in_nomine-digest Thursday, October 3 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2799 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Re: IN> The Event Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 IN> List Urban Legends and trend of the IN List RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 IN> Uriel was wrong? Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 RE: IN> Worlds One and Two (RE: The Event) Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption IN> Bright Lilim On Earth (Re: The Event) Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? IN> Sympathetic Demons (Re: The Event) Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Re: IN> Sympathetic Demons (Re: The Event) IN> Where the Darkness Knows No Dawn IN> List "Urban Legends" (Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795) Fwd: Re: IN> One hand on the phone, the other on my sword Re: IN> New Media Attunement IN> Fwd: Uriel's recall from Wajenberg, Earl Fwd: RE: IN> Uriel was wrong? from "Wajenberg, Earl" RE: IN> Uriel was wrong? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 13:28:21 -0600 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 > >A) all Ethereals are really cute and fluffy > >B) the apparent assumption that Malakim start out around 15 Forces > > Wow. I must be reading a different list, because I can't remember running > into either of these. > > -EDG I've seen variations of #1 on the list. The conventional wisdom seems to be that Ethereals were harmless good guys who were unfairly butchered by Uriel. I don't like this point of view and try to make Ethereals alien and scary in my games. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:31:05 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> The Event >Since /which/ "couple of Archangels" have created >attunements for Bright Lilim servitors varies from game >ot game, the game rules had to list them all. However, >it's perfectly reasonable to have only those few >Archangels who actually have Bright Lilim servitors to >have actually done the R&D work to create a Bright Lilim >Choir Attunement. The remainder of the attunements are >merely what those archangels /would/ create, if and when >they ever got a Bright Lilim servitor. And, in fact, that's exactly how it's listed in Dominic's entry for a Bright Lilim Choir Attunement in Superiors 1. "Dominic does not try to recruit Lilim ... such a Daughter WOULD find weaknesses in others..." (emphasis mine). It looks like a strong suggestion that there haven't yet(i.e. before some player draws one up for your game) been any Bright Lilim of Judgment. William ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 03:37:43 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Other listserv sacred cows are: A) all Ethereals are really cute and fluffy This one is connected like a Siamese twin to the "Uriel was evil" theory. >There seems to be a widely held idea that Ethereals are really good guys, >all ready to join Heaven against Hell. Whereas what I remember from the books is that some were Heaven's allies, some were Hell's allies, and some were neutral (I think the Indian pantheon was the most powerful neutral group). Janet Anderson - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:37:29 -0600 From: Julian Mensch Subject: RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 << Other listserv sacred cows are: A) all Ethereals are really cute and fluffy >> I'd argue this one, actually. I don't think the majority of list-etherials are overly sympathetic. I remember posts about Hera, the Perfect Mate, the Monster Under The Bed, and various Lovecraftian nastiness. What I do think is a list consensus is that Uriel was in the wrong to persecute /all/ of them, and I don't consider this an urban legend, just an obvious implication of the descriptions of events in the canon books. - -- Julian ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 16:18:14 -0400 From: Samovar3@aol.com Subject: IN> List Urban Legends and trend of the IN List > Wow. I must be reading a different list, because I can't > remember running into either of these. - -EDG I may have overstated them a bit, but the general principle is there. Ethereals, when written up on the list, are usually portrayed as really being heroic and would gladly ally with Heaven if it weren't for Uriel and that Purity Crusade. Even then, they'd be ready to forgive and forget if it weren't for those nasty Tsaydim. Perhaps the Malakim force arrangement came out of nowhere, but it's my perception that there are a lot of posts that have Malakim as ultimate butt-kickers, always outwitting any pitiful demonic plans, and no Malakim fails to use its resonance or falls victim to a demon's. To actually have the forces to pull that off, it's high. Given that new demons only have 7 forces, perhaps it's more like 12. But, hey, it's my perception. Others may disagree. To me, the list feels like it's gone mostly bright. That's fine. When I first joined the list, it had a good portion (probably 50%) of dark stuff. I prefer the dark stuff, but I'm willing to wait for it to swing around again, or stay around for the occasional stretch of high quality, dark posts. Of course, In Nomine is nicely in my "Favorite Game I've Never Played" niche, so a lot of stuff isn't as important to me and I may selectively remember posts because of it. Sam ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 04:18:53 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 > What I do think is a list consensus is that Uriel > was in the wrong to persecute /all/ of them, and > I don't consider this an urban legend, just an > obvious implication of the descriptions of events > in the canon books. "Uriel was in the wrong to persecute all of them" (a statement with which I completely agree) is not the same thing as "Uriel was evil" (a statement with which I do not agree), and I have seen both statements made on the list with almost equal frequency. Janet Anderson - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 04:21:24 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: RE: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 > What I do think is a list consensus is that Uriel > was in the wrong to persecute /all/ of them, and > I don't consider this an urban legend, just an > obvious implication of the descriptions of events > in the canon books. "Uriel was in the wrong to persecute all of them" (a statement with which I completely agree) is not the same thing as "Uriel was evil" (a statement with which I do not agree), and I have seen both statements made on the list with almost equal frequency. Janet Anderson - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:38:55 -0600 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: IN> Uriel was wrong? > "Uriel was in the wrong to persecute all of them" Why was Uriel wrong to persecute all of them? Sure, some of 'em acted nice, but they're still ethereals. Killing 'em was about as evil as 'killing' things in a computer game. I've run around in Ultima IV and slain hundreds of automated process that appeared as honest guards, but that doesn't make me wrong, nor does it make the automated processes good. It also doesn't make the guards less 'real' within the limitations provided by the game. The only reason people think it was wrong to kill the ethereals was because the illusion was too good. The automated processes called ethereals possessed the illusion of being real. For beings with limited perceptions, that's as good as being real. Pure Uriel, on the other hand, knew better, and knew that there was no such thing as a good or evil ethereal. Only a dangerous one that could run amok at any second and harm Heaven. Even an automated process can cause real-world problems if it's wired right. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 04:44:12 +0800 From: "Jeffery Watkins" Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 Personally, I like a gray world (as opposed to bright or dark), but there don't seem to be many on the list who agree with that. The beauty of the list and the game is, there is room for all the shades in between bright and dark. Jeff =) - -- __________________________________________________________ Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/ Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/ Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 16:53:46 -0700 From: Harukami Subject: Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? >Why was Uriel wrong to persecute all of them? > >Sure, some of 'em acted nice, but they're still ethereals. Killing 'em was >about as evil as 'killing' things in a computer game. I've run around in >Ultima IV and slain hundreds of automated process that appeared as honest >guards, but that doesn't make me wrong, nor does it make the automated >processes good. It also doesn't make the guards less 'real' within the >limitations provided by the game. I think the difference would be... well, say one of the guards gained an actual AI. It thought for itself, it knew itself to be alive, it developed a personality and morals (or the lack thereof) and made its own decisions. These WERE inventions of the human soul, but they were also real, thinking beings with feelings - and fear, and pain. Not to say Uriel was/wasn't right. ^_~ Just playing devil's advocate. Haru Balseraph of the Media ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:01:56 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 On Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 04:44 PM, Jeffery Watkins wrote: > Personally, I like a gray world (as opposed to bright or dark), but > there don't seem to be many on the list who agree with that. > I'm pretty well grey IMC. In part that means that sometimes Hell is right, and sometimes Heaven is. Sometimes, Michael has a good reason to be suspicious of Dominic, and sometimes Dominic has a good reason to be suspicious of Michael. And it means that Yves is ultimately more concerned with Destiny than victory... and Kronos is more concerned with Fate than with Hell. - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:09:46 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? >> "Uriel was in the wrong to persecute all of them" > >Why was Uriel wrong to persecute all of them? > >Sure, some of 'em acted nice, but they're still ethereals. Killing 'em was >about as evil as 'killing' things in a computer game. Depends on where the soul lies in your game. Some Ethereals have Celestial Forces that can be permanently disrupted by violence. For some of us, this enough to give us pause as to whether killing one is morally neutral act. On the other hand, they're never seen in Heaven or Hell, and they don't seem to have the usual Destiny and Fate. For some, this is enough to indicate that they're soulless and thus as bad as Undead, or at least neutral in some ineffable sense. William ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:15:14 -0400 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 And it means that Yves is ultimately more >concerned with Destiny than victory... and Kronos is more concerned >with Fate than with Hell. Now, you see, that's an interesting way of putting it. Interesting, and ultimately seed worthy way of putting it? Josh ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 16:38:26 -0500 From: Joe Reimers Subject: Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Hey guys, Please remember this isn't an attempt to flame, I am NOT related to anyone whose name rhymes with "Chack Jick" and that my argument is going to contain theological references and assumptions which are NOT canonical, and may not be everyone's cup of tea. That said, the whole point of this post is to add to the intellectual conversation about the nature of Uriel, the Malakim in general, and some other (arc)angels (and demons) of "questionable" standing. Please, please, please do NOT take this as any sort of effort to proselytize, either. I'm simply trying to introduce new arguments which (hopefully) have not yet been considered. Also, be forewarned that my family has 1 PhD in philosophy and 2 others studying it. Whew. Okay. I'm going to make a few general assumptions here (again, limited to the IN universe.) First is that God exists (or existed) at some level. Second, I put forth that God is Good. In fact, God is the embodiment of Good: there is no Good without God. "Evil" can be defined as "the absence of Good." Thus, we can postulate that the place God resides (Heaven) is good, and those who serve God and perform God's will are Good. Not necessarily perfectly Good, mind you, but definitely Good. Thus, it can also be extrapolated that the place God has no presence (Hell) is Evil, and those who seek to further the cause of Hell are Evil. Not perfectly Evil, mind you, but Evil because of the absence of Good. I will also put forward that because God created angels, angels have an inherent Goodness about them, and that because demons are Fallen angels, they, too, have a certain element of Goodness in them. Not much, but enough that the Evil is not as pure as the Good. What does this mean, then? I suggest that all angels serving the side of Heaven are inherently Good. Their natures, their resonances, everything about them strives toward Goodness. Angels are not perfect, thus they can gain Dissonance, but their inherent natures are to be Good. Uriel sought to be a beacon of Goodness among the Good. He sought to purify the Symphony and bring it closer to God's more perfect Goodness. I also put forth that his zeal and single-mindedness were imperfections which caused a Good being to do a deed that could be considered Evil. That does not make Uriel evil, however. The same holds true with the rest of the Malakim: they are unwaveringly Good, but their single-mindeness can cause problems. Nevertheless, the Malakim stand for a very important aspect of the greater Good, namely, Honor: Malakim can be considered an imperfect manifestation of God's Honor. This raises the question of other "questionable" superiors, such as Dominic. Again, bearing in mind that angels who are actively engaged on Heaven's side are inherently Good, it is important to remember that a Word-bound celestial not only personifies his/her Choir's resonance, but also his/her Word. Dominic represents Judgement, and does so as an imperfect manifestation of God's perfect Judgement. Dominic cannot be other than he is, he is as much Judgement as he is a Seraph. What often gets overlooked about Dominic (and what seperates him from Asmodeus) is the importance of rendering the correct Judgement: it's not just about finding the guilty, it's also about protecting the innocent. Judge, but judge correctly and with an even hand. If anything Judgement is very closely tied to the Truth, another aspect of God. Granted, Judgement is unforgiving, but Judgement is not about Forgiveness (mental note: we need an arcangel for this Word.) This brings me to some thoughts about the Lilim. Lilith is referred to as a Demon Princess, and her Lilim are considered a Band. Given Lilith's history, it is clear she was originally intended to be Human. Her nature is still such that she can suffer things like boredom: at heart, I still think she's the most human of any Superior for either side. Since only Lilith can create Lilim, I believe that Lilim have a greater portion of human nature than any other Choir or Band. Thomas Aquinas postulated that angels (including the Fallen) were created with Free Will, but that Will was very firm and inflexible and not prone to change the way human will is. (Based on this, Aquinas believes that Lucifer and his followers were cast down immediately after their creation because they rebelled immediately, so strong were their wills. Clearly not IN canon, but that's how the inflexibility works.) Anyway, I assume there's a certain amount of truth to this in the IN universe: Choirs and Bands perceive and, in turn, manifest in the Symphony in their own very particular ways, and they are firmly aligned to those ways. (Upon further reflection, THIS may be the reason Malakim don't fall: they simply refuse to accept any but the True Symphony.) Because Lilim have a human element in their natures, they tend to be more fickle: hence the importance of Freedom; they are free to change their minds. That's why Free Lilim work (and not Free Balseraphs or Free Shedim). I really ought to sit down and write this up more completely. I have a lot of half-finished thoughts in here, but I wanted to throw it out there into the greater conversation. Joe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:45:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795 - --- Rampaging Crypto-Man wrote: > I've seen variations of #1 on the list. The conventional > wisdom seems to be > that Ethereals were harmless good guys who were unfairly > butchered by Uriel. Go to Moe's website and check out the Tri-planar Conference presentations. There's a really good mix of viewpoints there. =====

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: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:23:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: RE: IN> Worlds One and Two (RE: The Event) At 6:39 PM -0700 10/2/02, Jennifer Shih wrote: >--- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> Neither Urilebana nor Urichislon have become >> Superiors >> in the SSO. Urilebana is unlikely to do so, frankly; >> her main claim to Weird Fame is having a .srl >> extension. > >If not Urichislon, then Kathriel? She's the other one >you've mentioned as having Superior potential, and >IIRC, she's already held off a DP for long enough for >the reinforcements to arrive -- twice. Well, truthfully, she held off Azzie long enough for people to beat a retreat, and Beleth long enough for reinforcements to arrive. And Dominic, but she was in the Halls of Creation and on the other side of the window while she stalled him a little. But yes, she's the only one mentioned as having faced down Princes and gotten away with it for the few heartbeats required. (Of course, Azzie was a bit discommoded by the Light of Heaven shining down on him, so it's not like he was in his prime then. He's still rather.... peeved at her, of course.) - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:28:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption At 3:40 PM -0500 10/2/02, Joe Reimers wrote: >What is the "official" word on this, really? >C) As far as you know, Malakim cannot Fall. (i.e. no one knows for sure >whether it may be possible given the right set of circumstances.) You push hard enough, I say C. No Malakite has been known to Fall. The vast majority of celestials believe it is impossible for them to Fall. A fair number of demons claim it's because Malakim are holy demons and can't Fall off the floor. Some actually believe this. A fair number of demons claim Malakim _could_ Fall, but so far none have been lucky enough to manage it. Some actually believe this. Some, whether they believe it or not, claim that the Malakite pastime of hunting down their brethern who are overly dissonant is a sign that the Malakim themselves fear Falling. Barring the intervention of celestial forces, I predict that you will never see a truly Fallen Malakite in canon. You might, of course, see some seriously psychotic ones who might as well... - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:39:58 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Espira, Djinn of Corruption, Demon of Redemption At 3:58 PM -0600 10/2/02, sirea@softhome.net wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy writes: >> (The original Genubath -- well, the IN one -- was a Djinn of Theft. SJ >> asked me for a name for Rapine. I plucked that one out. Had to rename >> the Djinn... Still, I always think of Genny as a Djinn first, and Something >> Else after. So who knows.) > >A Djinn of Theft? But then, how did... Theft stole Rapine and... *laugh* It's very simple. I had an NPC named Genubath. He was a Djinn of Theft. SJ needed a name for Rapine. I'd already looked up several good names for the concept of Taking Stuff. I told him Genubath (and a few others), and SJ liked Genubath. So I wound up renaming the NPC, but I'd already used that name and gotten it into my head first. Does that help? O:> - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:57:01 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Bright Lilim On Earth (Re: The Event) At 11:36 AM +0800 10/3/02, Janet Anderson wrote: >[...] (What Superior fortunate enough to have a Bright Lilim working for him or >her is going to waste such a resource, or put such a resource in danger, by >sending her to Earth?) If the resource is only useful when it's on Earth, then why waste it letting it moulder away "upstairs"? Note: when I say "useless" in the following, I mean, "no more special or effective than any other angel or reliever or even blessed soul, really." Blandine's are best in the Marches -- but then Blandine's anything is best in the Marches. David's are pretty redundant in Heaven. Dominic's could wander around in Heaven, with short, supervised trips down Tethers, and be reasonably useful -- but they're more useful when inquisiting angels who've had time to be 'tainted' by corporeality. Eli's would be somewhat redundant in Heaven. Gabriel's are downright useless in Heaven, unless they're teamed up with Judgment, to bring them prisoners -- and like _that's_ going to happen much? Janus' could work anywhere, this is true. But would they want to stay in Heaven indefinitely, or would they want to skip out ahead of the upset Laurencians? Jean's could be tucked away as divine programmers, but they're more useful web-surfing in a Tether. That, and pretending to their sisters that they're still dark, so as to improve the dataflow. Or vamping/geasing Vapulans. They Need-read Vapulans very well, thank you. Jordi's are, er, pretty useless in Heaven. Laurence's are _blessed_ useless in Heaven -- and not all that specially useful unless directly interacting with demons. Marc's might be okay in Heaven, depending on the need for such a broker... Michael's, ironically, are probably least useless in Heaven, as they make wicked trainers of other angels. Novalis' are totally, utterly, pathetically useless in Heaven -- at least, in the Glade. Yves' Lilim are only mildly useful in Heaven. Khalid's, if any ever existed, would be useless in Heaven. So that's why Archangels send them to Earth. So that they can use their special intersection-between-Lilim-nature-and-Archangel's-Word gifts to aid in the way that only they can. (Now, if you had one who was sufficiently damaged or sufficiently young as to be either useless, or not useful enough to justify the risk to further usefulness, on Earth -- that's different. To trot out the hoary old SSO, there's a Lilim of Flowers up there who is still so much in denial of her past evils that you _can't_ stick more Ethereal Forces on her. She's only fit for Heaven-duties, and Novalis is letting her mend in her own time -- which is, well, decades at least.) (On the other hand, the SSO's "top secret" Lilim of the Sword, after being trained in self-defense for a fairly long time, gets sent on gradually more and more Earth missions...) - --Beth's SSO .sig: (Want to hear more about the Superior Soap Opera? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IN-SoapOpera ) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:50:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? - --- Rampaging Crypto-Man wrote: > Why was Uriel wrong to persecute all of them? Because it was Blandine, not Uriel, who was the acknowledged expert on the Marches. Uriel had no idea what effect indiscriminately slaughtering Dream Elements would have on Human dreamers, but he did it anyway without consulting the AA of Dreams. His actions may not have been Dissonant from the perspective of his Choir and Word, but they were definitely unwise. Which is one more piece of evidence to put in the "Superiors are not infallible" file. =====

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: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:02:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Sympathetic Demons (Re: The Event) At 11:59 PM -0400 10/2/02, Damien A Wellman wrote: > To tell the truth, I've been able to think of fairly sympathetic sorts >for just about every Band but Shedim. Those guys are just *icky*, after >all. Shedim of the Game, who are not _forced_ to corrupt, can be pretty entertaining. Had one for a PC for a while. I can point to the logs sometime, maybe. >Balseraphs are kind of hard to like too. [...] Oh, I dunno -- some of the snakes have a certain style. Media ones kind of excel at this, of course. Calabim, those are harder for me to come up with sympathetic slants on... - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:57:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Uriel was wrong? Interesting points, Joe. One thing... > Judgement is not about Forgiveness (mental note: we need > an arcangel for this Word.) Mihr, the Angel of Mercy, is a canonical Servitor of Judgement. She appears in S1. =====

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: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:00:27 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Sympathetic Demons (Re: The Event) On Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 06:02 PM, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Calabim, those are harder for me to come up with sympathetic slants > on... > Yeah, it's not like anyone's ever come up with a sympathetic take on Valefor. Waaaait a sec.... (Okay, Valefor tends to fall into the leather clad bad boy beefcake bit more than anything, but still. He's at least sympathetic enough that reams of people believe he's an Archangel in disguise...) - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:08:42 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: IN> Where the Darkness Knows No Dawn The Calabite laughed. And laughed, spinning around the elaborate room. "It's so perfect," he giggled. "It's so *wonderful!* Already the soft ones have learned to burn! We can set the *ablaze!* Kobal smirked, leaning near Valefor. "He'll do this for five or six hours, won't he?" "At least." Valefor's smirk echoed the Impudite's, watching his Bandmate spin with joy and hunger. "Charming," Asmodeus said, stepping into the room, Kronos and Baal following. "I don't suppose anyone brought a hose? We have work to be done." "*Yes!*" Belial snapped, whirling and pointing at Asmodeus. "*Work* to be done! Buildings and peoples and trees and *flowers* to burn! It's time! It's time! It's timeit'stimeitstimeitstimeits--" "Silence!" Baal roared, backhanding the Calabite across the room. "*Control* yourself!" Belial looked startled and offended, cradling his arm like he were holding a child. "You aren't happy?" he half-whispered. "But Baal -- we've won. We've already won! The damnable Michael is dead, or nearly so! His *bride* is broken with him. Heaven is falling about, and the sheep *hunger* to be taught and burnt and killed." "I think we know your desires," Asmodeus sneered. "But we lack intelligence. In your case, more than one kind." "What do we know," Kronos asked. Kobal sat up at that, leaning back in his chair and folding his arms behind his head. "Well, we've learned Archangels should practice safe sex, if that helps." Kronos cracked a smile at that, which made Kobal frown. "Yes. Yes they should. Simply put, War and Peace reconciled their basic conflict, fell in love, married and joined in unity. The finest Fates are those born in the best intentions and highest principles, don't you think?" "This was Fate?" Baal looked skeptical. "You know something." "Of course I know something. If nothing else, I know that the balance of conflict -- of Factions, which will make Malphas smile I'm sure -- is there for a reason. When the Lion and the Lamb lay down together, it makes beautiful poetry but doesn't serve flock or pride, does it?" "Spare us the philosophy," Asmodeus snapped. "What we know is what our agents have drawn out of the Cherubim and Malakim so diligently combing the Earth, along with our other methods. Novalis and Michael had their little wedding, and decided to spawn a child. That child fledged Grigori -- the first confirmed Grigori in Heaven since they were cast out for using the penises they were given." "And as we all know, Grigori are supercelestials capable of bitchslapping Malakim like we'd bitchslap a puppy," Kobal said sardonically. "How'd a newborn angel of *any* Choir take two Archangels down. Much less God damned *Michael?*" "From the evidence, little Gog was able to tear the Forces from them. As they were off their guard--" "Michael is never off his guard," Baal said, very quietly and very menacingly. "His attunements would not permit it." "And Novalis can lay Peace down like a damn tarp," Valefor threw in. "Clearly, Gog didn't play by the rules." "They were at their most vulnerable," Kronos said. "Their most intimate. In giving Gog their Forces, they opened themselves to having the rest taken. Both lie near death, now." "That's right," Asmodeus said, then looked at Kronos mildly. "How did you know that?" "Which brings us to the point!" Belial cried. "They're weak and defenseless! Let loose the Dogs of War! Heaven cannot stop us now, they can only burn and die! Baal, you don't ever have to worry about Michael *again!* You've won, don't you--" Baal's arm blurred, faster than even Valefor could easily track. It slammed Belial into a wall hard enough to crack the infernal granite, Baal's blood red sword at the Prince of Fire's throat. "HE WAS *MINE* TO KILL!" Baal screamed. "*MINE!* GOG WILL *PAY* FOR THIS INSULT!" Belial's eyes were twice as wide as Kobal had ever seen. The Impudite even thought he saw the Calabite tremble, though even Kobal would be stupid enough to say it to Belial's face afterward. "Not to rain on this happy scene of tranquility," Valefor said in the silence that followed, "but why aren't we recruiting this happy little Skulker? When we find him, I mean. Seems to me he's got information we need *and* power we want." Baal let Belial go, turning on Valefor before gaining control. "Of course," he hissed. "Adding Gog to our forces is the first priority. Once he is with us, we can dispose of him however we feel is appropriate." "Listen to big red talking smack," Kobal snorted. "'Adding Gog to our forces is the first priority.' How do you propose we do that without adding our Forces to *Gog?* He's already a ton more powerful than Michael was. Am I the only one in the room who remembers Legion?" "No," Asmodeus said. "You certainly are not. I would recommend watching what move Gog makes next, with the possibility of a temporary alliance with the Host to eliminate Gog if necessary and expedient." "No!" Belial snapped. "No no no! *I* remember Legion too! I hated being so close to them, to having to *help* them! Hated it! I won't--" "Won't what," Baal asked quietly. "Tell me, Belial. After all this time that we've worked together, are you really thinking you'd do better on your own? You don't want to... take over for me, do you?" Belial smoldered, then looked away. Kobal smirked. He loved it when they forgot Baal was a Balseraph before even being a warrior. "Right," he said. "So what's the plan, Boss?" Baal glanced at Asmodeus and Kronos, then back. "For now, we wait and see what happens next. If Gog really is a new Legion, we figure out how to deal with him without putting ourselves at risk. Don't forget, as distasteful as cooperating with Heaven was then, in the end we rid ourselves both of Legion and of Raphael. Gog has already essentially destroyed two Archangels. Played correctly, he could win the war for us." "I couldn't put it better myself," Asmodeus murmured. "Shall we take our leave, then?" And that was that. Ten minutes later, only Kobal and Valefor were still in the room. Kobal put a hand on Valefor's shoulder before he could leave too. "Did you notice?" "What?" "Kronos didn't answer Azzy's question. How *did* he know what happened to Michael and Novalis?" Valefor looked at Kobal for a long moment. "Yes," he finally said. "I did notice. Hands off the leather, joke boy." Kobal let go of the coat. "So-rry." Valefor nodded and withdrew. Leaving Kobal. Who smiled. - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:21:16 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> List "Urban Legends" (Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2795) At 2:55 PM -0400 10/3/02, Samovar3@aol.com wrote: [...] >B) the apparent assumption that Malakim start out around 15 Forces [...] Nah -- They're only 13 Forces. 6 Corporeal, 6 Celestial, 1 Ethereal.... *duck* - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:35:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> One hand on the phone, the other on my sword >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\badd me\b/i at line 4 > >From: "Janet Anderson" >Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 02:48:26 +0800 >Subject: Re: IN> One hand on the phone, the other on my sword > >> As for continuing the fic, I don't know. If everyone really wants me to, >> sure, I'll try :D > >A d d m e to that list. > > >Janet Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 22:28:43 +0000 From: Nigel Cole Subject: Re: IN> New Media Attunement On Thursday 03 October 2002 14:18, Matthew Gerber wrote: > It's really quite > terrifying how many places you can go and never be challenged if you > just dress well, act comfortable and confident, and move and speak as > though you have every right in the world to be there. There used to be a guide for London students on which company canteens had free/cheap meals combined with poor security (no doubt a Kobal-Haagenti publication :). The entry for my father's bank said something like "wear a suit, and no-one will question whether you're supposed to be there". I've also heard a clipboard described as a "universal passport", for much the same reason. - -- Nigel Cole zebekia@zebekia.co.uk Dreamlyrics: Zebekia ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:50:33 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: Uriel's recall from Wajenberg, Earl >Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:38:27 -0500 >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from ["Wajenberg, Earl" ] >From: "Wajenberg, Earl" >Subject: Uriel's recall >Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 16:31:45 -0400 > >Concerning Uriel, the main thing canon says about him was that God called >him up to the Upper Heavens. This strongly suggests that Uriel had to be >stopped, but it is compatible with several possibilities: > > - Uriel had gone exactly far enough, > - so God called him up to say, "Well done, good and faithful servant." > - so God called him up to say, "You're being a loon. Stop." > > - Uriel had gone too far, > - so God called him up to stop and punish him. > - so God called him up to stop him. > > - Uriel's recall had nothing to do with the Crusade; the recall was >coincidental. > >Earl > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:51:43 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: RE: IN> Uriel was wrong? from "Wajenberg, Earl" >Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 16:01:20 -0500 >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from ["Wajenberg, Earl" ] Posters-L exists for a reason! O:> >From: "Wajenberg, Earl" >Subject: RE: IN> Uriel was wrong? >Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 16:54:44 -0400 > >Rampaging Crypto-Man wrote: > >"The only reason people think it was wrong to kill the ethereals was because >the illusion was too good. The automated processes called ethereals >possessed the illusion of being real. For beings with limited perceptions, >that's as good as being real. Pure Uriel, on the other hand, knew better, >and knew that there was no such thing as a good or evil ethereal. Only a >dangerous one that could run amok at any second and harm Heaven." > >An interesting interpretation of Ethereals, but a non-canonical one, given >the existence of an Ethereal Player's Guide, with detailed descriptions of >Ethereals as possession all three kinds of forces and, specifically, >consciousness. > >Earl > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 16:50:58 -0600 From: Julian Mensch Subject: RE: IN> Uriel was wrong? << Whew. Okay. I'm going to make a few general assumptions here (again, limited to the IN universe.) First is that God exists (or existed) at some level. Second, I put forth that God is Good. In fact, God is the embodiment of Good: there is no Good without God. "Evil" can be defined as "the absence of Good." Thus, we can postulate that the place God resides (Heaven) is good, and those who serve God and perform God's will are Good. Not necessarily perfectly Good, mind you, but definitely Good. >> I guess this comes down to definitions of words, then. If you say, "Good is defined by the qualities of God", then I respond "Okay, so a guess 'good' isn't what I'm talking about then; I meant secular ideas of virtue." (This is what I almost always mean when I say good OOC.) To put it another way, your "good" is not the same as my "good," and I don't particulairly care about yours except as it matches mine (which, admittedly somewhat egotistically, is the standard I hold everyone to in deciding whether I'm responsible for censuring them or not.) So back to Uriel. If we accept the Aquinite version of angels and then put the Purity Crusade in the same universe, it basically means that God is evil, _by my secular standards_. He's still theologically good, as he's the embodiment of goodness as per theology, but in this universe His theological good lines up pretty neatly with my secular evil, so I'd have little problem aligning myself with theological evil/Hell/opposition to God, and I'd probably look askance at others who did not do the same. So basically, for the idea of God as pure goodness to have any value to seculars (and many liberal theists!), He has to be doing and promoting things that we think are good, by non-theological standards. Genociding the competition pushes Him out of that realm. Now, assuming that God is God and etherials are not truly divinities, it's completely kosher for God and his angels to make it clear to pagans that the things they are worshipping aren't really divine -- but not to tell his servants to massacre etherials or priests of Baal. Put simply, the theological perspective you put forth here has a lot more dramatic power when it isn't used to justify things that we know in are gut are Evil. << closer to God's more perfect Goodness. I also put forth that his zeal and single-mindedness were imperfections which caused a Good being to do a deed that could be considered Evil. That does not make Uriel evil, however. >> The problem is that the vast majority of RL evil falls into this catagory. If falling prey to your imperfections and doing irreversable things that should not be done does not qualify you as evil, what does? Do you have to con- sciously embrace malice and reject moral awareness? That's how I describe the Biblical "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit," but theology specifically says that's not the only evil, just the most serious. - -- Julian Mensch ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2799 ********************************