in_nomine-digest Friday, January 24 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2944 In this digest: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... RE: IN> Three hours of exercise... RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) IN> Snoopy Blanket Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... RE: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> Clone Master M.C. Ice-Tongs Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) IN> A New Tangent (was: Relievers?) Re: IN> Snoopy Blanket IN> Roles and Words Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) Re: IN> Roles and Words Re: IN> Roles and Words RE: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... Re: IN> Roles and Words RE: IN> A New Tangent (was: Relievers?) IN> Odd jobs in Shal-Mari ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:08:53 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... >And two applications of Divine Logic. A Bright Lilim who can talk you >into anything is a dangerous, dangerous thing. See, to blazes with Seraphim of Flowers -- *this* is the Attunement I won't let near my game. >-- >Eric A. Burns >Freelance Writer and Textual Whore >http://www.annotations.com William ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:26:42 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) >EDG, is there any way to make "I hate name X, I think it should be Y" a >FAQ? Either that, or in the 'dead horses' file. We can add new names >to it as they accrue. Well, as long as we're making a dead horses file on this one, let's make it breathe its last. I always liked Malakh for singular, I tend to go with "Helper" whenever I write fanfic with a Reliever (or, personally, "Little One"), but "Engling" and "Ancilla" are appealing. >(Let's see... The plural of Lilim is another one that's come up a >few times, too. Someone who has a list could post that, for use in >the Dead Horses file, so it will be in a single place that can have >a URL pointer made.) Somebody recommended Lilot, which I think is pretty good; my only personal contribution to this line was an adjective, which got used in like so: "the Liline tendency," etc. >--Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor >http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ William ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:29:08 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) >"Never suwwender or be captured by the forces of Wucifer." ... *snicker* ... "Wucifer." ... *chortle* That one word made the whole post for me. >Josh >^_^' William ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:45:02 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) >*groan* What about fangirls for Janus? Or David? >Or Marc? See, the problem with me and my favored Archangel is that, from a few lines up, it's hard to distinguish his name from Janus'... so I keep inserting him into situations which are a bit off for him. Still, there must be Jean fangirls *somewhere*. Not in Tartarus -- they hunt down the Jean fanpeople there -- but maybe somewhere else they respect technology. Especially *shiny*, *SPARKLY* technology. Say, Perdition. - ----- place: somewhere deep in a studio backlot in Perdition time: does it matter in Hell "Nybbas cancel that girl! Where's the twice-damned special effects chick?" "I'll get her, Mr. Director!" "You do that, imp. For the love of ratings, she's always dillying..." *imp knocks on the door of a tiny office crammed with specs, pyro equipment, duct tape, and a big, shiny heavy-end graphics workstation* "Miss Special Effects Chick! You're wanted by the Director!" *inside, a Lilim is sitting on a stool and gazing longingly at a picture she has worked on for days, starting to resemble a glowing androgyne with big, coal-red eyes and an expression of repressed fury, surrounded by great strokes of lightning. At the knock, she glances up fearfully and closes the picture.* "Coming!" - ----- >--Beth's SSO .sig: (Want to hear more about the Superior Soap Opera? >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IN-SoapOpera ) William ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:35:23 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... At 10:08 PM -0500 1/23/03, William J. Keith wrote: >>And two applications of Divine Logic. A Bright Lilim who can talk you >>into anything is a dangerous, dangerous thing. > >See, to blazes with Seraphim of Flowers -- *this* is the Attunement I won't >let near my game. It was even funnier when one realized that the PC with it was only Intelligence 3. (Clearly weighted to Precision to make sure that the DL would work?) I only wish that the circumstances had been such that the Laurencian had actually proposed to the Lord Commander that short nun habits might be cool after all. But that's because I have a sadomasochistic streak when GMing, I guess. - -- - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:37:50 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) At 10:29 PM -0500 1/23/03, William J. Keith wrote: >>"Never suwwender or be captured by the forces of Wucifer." [...] > >That one word made the whole post for me. And if it were Iolanthe saying it, she'd say, "Yucifer." (She is iffy about her L-Ys. As I was, at her age, apparently. Sit in someone's yap. Yions roar. She says "Heyyo!" I think her name comes out "Ioyanthe" sometimes. But she's getting better!) Ahem. Sorry. Princess of Cute and all that. Ooo, a Rite. Call the Yightbringer Yucifer to his face. *duck* - -- - --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:48:48 -0600 From: MasonK Subject: Re: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) >Ooo, a Rite. > >Call the Yightbringer Yucifer to his face. I'm not sure the essence gained is worth the price.... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:17:20 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... On Thursday, January 23, 2003, at 11:35 PM, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 10:08 PM -0500 1/23/03, William J. Keith wrote: >>> And two applications of Divine Logic. A Bright Lilim who can talk you >>> into anything is a dangerous, dangerous thing. >> >> See, to blazes with Seraphim of Flowers -- *this* is the Attunement I >> won't >> let near my game. > > It was even funnier when one realized that the PC with it was only > Intelligence 3. (Clearly weighted to Precision to make sure that the DL > would work?) > Hey, Jodi may be dumb, but she *is* Bright. > I only wish that the circumstances had been such that the Laurencian > had actually proposed to the Lord Commander that short nun habits > might be cool after all. > After all, it was perfectly Logical. It's better than being a Balseraph -- subjectivity given the force of law! But, it *also* successfully talked the thirteen year old Priestess out of Ethereal Essence Sending and Worship, soooooo.... - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:16:00 -0800 From: Daiv Subject: Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) I will not risk your Wrath (tm) as list admin by posting this to the list. Nor would i risk your wrath by depriving you of this. http://members.tripod.com/davidchris/hedgehog.html Enjoy, My mother once said That boy is stranger than a three toed barking frog - -Daiv David M. Barr daiv@cruzio.com YIM Daivbear AIM Drnknmstrhkugk H (831)477-0539 C (831)566-2237 At 7:16 PM -0500 1/23/03, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 6:37 PM -0500 1/23/03, BC Petery wrote: >>>> (I mean, Andrealphites are pretty used to being tied up and...) >>> >>> True, Probably more so than Creationers. >> >>Well, I just got tired of it. That's why I've got a porcupine vessel. > >All right, how many people read Pratchett and are thinking of the >song of, "The Hedgehog can never be...." > > > >-- >--Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine Line Editor >http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:12:54 +0100 From: shadur@systemec.nl (Rens Houben) Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... In other news for Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 10:08:53PM -0500, William J. Keith has been seen typing: > >And two applications of Divine Logic. A Bright Lilim who can talk you > >into anything is a dangerous, dangerous thing. > See, to blazes with Seraphim of Flowers -- *this* is the Attunement I won't > let near my game. Not even if we ask really nicely? > William Shad. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:36:38 -0500 From: "Finder, Randolph J Mr NGB-ARNG" Subject: RE: IN> Three hours of exercise... > >I will if I can find it. :) > > www.warehouse23.com, at the very worst! O;D OK, I'll take a look. > Oh, Dominic cares. But given the choice of "go after the ones > who Fell" > or "police the ones who haven't," he'll pick the latter to spend his > resources on. > > Asmodeus, on the other hand, doesn't have "rehabilitate" in his > vocabulary. He has "make an Example so no other demon dares follow > in this one's footsteps." This means that he'd like to get redeemed > back in his clutches so that he can show, "See? Even if you run to > Heaven, we will find you, we will take you in the night, and we will > kill you slowly till you beg for the mercy of final death -- which > we will give only when it pleases _us._" > > They are doing the same thing, sort of -- policing their side -- > but with different tools. Ah! This really explains the difference! Thanx! > > [Lust and forcing angels] > >> Though he may ask why you didn't invite him. > > >And he may even share with the invitee. :) > > After he's _done_, at least. Or with whichever part he's not using. Yeah its not as if he cares enough to allow the demon to share evenly. :) > > It might very well be unwise for demons of Lust to care about > _Lilith_! > > I'm sure that Andre very carefully doesn't examine the quandary that > Lilith represents. He probably thinks of her as Lucifer's mistress, > and therefore to be treated as something akin to an equal -- > not because > of what she is (bah, human, even if a pretty thing he'd love to be > able to use as he sees fit), but because of who she knows, and what > bits of anatomy of that person she has hold of. Ally, but of convenience like all relationships in Hell. > > The Andre/Lilith alliance that exists today undoubtedly has > many places > where they Just Don't Go, forged over many stressful encounters. In > the early days, it was undoubtedly much rockier. Hmm. No Canon on how the relationships (ally, enemy, etc) have changed over the yeras... > > (Indeed, in the SSO, there was a lot of much more hostile interaction, > and at least one well-placed knee to remind someone that even Demon > Princes should be careful when trying to corner a Superior...) Hmm. that would be an interesting thing to try to gameplay. OK, you have a superior attempting to disable a superior without songs or attunements, Guess a knee to the groin would work. Hmm. Didn't we just do something on trying to gameplay subdual damage? > Mikey's a Seraph -- if you _were_, and it was True, he'd probably be > touched. (And some of his own people might even sympathize!) And it would certainly be a diplomatic way to redeem. (Given the Mercurian of War the angel would likely become... > > >Asmodeus is all about rules and Valefor is all about > ignoring inconvenient > >ones. :) > > Which would be, for Valefor, just about all of them... Almost as many as Janus. :) Randy > > > -- > --Beth, arcangel@io.com / archangel@sjgames.com In Nomine > Line Editor > http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:37:14 -0500 From: "Wajenberg, Earl" Subject: RE: IN> Relievers? (was: Three hours of exercise...) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>I have complained several times on this list about the name "reliever." > Yes, we know. > No, I'm not going to change it. I didn't think you *could* change it. But "angeletto," "sprite," etc. could be nicknames or alternates, like "Friend of Man" for Mercurian or "Punisher" for Habballah or "Virtue" for "Malakite." Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:53:06 -0500 From: "Finder, Randolph J Mr NGB-ARNG" Subject: IN> Snoopy Blanket > > That and the fact that ... well, you don't want to ask anywhere where > Asmodeus or any of his many, many agents might even > conceivably be able to > hear you about what happened to the Prince of the Game's > favorite Snoopy blan > > %(I&U^KRMFYTEW^$*#&%$^O)&*^Y\ > > NO CARRIER Ooh. This sounds like an Artifact! What would Asmodeus's favorite Snoopy Blanket do? Randy > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:52:10 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > >> > >> You're just lucky you didn't do that in a _campaign_ of mine... O:> > > > >If it were for a campaign, I might have even taken more for the sheer > >comedy/agnst value. > > *SNRK* > > I'd have been obligated to make your life a living nightmare, you know... That's a large part of why I took Geasa from Kobal, of course. :) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:35:12 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... >After all, it was perfectly Logical. > >It's better than being a Balseraph -- subjectivity given the force of >law! Really? How do you measure this in-game? Where I come from, logic starts with axioms *both* sides accept, and proceeds from there to an inescapable conclusion. All the angel has to do is believe their own side of the discussion -- as I read this, any sane angel with this attunement could prove with a successful Precision roll, to any demon that would give you two minutes, that being [angel of their opposing Choir] is better than being [Band they currently are]! Real logic goes a little like this: (NOTE! NOTE! When I occasionally delve into speaking like this, I am often interpreted as sounding really snarky. I'm not trying to -- I'm honestly trying to convey some of the flavor of logic in the classical style, by using it to make and buttress my position.) AXIOMS 1) Servitor Attunements aid acts the providing Superior finds likely to further their Word, over the issues where their use is expected. 2) The Superior Yves provides the Servitor Attunement Divine Logic. 3) Yves' Word is Destiny. 4) People achieving their destiny is necessary to further the Word of Destiny. 5) People must make choices utilizing their free will in order to achieve their destiny. 6) In order to utilize their free will, people must be able to examine, and choose among, a set of multiple options. 7) An angel using Divine Logic believes one particular option is best on a given issue. 8) A human on which Divine Logic has been used has no choice but to agree with the angel regarding the issue discussed. Okay, let's pause here. This really is the last stop before Boise, because once you've accepted the statements above, the rest follows through straight syllogisms. Now, of course you can choose to disagree with me on one of these; *I'm* not using any supernatural powers on anyone. ;^) If you do, my conclusion *doesn't* follow, because I need all these axioms. If you agree with me on everything above, then heeeere we go: ERGO: A) By 1) and 2), Divine Logic aids acts, over the issues where its use is expected, that Yves finds likely to further his Word. B) By A) and 3), Divine Logic aids acts, over the issues where its use is expected, that Yves finds likely to further Destiny. C) By 4) and 5), people must utilize their free will in order to further the Word of Destiny. D) By C) and 6), people being able to examine, and choose among, multiple options is necessary to further the Word of Destiny. E) By 7) and 8), if an angel uses Divine Logic to discuss a particular issue, the human has no choice but to agree with them; in particular, they believe one option is best. F) By D) and E), a human on whom Divine Logic has been used is no longer capable of furthering Destiny with a choice made on this issue. Conclusion: Divine Logic fails to achieve the purpose Yves felt it was likely to achieve, that of furthering Destiny over the issue at hand. Now the only weaseling left is around the edges. You can use Divine Logic on one guy to save the live of somebody else, for example, so that the second person can achieve their Destiny; you can Divine Logic somebody out of suicide so that they can go on to be a great flautist; in general, you can use Divine Logic on one issue, so long as it's not the issue central to the choice necessary to achieve someone's destiny. But it seems to me that the Attunement is flawed at its very heart. >But, it *also* successfully talked the thirteen year old Priestess out >of Ethereal Essence Sending and Worship, soooooo.... So, you couldn't exactly say she chose to stop of her own free will then, right? Idly, what *was* her Destiny? >-- >Eric A. Burns William ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:41:27 -0500 From: "Wajenberg, Earl" Subject: RE: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... William Keith wrote: "8) A human on which Divine Logic has been used has no choice but to agree with the angel regarding the issue discussed." Doesn't the Divine Logic effect wear off after some time proportional to the angel's Celestial Forces or some such? This would complicate the consequent steps of the logic. The net effect appears to be to make *sure* the human really sees the heavenly option, instead of having brushed it aside without ever really examining it (which, in real life, is painfully common). Or do I mis-remember? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:21:25 -0800 (PST) From: trupke@captainamericafans.com Subject: Re: IN> Clone Master M.C. Ice-Tongs > From: BC Petery > > Tired of having to beg your Superior for new vessels? Come on down to: > > Slap Happy Vappy's > > Used Vessel Emporium! > > Here we will take your old vessel and custom build you a new one from > our new manufactured Synthetic Primordial Clay! > But then it's not really a used vessel. A real used vessel would be much more fun. Demons ditch their old vessels to get out of trouble, only to end up with the trouble the last demon was trying to avoid. Meanwhile, all the Gamesters infiltrating the organization are taking careful notes... TTFN Trupke _________________________________________ ComicBookResources.com - The comic site you have to visit. Free e-mail for Comic Book Fans at http://www.cbrmail.com/ CBR Mail is sponsored by www.MyComicShop.com/cbr/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:29:06 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... From: "Whistling in the Dark" > > > And if Moonshadow can just find the right angle for convincing Eli to > > undo the switch Novalis hit her with... *eg* > > ...then Eli will probably have a master plan Moonshadow can't begin to > conceive of.... As long as I get my Celestial Entropy back, it'll be worth it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:45:58 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) - --- Daiv wrote: > I will not risk your Wrath (tm) as list admin by posting > this > to the list. Nor would i risk your wrath by depriving you > of this. > > http://members.tripod.com/davidchris/hedgehog.html Oy vay! Jordi's Malakim will be visiting you shortly, count on it. 0:> =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

"War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always evil." -- Jimmy Carter

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:48:06 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: IN> A New Tangent (was: Relievers?) - --- "Wajenberg, Earl" wrote: > I didn't think you *could* change it. But "angeletto," > "sprite," etc. could > be nicknames or alternates, like "Friend of Man" for > Mercurian or "Punisher" > for Habballah or "Virtue" for "Malakite." The name was never the thing that got me, though. Of more concern is the fact that there are lots of infernal spirits (Imps, Gremlins and Demonlings) but only one type of heavenly spirit. I like symmetry. =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

"War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always evil." -- Jimmy Carter

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:49:47 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Snoopy Blanket - --- "Finder, Randolph J Mr NGB-ARNG" wrote: > Ooh. This sounds like an Artifact! > > What would Asmodeus's favorite Snoopy Blanket do? Aside from being an Invocation Modifier for certain Ethereals it acts as Djinn Fuzz. Azzie doesn't want anyone keeping tabs on him, after all. The problem is that all of the other Princes want one now. A classic case of Peanuts Envy... =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

"War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always evil." -- Jimmy Carter

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:09:10 -0800 From: Daiv Subject: IN> Roles and Words How much is a Role like a Word? I am thinking about the in game aspects of word and Role connection, how the degree of a role, or the strength of a word, dictates the behavior of the character. When you act in a manner that is contrary to the Word you serve, you lose connection to it (Superiors are a special case; Their connection to their Word is so intrinsic that they get to define what acting in accordance to the word is and is not) by getting dissonance. What about Roles? If you have a role/6 as KKK High Mucky Muck, and you spend all your time volunteering as a literacy mentor at the local African American Community center, would your role level go down? If you had a role as a ten revival faith healer, and in the course of a service, you used a song of Healing, would that increase your Role Level? And while it did not start out this way, I have to admit a little bit of influence from Unknown Armies (a game that rocks; Yay, and mightily.) -Daiv, Tech Writer in Service to Coffee Illegible scrawl drunken writing on the brain what ... is your NAME? - -Daiv David M. Barr daiv@cruzio.com YIM Daivbear AIM Drnknmstrhkugk H (831)477-0539 C (831)566-2237 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:15:07 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... On Friday, January 24, 2003, at 10:35 AM, William J. Keith wrote: >> After all, it was perfectly Logical. >> >> It's better than being a Balseraph -- subjectivity given the force of >> law! > > Really? How do you measure this in-game? Where I come from, logic > starts > with axioms *both* sides accept, and proceeds from there to an > inescapable > conclusion. You misread my statement. "Better than being a balseraph" is more a negative than a positive -- albeit one I had a tremendous amount of enjoyment of in that game. Jodi used Divine Logic for two basic purposes: winning inconsequential arguments and helping resolve the end issue. Of those, only the last would normally be a truly good thing. If this had been a serious campaign instead of a one shot somewhat humorous In Nomine Anime game, either I wouldn't have done that or there would have been repercussions down the line. > All the angel has to do is believe their own side of the > discussion -- as I read this, any sane angel with this attunement could > prove with a successful Precision roll, to any demon that would give > you > two minutes, that being [angel of their opposing Choir] is better than > being [Band they currently are]! > It seems likely many demons would make the necessary roll to resist the attunement. Well, not the really stupid ones, but hey! > Real logic goes a little like this: > > (NOTE! NOTE! When I occasionally delve into speaking like this, I am > often > interpreted as sounding really snarky. I'm not trying to -- I'm > honestly > trying to convey some of the flavor of logic in the classical style, by > using it to make and buttress my position.) > So understood. > AXIOMS > 1) Servitor Attunements aid acts the providing Superior finds likely to > further their Word, over the issues where their use is expected. Not necessarily. Marc's "Head of a PIN" attunement, for example, gives the angel money for nothing (and the chicks for free), which doesn't truly further Trade. That they can then use that money to further Trade is clear -- but they can also as easily use it to make themselves more comfortable. I think a good number of Servitor Attunements are given because the Superior feels their Servitors will find them useful in the field, not because every use of every attunement has to further the Superior's Word. > 2) The Superior Yves provides the Servitor Attunement Divine Logic. > 3) Yves' Word is Destiny. > 4) People achieving their destiny is necessary to further the Word of > Destiny. > 5) People must make choices utilizing their free will in order to > achieve > their destiny. Not necessarily -- a man who, having been told by a Balseraph that his Fate is the truth, who then acts on it, has still completed his Fate. Having been convinced, even by attunement, that following a certain course is the best possible course of action for that man does not change the fact that it is the best possible course to follow, and Divine Logic does not compel activity. I believe that eating fatty food is extremely bad for me, yet I still eat fatty foods. > 6) In order to utilize their free will, people must be able to > examine, and > choose among, a set of multiple options. > 7) An angel using Divine Logic believes one particular option is best > on a > given issue. > 8) A human on which Divine Logic has been used has no choice but to > agree > with the angel regarding the issue discussed. > Agreement and action are two different things, sadly. > Conclusion: Divine Logic fails to achieve the purpose Yves felt it was > likely to achieve, that of furthering Destiny over the issue at hand. > I think it's rather less clear cut than that -- not only because acting on one's Destiny doesn't necessarily follow from agreeing with it, but also because even if we stipulate those elements Divine Logic can be used surgically -- changing opinions on ancillary issues, leading to a mindset that is conducive to Destiny. > Now the only weaseling left is around the edges. You can use Divine > Logic > on one guy to save the live of somebody else, for example, so that the > second person can achieve their Destiny; you can Divine Logic somebody > out > of suicide so that they can go on to be a great flautist; in general, > you > can use Divine Logic on one issue, so long as it's not the issue > central to > the choice necessary to achieve someone's destiny. But it seems to me > that > the Attunement is flawed at its very heart. > It may be, actually. Or it may also be conducive to a lower contrast game -- it is the Angel's Alternative to a Balseraph resonance, after all.... >> But, it *also* successfully talked the thirteen year old Priestess out >> of Ethereal Essence Sending and Worship, soooooo.... > > So, you couldn't exactly say she chose to stop of her own free will > then, > right? Idly, what *was* her Destiny? > No clue! Jodi was that most dangerous of Destiny Servitors -- possessed of Divine Logic but not of Divine Destiny. Also, she was dumb as Hake. But that's besides the point. In this particular case, Jodi was trying to preserve the girl's innocence while stopping the formation of an Ethereal tether. Preferably before the Laurencian decided the girl had met her Destiny and cut her head off as an Ethereal Soldier. (We *need* to do this complete writeup. I keep hoping Moe will because he's a funnier writer than I am, or Prodigal will because he has more facts at his disposal than I do. Or Beth will, since she by definition has all the cards. Or Walter will so we know just *what* the Kitsune was up to.) - -- Eric A. Burns Freelance Writer and Textual Whore http://www.annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:42:46 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... From: "Whistling in the Dark" > > (We *need* to do this complete writeup. I keep hoping Moe will because > he's a funnier writer than I am, or Prodigal will because he has more > facts at his disposal than I do. Or Beth will, since she by > definition has all the cards. Or Walter will so we know just *what* the > Kitsune was up to.) I'll be writing things up at some point this weekend, when I can finally sit down with my character sheet, read over the quotes I recorded ("It's Chibi-Moe!",) and have a better chance of not missing anything important (from my PC's viewpoint, anyway.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:57:09 -0800 From: Daiv Subject: Re: IN> How to convince a Lustie that "No" means "No" (was: Three hours of exercise...) At 10:45 AM -0800 1/24/03, Michael Walton wrote: >--- Daiv wrote: >> I will not risk your Wrath (tm) as list admin by posting >> this >> to the list. Nor would i risk your wrath by depriving you >> of this. >> >> http://members.tripod.com/davidchris/hedgehog.html > > Oy vay! Jordi's Malakim will be visiting you shortly, >count on it. 0:> > Note, for the record, that I cannot take any sort of credit for this particular Filksong. al I did was provide the link (Google abuse is a terrible thing). That said, I am not entirely convinced that Jordi would be opposed to the spirit of that song. I am not even sure that Jordi is, intrinsically, opposed to... cross species romantic relationships. On the other hand, I imagine that Jean is going to have a quiet word with me about getting the address right when sending messages like that (I had intended it only for our beloved and benevolent ListAdmin), since the list relevance is thin, at best. OB In. Is Jordi intrinsically opposed to Cross Species Romantic Relationships? See, also, George Carlins rabbit and cat (don't ask, it's worse than you imagine (He actually has pictures...(Kitty Cat Porn!)). beat the spiders off with a full cup of coffee frying pan and fire - -Daiv David M. Barr daiv@cruzio.com YIM Daivbear AIM Drnknmstrhkugk H (831)477-0539 C (831)566-2237 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:06:18 -0500 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> Roles and Words > How much is a Role like a Word? > I am thinking about the in game aspects of word and Role >connection, how the degree of a role, or the strength of a word, >dictates the behavior of the character. > When you act in a manner that is contrary to the Word you >serve, you lose connection to it (Superiors are a special case; Their >connection to their Word is so intrinsic that they get to define what >acting in accordance to the word is and is not) by getting dissonance. > If you had a role as a ten revival faith healer, and in the >course of a service, you used a song of Healing, would that increase >your Role Level? > Oh no. We had an endless series of the pros and cons of Role upkeep last year. You might want to check that out. Personally, I'd say that 'yes, if you do things that are directly contrary to your Role, and people notice, then it will have a negative impact, same as if you do positive things'. However, maybe if you do positive things it will still require a small cost of character points to build your Role. But to really get a negative or positive impact it should be a truly public spectacle. Like your examples for instance. However, what did you mean about the Superiors not being bound by their Word? You don't think they have the same Dissonance conditions as their Servitors? Josh ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:28:40 -0800 From: Daiv Subject: Re: IN> Roles and Words At 3:06 PM -0500 1/24/03, Josh Moger wrote: > > How much is a Role like a Word? >> I am thinking about the in game aspects of word and Role >>connection, how the degree of a role, or the strength of a word, >>dictates the behavior of the character. >> When you act in a manner that is contrary to the Word you >>serve, you lose connection to it (Superiors are a special case; Their >>connection to their Word is so intrinsic that they get to define what > >acting in accordance to the word is and is not) >However, what did you mean about the Superiors not being bound by their >Word? You don't think they have the same Dissonance conditions as their >Servitors? > > I think that Superiors are bound by the same dissonance conditions as their servitors (and i cannot read up on word bound issues from the GMG because it is one of the books i lost. Wah.) However, I also think that the dissonance conditions for a word can be controlled / set by a superior. I would even go so far as to speculate that dissonance conditions could change, as a Superior wills it. Maybe, once upon a time, David was a pacifist; Stone endures, Stone does not react. It is dissonant for a servitor of Stone to fight, regardless of the provocations. Then he changed; Stone is Strength and Utility; It is dissonant of Servitors of Stone to use any weapon not composed of Stone. Throwing rocks is okay, but using a wooden club is not. Etc. Now, if this is true, and if there are servitors of stone old enough to remember the old dissonance conditions, are they bound by the old ones, or are they bound by the current ones? This does lead to an interesting image of a Stonie 'getting the memo' in the middle of a fight, to good or ill. Speaking of Stone... Did we ever get an official ruling on whether or not jumping at an opponent in a fight is considered hand to hand fighting? (See Kyriotate of Stone Song of Motion Mid Flight Vessel Switch Maneuver; See also, Ton of Bricks, and other unpleasant surprises). Bears hunting season empty stomach drives him on wanted fries with that - -Daiv David M. Barr daiv@cruzio.com YIM Daivbear AIM Drnknmstrhkugk H (831)477-0539 C (831)566-2237 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:47:11 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: RE: IN> It's like a rorschach test gone horribly wrong.... >William Keith wrote: > >"8) A human on which Divine Logic has been used has no choice but to agree >with the angel regarding the issue discussed." > >Doesn't the Divine Logic effect wear off after some time proportional to the >angel's Celestial Forces or some such? >Earl No time limit. There's a resistance roll (Intelligence), but if failed the effects are permanent (well, presumably as permanent as any belief one holds). This is one of those things that is also probably not going to get changed in canon, and I understand that. However, were I to let it in my game, I would be likely to change it so that it expressed something closer to objective truth or logic as reality knows it. For example, if someone held a set of beliefs that directly contradicted each other, Divine Logic could cut through the doublethink and show them the contradiction("You say that now, but just a minute ago..."); or, if the angel could get the target to agree to a starting point, then Divine Logic could get them to believe anything that followed from those statements("These are the consequences of those beliefs...") whether the angel believed the starting point or not. Alternatively, it could be used perceptively -- telling the angel, with a perception roll, where any logical flaw in an argument was. ("Wait. Something's not quite right here... oh, he's assuming he can take out the guard.") William ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:14:14 -0500 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Roles and Words > How much is a Role like a Word? I never really thought of a Role like a Word, but in the context below the idea really makes sense. > What about Roles? If you have a role/6 as KKK High Mucky >Muck, and you spend all your time volunteering as a literacy mentor >at the local African American Community center, would your role level >go down? Toot sweet, and assuming one of your followers didn't off you for doing it. Even a Role/1 requires that you spend a few hours (a day or so?) each month living it; a Role/6 is nigh-on full-time, and you're likely to be doing the work for your Superior within that Role. Failing to act in line with the Role is going to decay the Role, at a rate determined by the GM. > If you had a role as a tent revival faith healer, and in the >course of a service, you used a song of Healing, would that increase >your Role Level? Now this is a little more involved. Roles will hide Disturbance from actions that are in line with the Role; probably the premiere example is the Media Habbalah attunement, which can hide disturbance from acts the Habbalah takes which look like his humans did it. On that basis, I'd say that there's a chance a Role as "faith healer" would hide disturbance from a Song of Healing used during service; and if done carefully enough, with the celestial claiming that he was an empowered human rather than a celestial being, might eventually increase the Role if this became known to people. > -Daiv, Tech Writer in Service to Coffee William ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:45:15 -0500 From: "Wajenberg, Earl" Subject: RE: IN> A New Tangent (was: Relievers?) Michael Walton wrote: "Of more concern is the fact that there are lots of infernal spirits (Imps, Gremlins and Demonlings) but only one type of heavenly spirit. I like symmetry." That bothered me, too. We could make up some... Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:25:40 -0500 From: BC Petery Subject: IN> Odd jobs in Shal-Mari > "And this concludes our evening of 'Lilim > Jello-Wrestling Grudge Match'!" Just the thing when you're a Free Lilim and short on essence in Shal-Mari. Lusties are better at sex and sex variants, Mamonaries are batter at conning people and the Gluttons have the catering/vending machine market cornered. The only way to get a job at a casino or club is to sign up with a Superior. That leaves Bicycle Messenger, Dog Walker and Baby (Gremlin) Sitter. Jobs that require both trustworthiness and expendability. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2944 ********************************