in_nomine-digest Monday, December 16 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2905 In this digest: Re: IN> Was pondering... Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) Re: IN> The Song of Songs IN> Say what? Re: IN> Say what? Re: IN> CP awards Re: IN> CP awards Re: IN> CP awards Re: IN> CP awards Re: IN> Say what? Re: IN> The Song of Songs IN> Suspicious Dominicans Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) Re: IN> Superior Jury Duty (was: What's with Gabriel?) Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) Re: IN> Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior) Re: IN> You know what I like about this list? Re: IN> CP awards IN> Zimbabwe Re: IN> Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior) IN> Re: CP awards IN> Re: CP awards Re: IN> You know what I like about this list? Re: IN> Zimbabwe Re: IN> Zimbabwe Re: IN> Zimbabwe Re: IN> Was pondering... IN> The nature of Truth (was yadda yadda) Re: IN> IN in other countries IN> It's not history, it's DRAMA... (re Yes That Again) Re: IN> CP awards ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:18:57 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Was pondering... At 10:09 AM 12/16/2002 -0500, BC Petery wrote: >And add to that the dissonance conditions of the Word of Faith: "Khalid's >servants must never allow their true natures to be found out.

They must >prevent humans from acquiring proof of the existence of the celestial >realm." (Rev.5 p54) FWIW, I think that's been modified in S3. I don't recall off the top of my head to *what* it was modified, though. - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:42:03 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) From: "Whistling in the Dark" > >> > >> DECONSTRUCTIONISM > >> Malphasian Servitor Attunement > > > > I will. NOT. Forget this. Any. Time. soon.* > > Thank God. I mean, you realize there are only about three other people > on this list who have any idea of what we're talking about, don't you? Do you get a bonus on its use if you're discussing Tafka's "Falling Stars" campaign? (Speaking of things maybe three people will get...) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:46:10 -0800 From: Harukami Subject: Re: IN> The Song of Songs >>Well, one of the more famous uses was when it was Sung by the author of the >>biblical Song of Songs, an incredibly beautiful love poem. > >Oh, is "The Song of Songs" another name for the Song of Solomon? I didn't >know. I wasn't intending that, just in case it matters to other writers. >(Though the connection was certainly effective in this case. :^) ) It is, or the Canticle of Canticles, depending on which version of the bible it is. And mind, while it reflects Love overwhelmingly, it's also very... sensual. (lots of descriptions of his lover's breasts, lots of different positions implied in the text, etc.) I'm musing with doing something Creationer-like with the challenge but can't think of anything.... Harukami - ---- "Why don't we stop, relax, and get something to eat? I'll give you all a Free Lunch." * Jesse eyes Ambrosius. http://haru_in.tripod.com/ Haru's IN page: Game logs, art, and fiction. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:19:24 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Say what? > >>I realize I am no where in the same category that Moe, Manny, Eric, Earl, > >>Josh, Beth, Sirea, Janet, Hakuri, William and the rest are in, but I was > >>honestly asking for opinions. *falls off chair in astonishment that anyone thinks I'm in the same category as the other people named. Or is there some other Janet on the list? Janet Anderson (who unfortunately feels that Jarrod may have some grounds for his complaint about cliquishness ...) ************************************************* Seraph: What do we want to do if he turns out to be an infernal? Malakite: I'm kinda hoping we don't find that out definitively. Leaving a long string of bodies behind us isn't a really good idea. - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:28:30 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Say what? On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 11:19 AM, Janet Anderson wrote: > *falls off chair in astonishment that anyone thinks I'm in the same > category as the other people named. Or is there some other Janet on > the list? > > I would assume it's you, Janet. You're one of the folks I read the instant the e-mail arrives. > Janet Anderson > (who unfortunately feels that Jarrod may have some grounds for his > complaint about cliquishness ...) > Sadly, I have to concur. And am examining my own online habits appropriately. obIN: I wonder if cliquishness is a specific Malphasian reaction to Davidian community building -- a way to make the very methods and ideals David employs into a tool for divisiveness and anger. - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:46:44 -0700 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: Re: IN> CP awards * Give them some award other than character points or give them fewer character points. * Make their Superior angry with their irresponsible self-growth. * Maybe there is a distinction they need that has prerequeisites they don't have. * Continue providing challenges that let people play their characters (fights, etc) or they'll feel cheated, but provide a lot of other challenges that require skills they lack for optimal resolution. After failing an entire night's worth of social skills, you can be sure they'll start raising their Fast Talk * Increase the challenge. They obviously want it, so give it to 'em and see if they're worthy. I had one game where my players were all increasing skills, songs, a few forces, and so on. I didn't mind the skills and songs, since it felt very silly to see angels fail at everything they did, but the forces bugged me. One player hit thirteen forces... I tried having his Superior gently remind him that he was growing too big for his britches, but it didn't work. He wanted a lot of forces because he was tired of failing all his skill checks, and increasing forces was the cheapest way to do it. (Really, 10 points for a force is too little.) In my current game, the characters are ancient creatures almost as old as creation itself; I simply don't care what they purchase, and give them an average of four points a session on top of other rewards like distinctions, attunements, and forces. The sessions are about five hours every week. They can grow as they see fit, and have tended to grow to react to the challenges in the game. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:56:15 -0500 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> CP awards > >I had one game where my players were all increasing skills, songs, a few >forces, and so on. I didn't mind the skills and songs, since it felt very >silly to see angels fail at everything they did, but the forces bugged me. >One player hit thirteen forces... I tried having his Superior gently remind >him that he was growing too big for his britches, but it didn't work. He >wanted a lot of forces because he was tired of failing all his skill checks, >and increasing forces was the cheapest way to do it. > >(Really, 10 points for a force is too little.) I think for Forces there should be Superior involvement. Sure, they can build up the necessary character points, but after that they should have to impress upon their Superior why they should be given a Force. Also, are they just buying the Forces or are they developing their characteristics until they develop a Force. The latter seems more natural for gameplay. Josh ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:56:32 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> CP awards At 09:46 AM 12/16/2002 -0700, Rampaging Crypto-Man wrote: >* Make their Superior angry with their irresponsible self-growth. As opposed to what? You can't give experience to characters and then expect them not to use it. >* Maybe there is a distinction they need that has prerequeisites they don't >have. Distinctions don't have mechanical prerequisites, but they *must* be given out by Superiors. Characters can't just "buy" Distinctions. >(Really, 10 points for a force is too little.) But in order to use this, they have to go see a Superior. (IIRC, that is.) Otherwise, they have to pay the full 12. (You might still think that's too little, but think about it this way: if you're awarding 3 XP per session, four sessions a month, that's a full month of XP devoted to a single area. The character might be getting that extra Force, and he might end up as an 18-Force angel after nine months, but he's not going to have improved in *any other area*.) Also, consider imposing an artificial cap (say, 12 Forces) on being able to buy Forces without a Superior's help. (You might even do it at 9 Forces - only Relievers, Gremlins and non-celestials can add Forces naturally.) - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:09:14 -0700 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: Re: IN> CP awards > You can't give experience to characters and then expect them not to use it. The expectation isn't that they wouldn't use it; it's that they'd spread their points out instead of just putting 'em all into one area.. A few words from an Archangel telling a character that they really ought to increase their skills and songs (wisdom) along with their forces (power) can go a long way towards fixing characters who seem unbalanced. And here's something that I forgot... if the characters are demons, let them see some other upstart (who put all his power into Songs, Forces, or whatever) get schooled by a Baron or Prince for growing too fast. > Characters can't just "buy" Distinctions. True, but they can want them. If a Superior says, "I'll consider knighting you if you acquire X, Y, and Z first," the character will probably do it. > if you're awarding 3 XP per session, four sessions a month, that's a > full month of XP devoted to a single area. That's a good point. > -EDG Ben ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:23:27 -0700 From: Sirea@softhome.net Subject: Re: IN> Say what? > > I would assume it's you, Janet. You're one of the folks I read the instant > the e-mail arrives. I myself am shocked I was on the list. I just like sharing my ideas, I'm no "uber-mind" or whatever was being implied o_O > >> Janet Anderson >> (who unfortunately feels that Jarrod may have some grounds for his >> complaint about cliquishness ...) >> > > Sadly, I have to concur. And am examining my own online habits > appropriately. I hope no one gets the wrong idea from me... I've been having a lot of personal troubles of late, that combined with school work, and the fact that I don't have the internet for a while makes replying to all my mail nearly impossible for the time being. So I hope no one feels snubbed, I promise I'm not trying to be a jerk. I don't like the idea of cliques :/ or being associated with one. I just post my ideas, and hope everyone likes them and gives feedback. I ask for nothing more. > > obIN: I wonder if cliquishness is a specific Malphasian reaction to > Davidian community building -- a way to make the very methods and ideals > David employs into a tool for divisiveness and anger. *Imagines Malphas in the role of a bubble-headed, shallow minded prom-queen type alpha female, or as a big and lunky jock with nothing better to do than promote factions* Ah... highschool memories... *blargh* The Demon of Highschool is most certaitly a very snittish Impudite of Factions. --- Sirea, Free Cherub IST Destiny, Angel who Wanders, petitioner for the Word of Eternity (currently being ridden by Grapejuice, Renegade Shedite of the Game, and petitioner for the Word of Pranking Tightwads) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:59:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Randy Finder Subject: Re: IN> The Song of Songs On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, William J. Keith wrote: > > The Song of Songs is half-mythical, half-theoretical. Demons might > not even believe in it. It can be sung only by humans(even those without > Essence Control or Symphonic Awareness), and only at some height of passion > or achievement in their lives (perhaps only at *one* peak). And it does > something that surprises even celestials... , it can alter what the destiny or fate of the singer is. Roll d666 against total forces. On a success, the symphony will evaluate their actions over the last CD minutes and decide if that is a destiny or a fate for the singer. From then on the mortal is counted as having achieved his destiny/fate as if that even had been the destiny/fate for the mortal from birth. On an intervention, the person has still achieved their fate/destiny and if divine, Yves is summoned at +6 on an infernal Kronos is summoned at +6. Randolph Finder - -- Leadership, Friendship and Service - Alpha Phi Omega ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:31:08 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Suspicious Dominicans > Consider the attitude not one of _suspicion_ but one of _concern_. > Expressed as suspicion, yes, by many in Judgment. (But then there's > the Mercy proponents, too.) Oh, yes. In the NPC Triad in my campaign, the Seraph is a member of the Suspicion party and the Mercurian is a member of the Mercy party. (The Cherub doesn't care; his job is to protect the other two and provide muscle as needed. It annoys him that he keeps being called on as a tie-breaker.) The Seraph tried his way first, and among other things it got the Triad mistaken for demons by two separate parties of PCs (well, who else would try to keep a Redeemed demon under covert surveillance?). The Mercurian is now trying to repair fences with the help (talk about irony) of the PC Seraph of Creation serving Destiny. Janet Anderson ************************************************* Seraph: What do we want to do if he turns out to be an infernal? Malakite: I'm kinda hoping we don't find that out definitively. Leaving a long string of bodies behind us isn't a really good idea. - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:22:52 +0800 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) > DECONSTRUCTIONISM > Malphasian Servitor Attunement > > No matter how convoluted the conflict, it will > suddenly seem to be the whole and entire reason for these two people to > be associated with one another. The relationship will become an > implicit critique in the minds of the couple -- a critique of society, > of tradition, of roles, and of each other, and will be ready to defend > their positions to the death, usually in polysyllabic ways. I always *knew* that stuff came from Malphas ... Vapula might want the credit but it doesn't hold together well enough to be one of his products. Janet Anderson ************************************************* Seraph: What do we want to do if he turns out to be an infernal? Malakite: I'm kinda hoping we don't find that out definitively. Leaving a long string of bodies behind us isn't a really good idea. - -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:36:36 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 02:22 PM, Janet Anderson wrote: > I always *knew* that stuff came from Malphas ... Vapula might want the > credit but it doesn't hold together well enough to be one of his > products. > Vapula's got Structuralism written all over him. Critical theory as defined by Sign, Significated, Significator, sentence construction... it's one step away from being pure linguistics, and yet lacking any of the real linguistic basis.... - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:53:34 -0800 From: Harukami Subject: Re: IN> Superior Jury Duty (was: What's with Gabriel?) >The real reason for David's distaste of Marc revealed: >"Dominiiiiic, Marc's been playing solitaire for five centuries now. Make >him share!" This whole thing was beautiful. I haven't the words. [clap clap] Harukami - ---- "Why don't we stop, relax, and get something to eat? I'll give you all a Free Lunch." * Jesse eyes Ambrosius. http://haru_in.tripod.com/ Haru's IN page: Game logs, art, and fiction. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:54:43 -0700 From: Cinnabari Subject: Re: IN> He Asked for It (was Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior)) > > >(Next comes a Structuralist attunement, and the Song of Post-Modernism, >and Eli's New Critic Distinction....) > > I am not sure whether to hope that's a threat or a promise... - - Kat (of course we need an Angel of LitCrit...) - -- Obsequium parit amicos; veritas parit odium. - Cicero (Compliance produces friends; truth produces hate.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:57 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) Subject: Re: IN> Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior) In article , wjk150@email.psu.edu (William J. Keith) wrote: > I have to mention this the next time I get in a talk with a > physicist/cosmologist friend (I have one, believe it or not. Does > arcane stuff with gravitation in an out-of-the-way lab on campus. What you do on campus at IOU is your own business... - --- John Dallman jgd@cix.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:57 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) Subject: Re: IN> You know what I like about this list? In article <5.1.1.6.2.20021216094345.02cefc08@pop.earlham.edu>, anthoch@earlham.edu (EDG) wrote: > There are two major benefits to being a Playtester. The first, of > course, is that there is a certain degree of respect that comes of > being so highly trusted that other Princes give you attunements to play > with. > > The second is that you don't have to give them back. ... although, on one occasion, a Habbalite was seen begging and pleading to be allowed to. Kobal will have his little jokes, although this one had been cleared with Asmodeus beforehand, when the Playtester had got a little too enthusiastic. - --- John Dallman jgd@cix.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:57 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) Subject: Re: IN> CP awards In article <029701c2a522$b73944d0$d27c86cc@CAESAR>, ben@zianet.com (Rampaging Crypto-Man) wrote: > (Really, 10 points for a force is too little.) The rule I use, along with several other local GMs, is 5 points for a stat point and no discount for buying a complete force, so it's 20 points. If you want to just buy something, without spending training time, it needs to be a skill or song you've been using. Buying stats needs a Superior's assistance to do it quickly, rather than spending - ur, maybe several months? No one has done that yet. With that setup, the awards in the book seem to work OK. People do buy the skills they use up to 6 pretty fast, but that's OK, and they need high stats as well to start getting really effective. - --- John Dallman jgd@cix.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:21:49 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: IN> Zimbabwe I like this seed. I would add one bit to the Malphan end; demons of Factions would also be on the lookout for ways to stir up tension between the various tribes in the region. Remember that only in the West is this a Black and White issue; most Africans identify themselves not as Black or even as Africans but by their tribal affiliations. =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

Corrollary to Clarke's Third Law: "Any technology that is distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:28:13 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Superior-level Relic (non-canon Superior) I'm with you on this one, Josh! [bangs head against wall repeatedly] =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

Corrollary to Clarke's Third Law: "Any technology that is distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:05:05 +1030 From: "gnezda" Subject: IN> Re: CP awards Thanks everyone for your input. Now I have a lot to ponder. :) - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/2002 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:05:05 +1030 From: "gnezda" Subject: IN> Re: CP awards Thanks everyone for your input. I've got a lot to ponder now. :) - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/2002 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:35:09 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> You know what I like about this list? This is a way powerful ability -- I'd make PC's work really hard to earn this (of course, becoming a trusted Servitor of the Game should be hard). One quibble (which I know some of you dread and others love): PC's can't begin play with Distinctions in canon. If this were an Attunement, however... =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

Corrollary to Clarke's Third Law: "Any technology that is distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:09:26 -0500 From: "C. Mark Pearson" Subject: Re: IN> Zimbabwe - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Walton" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 5:21 PM Subject: IN> Zimbabwe > I like this seed. I would add one bit to the Malphan > end; demons of Factions would also be on the lookout for > ways to stir up tension between the various tribes in the > region. Remember that only in the West is this a Black and > White issue; most Africans identify themselves not as Black > or even as Africans but by their tribal affiliations. Thanks. And you're right. That was something I meant to mention. There are, if I recall, two major tribal groups in the area. The Shona, who originally dealt with the Rhodes when he first arrived, and another group that I can't recall the name off off the tip of my head. There may be smaller groups in the area, but I'm not aware of them. But, yes, Malphas would try to drive wedges between the two major native groups as well. C. Mark Pearson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:29:58 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Zimbabwe On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 06:09 PM, C. Mark Pearson wrote: >> I like this seed. I would add one bit to the Malphan >> end; demons of Factions would also be on the lookout for >> ways to stir up tension between the various tribes in the >> region. Remember that only in the West is this a Black and >> White issue; most Africans identify themselves not as Black >> or even as Africans but by their tribal affiliations. > > > Thanks. And you're right. That was something I meant to mention. > There > are, if I recall, two major tribal groups in the area. The Shona, who > originally dealt with the Rhodes when he first arrived, and another > group > that I can't recall the name off off the tip of my head. There may be > smaller groups in the area, but I'm not aware of them. But, yes, > Malphas > would try to drive wedges between the two major native groups as well. > Absolutely -- or has already succeeded at it. So turning to Uganda, the question is, is Idi Amin a Kobalian triumph? (Right down to the clown turning out to be a genocidal mass murderer?) - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:36:39 -0500 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> Zimbabwe >Absolutely -- or has already succeeded at it. > >So turning to Uganda, the question is, is Idi Amin a Kobalian triumph? >(Right down to the clown turning out to be a genocidal mass murderer?) > > Mmm..... lacks the subtlety of Kobal. I'd say it actually sounds a bit like Saminga. Josh ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:17:40 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Was pondering... At 12:10 AM -0500 12/15/02, Josh Moger wrote: >What do you have to believe to be a Soldier of God? That you're not hallucinating, pretty much. >Can you be an athiest, completely sure that there is no God, and still serve >Heaven? Sure. >How about agnostic? Sure. >Canonically there are Ethereal Soldiers, so I'm guessing that there has to >be a monotheistic, or at least monolatrous, belief system. Not necessarily. I mean, to be a Soldier of God who reports to a Laurencian angel, you'd probably be picked based on belief. But what it takes to be a Soldier of God is 6 Forces and a willingness to do your best and beyond for these guys who claim to be angels. (To apply for SoG, you have to have the potential for 6 Forces, etc.) Heck, there's a K-9 of God in Night Music... O:/ Which doesn't mean that angels don't _prefer_ to recruit monotheists, but that's not the rock-bottom "what you HAVE to believe." I mean, you can recruit a strong-atheist militant UFO-fanatic, and explain you're energy beings from another dimension who are the source of all the angel imagry in the Christian mythos, if you want. (And it's even true! A Wind-Seraph could probably state that explicitly...) But he'll still qualify as a "Soldier of God," and probably be somewhat quirky if he makes it to Heaven after all... At 10:11 AM -0500 12/15/02, BC Petery wrote: >But how can you be a "Soldier of God" if you don't believe in *GOD*? Just because a Soldier is working for the side of the angels doesn't mean that he has to agree with the terminology. (Yes, most SoG probably become monotheists eventually, if they weren't selected as such already. But it's not a requirement. It's just the bellcurve.) - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:46:52 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> The nature of Truth (was yadda yadda) At 5:34 AM -0600 12/15/02, Gregg Forge wrote: > Where, in a Heaven that is nothing but Truth, is there room for Opinion? > > Mind, there IS the plausible probability that opinions are kept on the >wayside, much in the ways that Seraphim don't see Storytelling and >deliberate fiction as lies. Sort of. Opinions abound. "What is the proper way to fight the War?" "Is this demon redeemable or should we soul-kill her?" "I like pizza with anchovies!" You just can't lie about your opinions, and the notes to say, "Pizza with anchovies is the best!" will have a flavoring of "Personal Opinion." Here, let me get an example. A pair of Servitors of Judgment, discussing one's emotional entanglements with a PC... Jordan closes his upper pair of eyes for a moment, then looks back at Regulus, resolutely. "I would not lie for her, nor exceed the bounds of justice." Jordan notes that this is all shaded as strong opinion. Jordan says "Since the future precognitive is a bit strong for a mere Judgment Servitor. It's usually reserved for God. Sometimes Yves." I.e., this is what the Seraph _intends_. But he cannot know the future, cannot _force_ the future, and so he can only state that this is his truthful intention. (The "future intention tense," as opposed to the "future precognitive tense.") But if there _is_ a definative Truth out there, then opinion falls into "right and wrong." If it is the TRUTH that the sky is blue, then anyone saying otherwise is mistaken. (Mercurians bring up color-blindness during this sort of analogy, Seraphim loftily pronounce that such a Discord causes the color-blind one to be mistaken, Elohim suggest another anology, such as 'the TRUTH is that the Seraphic resonance is for truth' and since they are in Heaven, the nuances are far more clear and easily agreed upon.) >However, based on raw canonical >interpretation, one comes away with the impression that there's rahter >little room for Opinion among the lower Angels, as those who are the >most opinionated are among the least Holy (which leads to what I see >as the Malakim Paradox, but I'll come back to that later). Not quite sure what you mean by this one -- opinion fuels a lot of things among the Choirs. Kyriotates are often of the opinion that Cherubim are boring, while Cherubim are of the opinion that Kyriotates should be more protective of (implied _fewer_) hosts. Opinion is what drives the personality clashes in the Archangels, too; is one Word "better" than another? All the time? In certain circumstances? Which ones? > To make >matters worse, those who are the Most Holy by canon are the ones >who are evidently the least respecting of Opinion, which is why I see >Seraphim, in general (And Dominic, especially), as being...well, too >trusting of their resonance is a good way to put it. This is entirely possible. It is, in fact, an aspect of the game universe that is a feature, not a bug. O:> Seraphim do tend to see things in a more clear-cut manner. Something is either good, or bad. Something is black, or white. If it's gray, they want to be able to say _how_ gray, and to what degree. This is why they are "most holy" -- they're furthest from the mindset that understands the corporeal world, nuances, and shades of gray. (Some can overcome this to a large extent. Many... don't even try.) This can be a good thing, and is why Seraphim often get the "final word" on matters; they can cut through the meebling and circumstances and lay out the facts. This is X, this is Y, this is true, that is false -- all else is conjecture. > The Seraphic resonance can ping a grieving man and tell [he] >is Not A Killer (Truth). However, as any good >Elohite would be able to tell, that doesn't mean he's incapable [...] > > Of course, the fact that Elohim are utterly objective helps in this; >I for one think they should be closer unto God than the Seraphs, >but that's me. They can take Truth and Opinon and make an >actually sound call from that. But they can't _know_ Truth, however much they'd like to, from just their resonance. (It's the Seraph-Elohite team that's a potent combo... But even they can be well informed by other resonances.) (Still, there's a reason that there's a phrase in the GIN writeup of Elohim that a wise Seraph, though he may have the last word, listens to an Elohite before he pronounces that last word.) The Elohite resonance is for emotion, and their purpose is to balance -- they provide an interface between the rarified world of truth that Seraphim live in, and the nuanced, entangled, opinionated world that Mercurians inhabit. [[[ I do wonder if Dominic often allows people to tell him, "You're wrong!" and listens with all his resonance... and sighs to find only opinion and ineffability echoing around them. If someone told him that, and he could see the TRUTH of it -- it would hurt him, but it would imply that there was a RIGHT out there to be aspired to. If someone tells him how he should be running his organization... it depends on the brightness of the universe, but sometimes he might listen, and hope to hear TRUTH. ]]] (And then there's the "Sliders" fluff... http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/fiat/meta/Meta13.html ... A universe where Eli is the Mercurian Archangel of Judgment, and Dominic the Seraph Archangel of Creation. Some highlights: Daimonique says "A Mercurian of Creation would lead to an untidy universe, I would think. How does he remember the truth of where everything goes?" Jordan chuckles at Daimonique. "Tidiness is all well and good, but one has to have some fun too!" Daimonique says "We have fun, in between writing our structured poetry and following the rules of musical theory." Jordan raspberries Daimonique. "That's not fun, that's... a straitjacket! Metaphorically, of course." Daimonique says "Rules are what allows for the clear paths of Creation, Jordan." Jordan rolls his upper pair of eyes, and says, out of the corner of his mouth, "Rules have little place in proper judgment. Everything has reasons, backgrounds, motivations, circumstances..." Jordan adds, "If you used fixed rules, there would be injustice *everywhere*!" Daimonique says "Only through rules can we find the true path to individual Freedom. It says so right in Kant." Jordan snorts, "See, Dana? She's always going on about rules and freedom. She doesn't understand that sometimes you just have to go wth what's *right*." (This universe's Jordan still serves Judgment (Eli, here). That Daimonique is a Servitor of Creation (Dominic).) - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:36:58 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> IN in other countries At 3:19 PM -0800 12/15/02, Fade the Cat wrote: >I know that I'd like to see more about South America; having lived there for a >while, and with missionary parents at that, it provides an interesting >perspective on the conflicts between various religions down there. Might I suggest Pyramid articles.... O;> That's actually a fairly serious suggestion, to anyone who actually _knows_ stuff about, well, this stuff. One of the things that slowed down FotM was needing to find an author who could write the LA section reasonably. A "Modern Location X (with side helpings of the paranormal)" might be a useful idea for a Pyramid article (no clue is Steven Marsh agrees), if the theme of it is kept somewhat Hitean and doesn't focus overmuch on IN Tethers and whatnot. (Making it more universal would make it more likely to interest Steven, certainly.) Or people can do up IN-specific things here. - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:32:10 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> It's not history, it's DRAMA... (re Yes That Again) At 7:24 AM -0600 12/15/02, Gregg Forge wrote: > War and Honor, p. 44: (As a final, mild, parting comment, p. 44 also says: "During the Council debates [over whether a new religion should be created], Gabriel lost patience and -- before a decision was reached -- dictated [...]" I.e., whatever else she did, she _did_ buck the Council and acted on his/her own. ) As for the rest of all this (which is best dying down, and I hope this banks flames rather than fanning them...), I definitely point people at the boxtext on p. 48 of Superiors 3. "Both acted precisely as they must, though other Archangels may have struggled to prevent them. Like all the best tragedies, once begun, it could not be halted. (And perhaps, for them to have acted otehrwise -- to have betrayed the nature of their Words -- might have resulted in an even worse situation . . .)" It's very tempting to want to pick at some things from an "effeciency" point of view. (Heck, it's how most gamers I know play, myself included! And, as it happens, I often detest Romeo and Juliet for just that reason; there's too much hormonal daftness and not enough ruthless sense with that pair. "Sorry, daddy, but I _can't_ get married; I already married Romeo and slept with him." Or even, "I don't want to get married to that guy -- I want to join a nunnery!") >From such a standpoint -- i.e., if all involved had been Elohim -- the whole tragedy would never have happened without a _lot_ of daftness in the air. And it's a balancing act to write Superior history with them as, well, potentially faliable (if very intelligent/clever and experienced) beings. (From another standpoint, well... pp. 79-80 in the Game Master's Guide; "Gabriel should be a lot less mad -- Dominic would never have been allowed to persecute him for conveying the Truth!" Individual campaigns oughta be doing what the GMs want 'em to.) But the intent of the current Line Editor is pretty much as contained in the quoted Superiors 3 text above. A tragedy was set in motion, and just kept snowballing inexorably, as each party involved acted and reacted as their natures and Words and situations demanded. Cue suspicion and Seraphic inflexibility. Cue Ofanite impatience and fiery outrage. Cue shouting matches, decisions made and stated in impolitic ultimatums, words said by stubborn and powerful beings. Cue angst. Enter, angst, stage center. [Actually, a lot of the feel of "how stupid things happen to smart angels" might be conveyed by Steven Brust's _To Reign in Hell_, now back in print. I'd say more, but it'd be a spoiler.] - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:54:01 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> CP awards At 1:54 PM +1030 12/16/02, gnezda wrote: [HTML, but luckily I saw the post that it's fixed now, first, so I won't use the lead-lined newspaper...] >Okay, Id like your opinions on CP awards at the end of adventures, I'd suggest checking out the GMG, if you haven't already. There's a fair amount of discussionthere. >and advice on how to handle players who keep trying to boost skills to superhuman levels. The game's supposed to be a bit cinematic. I'd say, let 'em! Plan for it, put in a few things about "gotta do a little training/practicing" if you don't want stuff going up between one game-second and the next (i.e., the cliffhanger ending and the start of the new session), but let them get cinematic. It's hard enough for many of them to tie their shoes in the first place... [EDG's post says the above, but much better. O:> ] If they're getting Forces, you can make them buy it 1 characteristic at a time (and yes, make that cost 12, since they're doing it themselves and not because they made their Superiors happy enough to give them the Force the quick way). You can also encourage them to get Songs -- Songs generally have to be pretty high-level before they're useful, see, so they're a nice point-sink. (And Songs are a self-correcting problem, since they always use Essence...) As noted in the GMG, you can encourage them to save up their brownie points and use them to get the GM to give them a mission that will get them a bennie from their Superior. (As opposed to the GM deciding that the Superior should just gift the player with a bennie for free.) I'm saving my points up for a Summonable-for-no-Essence motorcycle with Driving skill artifact, with one character, which I think comes to about 40 points...* Or you can switch to GURPS IN, and give out 1-2 points and they'll probably go nuts trying to get umptyzillion different skills, which spreads out the problem nicely. O;> [*It's also something that came about from some one-on-one gaming, and it'd be favoritism if I _didn't_ have to pay the whole point kit and kaboodle to acquire it. So because it's logical, and I don't want to wipe that bit of "backstory" (frontstory?) from the character, I save my points.] - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2905 ********************************