avoid surrender or capture by them, it's hardly his choice whether or not to kill them. Whether or not he's actually allowed into a game depends highly on the GM. I can already pick out the names of several people whose initial response will be "and what crack are you smoking today, EDG?". I implore you not to respond that way; after all, *I* wouldn't allow him in one of *my* games. I'm just pointing out the possibilities. And, of course, your mileage may vary greatly here. - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 12:20:11 -0600 From: Julian Mensch Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption << I still mislike the "can never redeem" aspect as much as I mislike the "can never fall" concept of Malakim. "Have never fallen" and "purify their ranks so that none fall" is different. It shows they still struggle against evil within themselves, because the temptation is a part of free will, which all angels must have or none would never have fallen at all. >> I think we have to distinguish between thematic falling or redemption, and metaphysical falling/redemption. In both cases where the metaphysical option is denied, it just serves to reinforce the fact that the thematic option can not be forced. In Uriel's case, we get the bitter irony that the one Superior who most epitomizes never being able to become a demon is the one Archangel who "fell" the hardest, in the sense of becoming evil. Likewise, Espira seems to be written with the potential to become an incredible hero, an model to others and a wonderful example of a person, inspiring many others to redeem, even if she never sees the light of Heaven. IOW, you can stop her from becoming an angel, but you can't stop her from becoming a force of good. That's a strong theme, IMO. - -- Julian Mensch ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 12:19:27 -0600 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: IN> Archangel of Fear. Does anyone have any ideas for nifty attunements the Archangel of Fear could've granted? Ben "You're all the things I've got to remember." - -- A-ha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 21:24:20 +0300 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption At 08:45 PM 10/2/2002 +0300, Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW) wrote: >I still mislike the "can never redeem" aspect as much as I mislike the "can >never fall" concept of Malakim. "Have never fallen" and "purify their ranks >so that none fall" is different. It shows they still struggle against evil >within themselves, because the temptation is a part of free will, which all >angels must have or none would never have fallen at all. EDG [anthoch@earlham.edu] Faulty syllogism. Just because not all angels have free will doesn't mean none of them do. DS1 Actually, it either makes my statement true, or Malakim are less than other angels and in fact less than all other creatures in Heaven and Earth because they have no free will. EDG [anthoch@earlham.edu] Further: The fact that Malakim can't Fall doesn't restrict their free will any more than the fact that a Seraph can't turn into a Lilim restricts the Seraph's free will. Falling and serving Hell are not synonymous; one can exist quite easily without the other. DS1 What does the Choir have to do with their Free Will? I can't turn into a bug, but it doesn't effect my mind, my soul or my choices. Yes. If you make it a fact that a Malakim cannot fall it means they do not have free will. They can never conciously choose evil. They are always forced to choose good because they cannot fall and so no evil can come to them. Or, as I stated last message, they become the biggest hypocrites in existance. "I can do what ever evil I want because I can never fall so gimmie a whore, find me some crack and let's burn some babies alive" because after all, he is a Malakim and can never fall. The thought sickens me. I never once stated that you had to play it that way, but it is a situation I find extremely distastful. And even if your Malakim doesn't go to the extreme of burning babies alive, the unconcious knowlege in the back of their brains that tells them that no matter what sin they commit they can never fall makes them hypocrities. They can never speak out to another angel about making a choice that might lead to evil because they are exempt from paying the price of their own sins. So, if you take the supposition that Malakim can never fall then I belive you remove their ability to have free will. Falling does mean serving Hell. Tripping or becoming Outcaste means not serving Heaven or Hell, but Falling means you are no longer an angel you are a demon and even if you think you are serving Heaven's purpose, you are in fact serving Hell. Ask any Habbalah. Falling and serving Hell are completely synonymous. EDG [anthoch@earlham.edu] In point of fact, I can see a Malakite rationalizing that the only group he cannot possibly surrender to or be captured by is the group he already works for, and that if he needs to work for them in order to avoid surrender or capture by them, it's hardly his choice whether or not to kill them. DS1 I have no idea what this has to do with anything I said. When did it become a matter of who a Malakim can kill? EDG [anthoch@earlham.edu] Whether or not he's actually allowed into a game depends highly on the GM. I can already pick out the names of several people whose initial response will be "and what crack are you smoking today, EDG?". I implore you not to respond that way; after all, *I* wouldn't allow him in one of *my* games. I'm just pointing out the possibilities. DS1 You don't allow Malakim in your game? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 21:37:55 +0300 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption - -----Original Message----- From: Julian Mensch [mailto:jmensch@shaw.ca] IOW, you can stop her from becoming an angel, but you can't stop her from becoming a force of good. That's a strong theme, IMO. - -- Julian Mensch DS1 But that was my point. Nothing is strong enough to overcome free will. Even Lucifer had to tempt Adam and Eve. He had to tempt his fellow angels. He cannot damn anyone out of hand, he cannot prevent their overcoming the inner selfishness of their miserable existence to blossom into something greater. Struggling against damnation and overcoming the impossible odds of your own sins are great themes, they are the themes I enjoy the most in any game system. But to say that any one demon or Demon Prince has a power to prevent the final glory of becoming the better person that you fought to be is, I think, totally wrong. Especially in In Nomine where the crux of the game can actually boil down to the struggle for the redemption or damnation of a single human being. If Lucifer could just wave his hand and damn an angel with a whim, don't you think he would have done so? If he had the ability to chain every one of his servants to everlasting submission to his cause, don't you think he would have done it already? Yes. I agree that demons can do good. They can even do good out of choice. And even doing one good act, or ten good acts may not be enough to have them redeem. But if the demon wants to redeem, chooses good consistently over evil, even in the face of sacrificing themselves to pain and suffering and horrible tortures, which need not be physical because once you have experienced the Symphony, being barred from it is a torture... If the demon in fact is ready for redemption, no power in Heaven or Earth should stop it. Yes, a superior should be on hand, but if the demon truly repents of it's sins, truly reaches for God, then there should be nothing else required but the leap of faith to say "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed." So yes. I think an irredeemable demon is a terrible idea. I think an infallible angel is a terrible idea. I think both concepts deny the character free will. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 02:39:02 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: Re: IN> Accumulate Your welcome ^^; just please... one thing... for the love of refried beans, do NOT makle the thing as powerful as it is in DBZ, my write-up, or anywhere! ;-; unless you like people dealing in excess of 10,000 damage :D (j/k) Sirea, LOL...I may be one of the few who hasn't seen an entire episode of DBZ, and hence not know what you mean but I'll try not to... Of course sometimes the scale of the game has universes (yes plural) at stake so, the damage level may just be about right...;-) Jeff =) - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 14:57:28 -0400 From: EDG Subject: RE: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption At 09:24 PM 10/2/2002 +0300, Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW) wrote: >Actually, it either makes my statement true, or Malakim are less than other >angels and in fact less than all other creatures in Heaven and Earth because >they have no free will. Only if you place a value judgment on the possession of free will - which the canon game *does not do*. In fact, it deliberately leaves unstated whether free will, in In Nomine, even exists. >What does the Choir have to do with their Free Will? I can't turn into a >bug, but it doesn't effect my mind, my soul or my choices. Yes. If you >make it a fact that a Malakim cannot fall it means they do not have free >will. They can never conciously choose evil. They are always forced to >choose good because they cannot fall and so no evil can come to them. Wrong. As *I* stated last message, Falling and serving Hell are two different things. For that matter, serving Hell and being evil are two different things. Again, you're making a lot of assumptions that the game itself simply doesn't support. Falling, at its core, involves the transformation from a Choir attuned to the Symphony at large into a Band attuned to a personal Symphony. No Falling angel gets to choose into which Band he will transform, so this restricts their will; if their will is restricted, how is it free? You're making a boolean distinction between free will and no free will. I'm pointing out that nothing *ever* has completely free will. A Seraph cannot become a Lilim; a Malakite cannot become a demon. Both are, at their core, the same restriction on free will. >Or, as I stated last message, they become the biggest hypocrites in >existance. "I can do what ever evil I want because I can never fall so >gimmie a whore, find me some crack and let's burn some babies alive" because >after all, he is a Malakim and can never fall. This isn't hypocrisy. This is delusional, perhaps, and behavior likely to get the Malakite killed, but not hypocritical. Hypocrisy is "I am the most virtuous creature alive, therefore I can never Fall. Since I am the most virtuous creature alive and can never Fall, I will perform unvirtuous acts." (Even there, it's less hypocrisy than fatally flawed logic.) >The thought sickens me. I never once stated that you had to play it that >way, but it is a situation I find extremely distastful. And even if your >Malakim doesn't go to the extreme of burning babies alive, the unconcious >knowlege in the back of their brains that tells them that no matter what sin >they commit they can never fall makes them hypocrities. They can never >speak out to another angel about making a choice that might lead to evil >because they are exempt from paying the price of their own sins. Again, flawed logic. Just because I am not you doesn't mean I can't understand your situation, and in point of fact, I might understand it better simply because I'm not in the middle of it and can therefore examine it from a distance. >So, if you take the supposition that Malakim can never fall then I belive >you remove their ability to have free will. You're entitled to your beliefs. I disagree with you. So do the core rules. >Falling does mean serving Hell. Tripping or becoming Outcaste means not >serving Heaven or Hell, but Falling means you are no longer an angel you are >a demon and even if you think you are serving Heaven's purpose, you are in >fact serving Hell. Ask any Habbalah. Falling and serving Hell are >completely synonymous. There's a difference between "serving Hell" and "serving Hell's purposes". Falling means that Heaven has fewer angels to rely on; this serves Hell's purposes. An angel who has Fallen need not go to Hell and say "Here, I'm yours"; to do so would be to serve Hell. >I have no idea what this has to do with anything I said. When did it become >a matter of who a Malakim can kill? A Malakite gains dissonance by violating his oaths. The first oath every Malakite takes is "I shall not suffer an evil to live, if it is my choice." >You don't allow Malakim in your game? I wouldn't allow *that Malakite* in my game. Please stop putting words in my mouth. - -EDG ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2794 ********************************