From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Oct 6 21:43:38 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA23710 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:43:38 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id VAA00721 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:22:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:22:07 -0500 Message-Id: <199710070222.VAA00721@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #388 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Monday, October 6 1997 Volume 01 : Number 388 In this digest: Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. Re: IN> [fluff] WW vs. IN Re: IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? Re: IN> Questions Re: IN> Vessel Question Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> Lilim and Malakim (fwd) IN> Band Attunements Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> On playing demons Re: IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote Re: Did Uriel have help (Was: Re: IN> IN in other settings) Re: IN> d666 patches IN> NI sdrawkcaB IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote IN> [FICTION] Chess Game ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 15:32:06 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil Greg writes: "Why is this [a bloodless TV gunfight] less awful than fake violence where the blood *does* show? If the media really does make people shoot other people in real life, I don't care whether my assailant is expecting blood or not." I wasn't necessarily talking about any tendency of media to incite people to violence. I was drawing the distinction between blowing off frustration with imaginary violence and playing an evil character. However, there are differences: the bloodless version engages the emotions less, though it may thereby mislead people into thinking shooting isn't as horrible as it is; the bloody version engages the emotions more ... or does NOT because repeated exposure numbs the viewer to sights like that. I have not paused to consider which is worse or if they are just different. But I think they are different. "Where does this come from? Most R.P.G. P.C.s are in almost constant danger, and frequently in great pain. Does that mean that anyone who plays R.P.G.s would like to be in danger and pain? You are making a substantive psychological claim here that I see no evidence to support." When players enjoy the imagined danger of their characters, there is a huge and obvious difference between the character's predicament, hanging on the edge of a cliff or whatnot, and their own situation sitting around a coffee table in someone's living room. It's even bigger than the gap when you watch an adventure movie, and nearly as big as the gap when you read an adventure. When a player enjoys the villainous attitudes of a villainous character, and in the direct sense I distinguished from the detatched, authorial sense, the gap is much smaller. You really are thinking villainous thoughts; you just have the "fiction" flag on them. Of course the gap is still there -- if you are sane -- but it is narrower. The situation looks still more like rehersal. "Why is it bad spiritual health? What more do you need than happiness and morality? I was trying to paint a picture of someone who would LIKE to cause someone else significant misery. They might be held back from doing so by conscience, but they are then in the position of someone trying to kick an addiction, who wants their fix but is refraining by an act of will. The person is doing the right thing, but is tempted to do the wrong thing. Their position is not as fortunate as someone who is simply not tempted. "The first [a scheming villain] may hack one individual up slowly while the second hacks [a combatant in melee] a lot of them up quickly. What's the big difference?" The difference is not only speed but the amount of attention and degree of identification require. In playing combat, you just say "I punch him" or "I hit him," and maybe give a few tactical details. In role-playing the villain, you don't just say "I come up with a devilish plot." You have to actually do the work of coming up with a devilish plot. "Well, heck, I can set up a contrived situation in a game whereby rape is the *right* thing to do." Then in your contrived instance, it isn't a sin, or is at most the lesser of two evil. But as you said, that is a contrived instance, not what generally comes to mind when we use the term "rape." "Killing," on the other hand, refers pretty much equally to various degrees of murder and to warfare. Earl Wajenberg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 14:57:20 -0400 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. >Note to Dottie: There are other pagans out there. :) Of course, most of the >ones I've met wanna play the Ethereals anyhow... I dunno. Myself and Blade (the other major In Nomine wonk in this tiny town) are both pagan, and it's angels all the way for us. We think it's interesting to play in a universe where the standard Christian assumptions we rebel against are, in some sense, true. -Loki - -- Kirt A. Dankmyer --- Academic Computing Specialist http://www.wfu.edu/~dankmyka/ -- (910) 759-4202 -- PGP public key available. For the Snark _was_ a Boojum, you see. --Lewis Carroll ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 16:16:33 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> [fluff] WW vs. IN At 11:59 PM -0400 10/4/97, Mark Kinney wrote: >On Sat, 4 Oct 1997, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> > >AB> ...Or do I have to get out the bullwhip and leather? >> > >GIF! GIF! >> > So, what's it worth to y'all for such a thing to appear on, say, >> > the INC? > Well, I sent MY offering in... (Which one was this?) >Um... I'm not sure what the rules on mass geasa are... am I affected by >this just by being on the list (if this deal goes through, that is) or do >I actually have to agree to it myself? You don't have to agree -- but it has to fulfill a Need. >Just wondering... I don't much like being under obligations I didn't ask >for. :-) Only if you Needed it... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:50:28 -0500 (CDT) From: Dorothy Bixler Subject: Re: IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Stacy Stroud wrote: (snip down to the basic question) > > That leads me to ask: What do we mean when we say "evil"? I realize that > there are probably as many different answers as there are members on the > list, but I think adding this aspect to the discussion might prove fruitful. > That is a huge question. And a question that cuts down to the personal level. I honestly think that there will never be a consensus among more than two persons on what evil is (which is why I loathe to use the word sometimes). I try to limit (in context of discussing In Nomine) evil as "opposing God" and use other phrases to signify things like selfishness, malice, etc. (I try at least- it's not my personal definition so sometimes I slip up). *Dorothy Michelle Bixler * mudmh10@ecom.ecn.bgu.edu* "Gidget, have you been laying with the Horned One again?" -MST3K's Mike from "The Thing the Couldn't Die" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 16:33:37 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Questions At 2:21 PM -0600 10/5/97, John L Veazey wrote: >1> How many negative hits do mortal characters get? Celestials get > Vessel level x Strength. So do mortals just get Strength? I would probably say Strength + any Toughness = the "negative hits" that a human can take. >2> If mortals don't get vessels, why does Mother Wilkinson, a > Bodhisattva (pg 14 Night Music) have a Vessel: Human/2; or are > Bodhisattvas an exception & have vessels? She's a Saint, and therefore has a vessel. (It's not quite reincarnation, y'see...) >3> If a vessel of a celestial dies, >a> if he has another vessel can he automatically shift to another > vessel or must he blow the required essence to shift? He needs to blow the essence, and has to do it before the vessel he's currently in gets fully toasted (which is what drops him into Trauma...). If he has a body-bag, he just wakes up in that. >b> if he can shift to another vessel, what happens to the dead > vessel? Is it still dead and lying where it died or does it go > back to its potential existence? If he makes the shift in time (with the old vessel now dying or dead if a hit landed while he was shifting), then the old vessel is in "potentiality." >c> does the dead vessel slowly discorporate, or does it decay as per > a normal body? Currently, it would seem that dead vessels, according to what canon I can find, lie there and decay as normal. I'm not going to deal with Zombi + celestial vessel right now, except to note that it takes gobs of Essence if the GM allows it... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:04:02 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Vessel Question At 1:20 PM -0400 10/6/97, Twila Oxley Price wrote: >[...] I have some quick >questions about vessels -- if you buy one at level 3, what exactly >does that mean? Maybe I'm just too stuffy-headed from my cold, but the >IN book isn't terribly clear about the differences between what a >human/3 vessel is compared to a human vessel with level 3/status 3... The level of your Vessel is how tough and durable it is. p. 62, 4th paragraph. Status and Role affect other things -- mostly how people react to you. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:19:31 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. At 2:57 PM -0400 10/6/97, Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki wrote: >>Note to Dottie: There are other pagans out there. :) Of course, most of the >>ones I've met wanna play the Ethereals anyhow... > >I dunno. Myself and Blade (the other major In Nomine wonk in this tiny >town) are both pagan, and it's angels all the way for us. We think it's >interesting to play in a universe where the standard Christian assumptions >we rebel against are, in some sense, true. I'm no standard Christian myself. But I can almost get into these AAs and folks... It's really weird. (It's even more weird since my most favored character is Renegade -- of the "Oh, a plague in both your houses" brand, overall.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:05:40 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote At 12:33 PM -0400 10/6/97, Emily K. Dresner wrote: [...] >Although I have a major complaint about Sorcerers and the lack of the >Angel Raziel. *waggle finger* Some Kabbalists you lot turned out to >be. :) When I decide on what fun things he does, I'll post him.... Good. (And I wasn't Line Editor for that one. It's Not My Fault. ) >It's crazy. My players are so strung out on angst I don't know what to >do. It's fantastic. Sometimes, I think I might like to play in one of your games. Just for a little. When I'm in an angsty mood... (And then I go work on some of my fiction, with my delightfully cracked Lilim of the Game.) >- Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards And what kind of Rites does that give you? O;> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:21:26 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil At 12:57 PM -0400 10/4/97, Gregory Littmann wrote: >> >>>> *Getting off* on fictional badness is what bothers me. >> > >> > O.K.. Why does *that* bother you?<<< >> >> Why does it bother me if someone gets off on roleplaying rape, murder and >> parking in no-parking zones? >> Let me ask you-- why do you think someone *would* enjoy doing those things, >> even in a game? [...] > I honestly don't know why, but then, I find it baffling that fictional >things should be interesting at all, or why pretending should be fun. >Indeed, to some degree it doesn't *matter* why I enjoy it, unless my doing >so leads me to perform real evil acts - which it doesn't. Nor do I see >any evidence that playing villains leads other people to perform evil acts >- and if it does, it's time to ban almost all movies and plays. It's a gray area, from what I can see. Enjoying the carrying out of a dandy little plot that gets the right NPC toasted (or sometimes PC; ah, the way us AD&D munchkins slaughtered the PC we didn't want to play with!) is one thing. Enjoying the idea of killing someone, periord, starts to edge into a gray area... Enjoying something *too much*, and I think most of us can agree we've got a baby sociopath around. Where is the line drawn? No telling. It's individual for each person, I suspect. If someone actually goes out and *does* it, well, that's definitely bad! If someone uses enjoying the pretending to creep other people out, he's probably a jerk at least. Beyond that -- I have a hard time having a character toast most NPCs, even the ones who deserve it, even the PCs who are supposed to be ruthless. (GURPS character with Bloodlust. We took a prisoner after a firefight. The prisoner refused to cooperate. My PC shot the NPC in cold blood. I'm still grappling with that one, off and on. I certainly crowed when I pulled off three shots and blew away an enemy with some sweet die-rolls, in the heat of combat... The effect on me is different. Why? Well, they were trying to shoot *our* characters...) I think it's the "getting off on" phrasing. Without modifying circumstances, somebody who evidences pleasure in the concept of hurting others is a little odd. But somebody who gets into character deeply is not necessarly the sort who *really* gets off on others' pain. Toying with a normally abhorent psychology/personality can be...interesting. (A demon of the Game with Murderous. What conflicts does this produce? What stresses? Where are the cracks, where the strengths? How is this person admirable, and how is this character vile? How is this person tormented when the explicit orders are to kill someone the character *likes*?) Motives, motives are everything. And unless you're a Seraph or Elohite, there's no quick way to figure out what the motives are. (Or maybe Malakite, or Lilim...) At 12:44 AM +0000 10/6/97, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: [...] >> Likewise, I don't think roleplaying atrocities with glee says >> nothing about the roleplayer. If you get off on pretending to rape >> or murder or beat someone up, then there is some part of you that >> finds the action that you're simulating appealing. > >Guess what - that part's in everybody. [...] If you've never >fantasized about kicking the daylights out of some idiot who just cut >you off, then you are in the minority, my friend. A very small >minority. I prefer to fantisize about trashing their car, myself. (And some of my most vivid nightmares were of *me* doing something to somebody or someone else.. Shedite dreams. And yet there are some of my more satisfying dreams -- yelling at someone who deserved it. And yes, that felt pretty satisfying when I did it in real life, finally, too!) At 10:55 AM -0400 10/6/97, MarkDEddy@aol.com wrote: >I'd like to add one point to the current discussion of killing, rape, >and so on: > >Death is something our (i.e., Modern American/Western) culture has really >sanitized in real life. Think about it. When was the last time you saw a >dead body? Was it before or after the mortician had been at it? Human or animal? (And the open-casket funeral for a friend... I was keeping it together till I saw the body. It *wasn't her*. Okay, so it wasn't a bloody death, and all that, but... ) As for animals... I've held more than one of my cats when the final choice had to be made. >Was it someone who had died violently? I think that many people who >don't have a problem with simulated violence/murder and do have a >problem with simulated rape may be more familliar with *real* rape >than *real* murder. And as someone else said -- killing can have "good" reasons. Killing someone who would badly hurt or kill *you* is self-defense. There is *no* excuse for RL rape, not in this day and age, just as there is no excuse for torturing someone for giggles. With death, at least there is closure for the victim. With something that hurts, that breaks, that steals all control, *that garners scorn from those who say, "Well, why didn't you do [x] and stop it?"*, the victim is left alive to cope. And if the body has betrayed one by tolerating or even sending "pleasure" signals... Loss of all control. There is no closure, only the slow re-establishing of one's own physical identity. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:34:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on playing demons...and angels. > I dunno. Myself and Blade (the other major In Nomine wonk in this tiny > town) are both pagan, and it's angels all the way for us. We think it's > interesting to play in a universe where the standard Christian assumptions > we rebel against are, in some sense, true. Hmm. I've yet to actually _play_ In Nomine (the one PBEM I created a character for never got off of the ground), but I'm a Christian myself, and I have to admit that I view the In Nomine universe to be just as fictional as that of any other fantasy game. Although In Nomine is based on Christian mythology and the stories of that tradition, IMHO it doesn't have anything to do with "real" Christianity (of which, of course, there are several flavors). - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 18:36:10 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil > > Guess what - that part's in everybody. It's part of our animal > > heritage to kill and rape - it ensures survival. If you've never > > I'm noticing that killing is considered a lot more acceptable in > gaming than rape...I would actually suggest that it's also more > deeply ingrained. It's a more direct way of dealing with competition, and on the whole, more effective. Rape takes the long way around, by trying to get the man's genetics spread as far as possible. The acceptability is an interesting point... > Now, it's an interesting question as to whether Celestials HAVE > instincts...hmm...whatever the situation in a game is as to > humans, it's almost certain that Angels never evolved.) Strictly speaking, humans don't have insticts, except at an early age. What we have are urges. I doubt that Celestials lack urges - they wouldn't have much of a reason to do anything if they didn't - but they might truely be alien. Or they might be very human, in which case both Celestials and humans can wonder about the similarity... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 18:36:10 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Lilim and Malakim (fwd) > > If I make a IN PBEM, it will be much more serious. > > Drat. Well, let me know anyway.. I'll post on the list if I do. > > > Hmm...I confess, I DO have a tendancy to keep my mythology > > > mythological...(by which I mean, when I'm playing around with > > I've never really gone for that - my games tend to go for gritty > > realism, even if it's realism by our standards... > > Which means that if I do my IN game as a PBEM, you might not > > appreciate it as much. > Oh, I enjoy playing in all kinds of worlds I wouldn't run > myself...and I can certainly see the point to it; given the > replication of patterns between, say, atoms and solar systems, > quarks and honeybees, etc., there's certainly a good case for > applying them to angels and demons... Again, the replication is purely coincidental - none of the elements in an atom act even marginally like a solar system, by the current models. As for quarks and honeybees, you've lost me... > > > because it's not strictly list-appropriate. Briefly, though, > > > Mortijingle is the Lord of Death and Humor, and embodies the irony > > > inherent in the universe. > > > > Servator of Kobal with the word of Funny Deaths? Kobal himself? > > Well, seeing the Prince of Dark Humor in there WAS one of the > reasons we picked up the game in the first place...unfortunately, > we were a little disappointed on that end. Kobal, when it comes > down to it, really doesn't seem to GET humor, and Mortijingle's > ironies aren't always `bad'... So fiddle with the brightness knob. Kobal may simply be a demon because God wouldn't have him... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 19:16:43 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Band Attunements >>>Non-Archangels/Princes do not have C/B/S Attunements, in canon. They have Rites, but not Attunements or Distinctions.<<< Actually, that's not entirely true. Generally, small-s superiors don't have Choir/Band attunements, but this is not to say that some of the really powerful ones (like the ones who are just below Archangel/Prince level) might not. (IOW, you probably don't want to say such a superior will *never* appear in official materials. ) And some of the middlin' powerful ones CAN have a Servitor attunement or two (witness Hatiphas, the Demon of Sorcery from the Marches, who can grant the Sorcery attunement). - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:15:01 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil > > What is do special about rape? > > I'm not sure, but for me it is. I'll have to think about why (it's > good to be able to explain these things). I'd point out that rape is such a damaging thing not because of what is done to the person, but because of how much weight our society puts on sex and sexuality. One of the worst rape cases I have heard of was a devout Catholic - she went catatonic for quite a while. On the other hand, one of my net acquaintances was raped, and has said that she has had much worse things happen to her that were completely legal. > >Perhaps it can. But what evidence is there that playing evil > >characters makes people act out such atrocities in real life. > > I never said that. It's stupid to say that because someone played > his first evil character, he is now going to go steal candy from > children. My possible cause and effect runs in the opposite > direction. It's more that I wonder about how the person already is > if they really want to spend their recreational time with pretend > atrocities. As I noted, "seem" is very much the operative word. > I've never roleplayed with anyone who wanted to do that stuff > anyway (in the game). A lot of assumptions are being made, then. Most people who know of me by description only (roleplays, listens to NIN, Manson, and Prodigy, has been known to use drugs) get an entirely wrong image of me, as a dangerous, potentially violent person. The associations are the same, except that you are taking them in another direction; people assume I might be violent or psychopathic because I enjoy violent, psychopathic music, you assume I might be because I enjoy violent, psychopathic characters. In both cases (AFAIK - self-analysis is never very accurate), the assumption is wrong. I enjoy them because they give me a way to express the part of me that is dark and violent; I'm pretty mellow and nice in real life. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:15:01 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> On playing demons > > The problem is, no regular angel has been to higher Heaven, and only > > some of the AAs are supposed to have. > > And God might be brainwashing the angels, anyway... > > How does this change anything? > If you think Heaven is a good organisation, work for it. > If you think Heaven is as bad as Hell, don't work for it. > But whatever you do, *don't work for Hell!*. Hell may be the only thing that has a chance of stopping Heaven. And if you work outside the organization, you can't ever change it. > > For some demons, we are about the equivalent of cows. How many of > > you object, morally, to the situation that cows in? At best, kept > > in cheap pleasure palaces while they are drained of what we want > > from them, at worst, ripped apart for what we want from them. > > Firstly, I would object strongly if cows were tortured, as > humans are in so many parts of Hell. Our treatment of them may > not be ideal (and certainly ought to be better) but it falls way > short of the torments of the pit. > Secondly, what we do to cows does not last forever. From who's perspective? If this life is all there is (and we have no source to prove otherwise) then from the perspective of a given being, that life *is* forever. > > For some demons, it works on balance of fears. Demons can either go > > along with it, and save their hides, or try to change sides, and > > risk getting smoked by *both* sides. > > > > Does this make these demons good? No. But they aren't all evil - > > just cowardly (with good cause) and selfish. > > Selfish to an amazing degree. Just think about what they are > willing to do to us again and again to save their own hides. That's the situation they are in - use and abuse the monkeys, or face death. In a similar situation, would you choose to protect a monkey for a few moments with your *life*? There is also the potential for a Schindler - somebody who intentionally goes with the system because fighting it would be impossible, and does what good he can. > "I vas just followink orders" is a pretty lousy excuse. It's not just orders - it's life or death in a very permanent way, with *no* higher reward for being noble. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:15:01 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? > >Does this make these demons good? No. But they aren't all evil - > >just cowardly (with good cause) and selfish. > > My response here is not directed specifically at Mr. Eliot. Mr. Eliot? That's one I haven't heard (apart from telemarketers). > His is merely the latest example of something I've been noticing > in a number of posts on the "playing demons" issue, so I picked his > rendition to quote. Well, whether it is aimed at me or not, I'm going to take pot shots...;-) > Based purely on my own reading of the posts so far, I'd opine that > many of the folks making the selfish/evil distinction are using > "evil" to mean "cruel." So a truly "evil" demon would be one who, > in the words of Prince Edelstein, "gets off" on causing misery. Not even that bad - just somebody who doesn't care either way whether he is hurting people is (IMO) evil. > But is that really all there is to evil? IMHO, it's not. > Selfishness and cowardice can easily be just as evil as cruelty -- > and evil in a more subtle, more dangerous way. Selfishness, maybe. Cowardice I hardly see as being evil on it's own. Even then, you're stretching the definition of selfishness I was using. > A demon (or a real, live human!) who just doesn't *care* what his > actions do to others because he's selfish is a morally repugnant > creature. Perhaps he's never quite as spectacularly sadistic as > the cruel person, but he's still evil in my book. Granted. > Similarly, true courage is continuing to stand up for what's > right, even in the face of fearsome consequences. IN demons who > continue to promote misery and tempt souls to Hell because they're > afraid of what will happen to them if they don't *are* evil, and > evil *because* they are cowards. Here, I don't agree. Somebody cannot be coerced into being evil; they aren't good by any stretch of imagination, and they aren't somebody I would like, but they aren't evil. They are selfish as I was using the word, in that they put their own suffering before somebody elses. > Now, this is all IMHO, of course. As you might notice, my > personal morality tends to identify strongly with In Nomine's use > of selflessness and selfishness as the ultimate roots of goodness > and evil respectively. I agree with whoever it was who said that > the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. And I'll agree there. > So I'm curious what other people mean when they say "evil," and > especially when they distinguish evil so carefully from "mere" > selfishness. What I mean when I say evil is somebody who is *actively* evil - somebody who could safely be good without retribution, but who is not. Granted, there is shading, but only in less dangerous situations - when it is a choice of being cruel to somebody or be ostracized, I am less ready to defend them. But demons are in a far tougher situation - if they fight back, they are likely to pay with their lives, and will probably only buy a few moments of respite. But since you are arguing that demons are evil, I ask you this - God in In Nomine is portrayed as omnipotent, or nearly so. If God is not stopping this, does this make Him evil? I think there is a better case there than there is for all demons being evil. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:30:34 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote > > I saw that in the rulebook finally. I didn't know where that came from, > > but now I do and... KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE! I am officially In The > > Know. > > Yo Joe! I still want an IN tee-shirt with that line and Furfur... Hey, Official-ish people - how do we go about promoting this idea to SJ? Does he even know of it yet? I, for one, would love to have that shirt...if I got permission from SJG, I wouldn't hesitate to have some made up locally. > > - Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards > > Hey! Them's fightin' Words. You're cutting in on my turf. ='p ;'} > > Oops da Ogre, Demon of In Nomine Played Backwards Out of curiousity, how many other people play (or want to play) IN backwards? So far, we have three (Oops, Em, and me). Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "This is my town. I know where the ketchup is." - Dan Smith ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 97 20:54:03 -0400 From: dwood@skipjack.bluecrab.org Subject: Re: Did Uriel have help (Was: Re: IN> IN in other settings) Previously, from the desktop of Emily K. Dresner >> Did Uriel just go off all on his own, or were all the servants of >> Purity involved in the mythic genocide? This isn't really answered in >> Laurence's description. > >The impression I got from the Marches was that Uriel and his entire flock >went after the ethereals, including Laurence. ...which could get interesting. Consider Laurence's comments on Blandine in that same book, combined with a few hints in the Night Music supplement. *MY* particular spin would be to assume that Laurence's view of dreams and the importance of the Marches over time has changed considerably from when he went on Uriel's massacre. I'm not sure what Laurence's opinion of most of the residents of the Far Marches is (probably dim since many of them cut deals with Beleth), but were Uriel to come back and declare another purge, Laurence would probably side with Blandine in order to prevent more bloodshed there. But then, I would, wouldn't I? - -David http://www.bluecrab.org/members/dwood/ Demon of Obfuscation in service to Malphas ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:49:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Louis Wainwright Subject: Re: IN> d666 patches > > Stop me if I'm wrong, but it seems to be that the degree of success for a > given task (represented by the check digit) is totally unrelated to the > difficulty of the task/skill of performer (represented by the target > number). That is, you're just as likely to roll a CD of 6 on a TN of 12 (an > incredibly easy task) as on a TN of 2 (well-nigh impossible). Seems to me > like there are/should be greater possibility for greater success as you are > more skilled. Bugged me as well. I think Paul Strack came up with the following idea which I use: Use only two dice! Identify one of the dice as the check die, and treat everything else as normal. What happens is very clever, someone with a low target value can't get a large check die, whereas someone with a high target value is treated as normal. E.g. A Soldier with a Will of 4 is trying to resist a Demonic Resonance. The highest check digit they can succeed with is a 3 (with a one on the non-check die). An Angel with a Will of 8 can have a check digit of 6, but 4 is average. The Angel of Demon Slaying with a Will of 12 has a even distribution on her check die. Of course, the demon only has a target value of about 8, so the odds are that he is going to fail against the Angel of Demon Slaying, 50/50 against the normal Angel, and very likely to succeed against the Soldier. I have found this to be a wonderful change. It makes higher attributes and skills really useful and keeps those damn Seraphim from getting so many 6's on their resonance! Of course if the roll is snake eyes or boxcars there is a hush as the PC rerolls. I find it hightens the dramatic tension. :) Hope this helps, Lou Wainwright wainwrig@ntrnet.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:34:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Raoul Duke Subject: IN> NI sdrawkcaB On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > Out of curiousity, how many other people play (or want to play) IN > backwards? So far, we have three (Oops, Em, and me). Count me in as playing sideways. I still haven't gotten around to running a game (I seem to mostly be buying RPGs as reading material, as opposed to actually running them), but when I do I plan to give it more of a "Good Omens" feel, where angels and demons are largely running on their own initiative on the Corporeal (if they're supposed to be among their Prince/AA's most valued servitors, a little faith in their judgement is implied) and may or may not oppose one another, depending on the temperaments and goals of the individual celestials. If Jean's boys need to wreck some no-no device, what's wrong with enlisting a few Calabim if the Superior'll never know? I enjoy the idea of Heaven's troops not necessarily being saintly and there being a few flowers blooming in Hell. Black-and-white us-vs-them setups can be fun, but that wasn't what attracted me to IN. Joe ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:31:31 -0500 (CDT) From: Dorothy Bixler Subject: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > > > I saw that in the rulebook finally. I didn't know where that came from, > > > but now I do and... KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE! I am officially In The > > > Know. > > > > Yo Joe! I still want an IN tee-shirt with that line and Furfur... I thought that you wanted to have one with Furfur and the quote "Hail, Hail Rock & Roll?" Darn it, make up your mind ;) > (snip) > > > > - Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards > > > > Hey! Them's fightin' Words. You're cutting in on my turf. ='p ;'} > > > > Oops da Ogre, Demon of In Nomine Played Backwards > > Out of curiousity, how many other people play (or want to play) IN > backwards? So far, we have three (Oops, Em, and me). Four- Mrs. Oops. And it's a good thing we agree- our role playing group usually consists of just us two! *Dorothy Michelle Bixler * mudmh10@ecom.ecn.bgu.edu* Riot Ogrrrrrrrrrrress "Gidget, have you been laying with the Horned One again?" -MST3K's Mike from "The Thing the Couldn't Die" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:08:54 -0500 (CDT) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: IN> [FICTION] Chess Game Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. -- Job 2:1-2 And Michael, mighty of hosts, spoke unto God, saying, Lord, allow me to remove this footpad, and teach him to profane your presence no more. But the LORD spoke, saying, Nay, let none raise their hand against another today; for all are my children, yea even the wayward, and each shall have a part to play in what is to come. And Satan smiled, and spoke unto the LORD, saying, Shall we play a game? -- Job 2, removed from Gabriel's account by Josias of Thebes, in what was widely regarded as a sound editorial move at the time The wind blew gently through the trees surrounding the picnic clearing in the park, barely stirring the hair of the small group of people who stood, with various levels of mutual distrust and contempt, around a stone table with a chessboard carved in the top. The sunlight glittered off the morning dew and shone impartially over the cluster of people who stood beside the old man in the Hawaiian shirt and the quiet group milling behind the middle-aged gentleman clad in a stylish dark three-piece suit. CHESS AGAIN? the old man said in a quiet, friendly voice. "I think so," the man in the suit nodded. "But this time, I would prefer to play without the audience." AS YOU LIKE, the old man smiled. GO YOU, AND COMPETE AMONG YOURSELVES, he nodded to the two clusters of people. BUT DO YE NO HARM UNTO EACH OTHER, NOR UNTO OTHERS. One of the men standing behind the old man, a young-looking gentleman with long dark hair and piercing eyes, knelt and said, "My Lord, I have sworn an oath..." I KNOW OF YOUR OATH, LAWRENCE, the Lord smiled. YOU ARE FREE TO LEAVE IF YOU WISH. YOUR FELLOW SERVANTS BLANDINE, JORDI, JANUS AND GABRIEL ARE NOT HERE, AND THEY SWORE NO OATH. IF YOU WISH TO STAY, YOU MAY, BUT YOU SHALL NOT DRAW YOUR SWORD TODAY. Lawrence's head bowed still lower, and his voice ran with a low current of anger. "If Your enemies will keep the peace, so shall I, my Lord." Lucifer smiled slyly. "We have no interest in breaking the peace today, Malakite. This is strictly a day for fun. My servants know the penalty for disobedience, and those who I cannot trust I have left at home." OR THEY CHOSE TO STAY HOME, the Lord replied. OH, DO GET UP, LAWRENCE, AND TRY TO RELAX. As Lucifer glowered at the Lord's gentle barb, Lawrence stood up, bowing at the waist, and returned to the group standing behind the old man. Each group, seven men and one woman each, looked at each other, shifting their feet uncomfortably, uncertain what to do next. SO, the Lord said, setting the chessboard, WHAT ARE WE PLAYING FOR TODAY? "No bets," Lucifer smiled. "Somehow, whenever we make a wager, I come out second best. Even when I win." FUN, THEN, the Lord grinned. He looked up at the demons and angels around them, grinning cheerfully. WHAT ARE YOU STILL DOING HERE? SHOO! GO PLAY, ALREADY! The sixteen Celestials vanished, and the Lord held out his fists. WHITE OR BLACK? "A-3," Dominic said, rolling a tiny red peg in his fingers. For today's solemn occasion, he had manifested as a severe-looking man, bald and saturnine, glaring at the world through dark sunglasses, occasionally brushing a bit of lint from his immaculate black suit. Across from him, an equally solemn man in an equally clean black suit frowned, brushing his fingers through his close-cropped black hair. "Hit," Asmodeus grouched. "How is your housecleaning going?" "The same as yours, I suspect," Dominic smiled. "Always a heretic, someone who thinks they can break the rules and hide it from us. It seems like there's even more of them these days." "Many more," Asmodeus nodded. "More and more people unwilling to abide by the rules of the game. It grows tiresome, after all these millenia. I-7." "Miss," Dominic said impassively. "It is a heavy burden, sometimes," he added, actually looking a tiny bit wistful behind his sunglasses. "Before the Fall, we were not troubled by concerns like heresy and insubordination. Now, they lurk everywhere." "And everywhere they lurk, they must be stamped out," Asmodeus nodded. "After all, how can we settle affairs between our two sides when each side is divided against itself?" Dominic nodded. "After a fashion, it is a comfort to know there is someone who thinks as I do." "Of course," Asmodeus added, "nothing can come of this conversation. Under other circumstances, I would destroy you." "Or I you," Dominic nodded, "but the house must be cleaned first. A-2." "You have sunk my destroyer," Asmodeus sighed, placing a red peg atop his screen. "To a clean house. May it happen soon." "Amen," Dominic agreed. "Your move." BISHOP TO QUEEN'S BISHOP FOUR. "May I ask a question?" Lucifer asked idly, studying the developed opening board from above steepled fingers. ASK AWAY. IT WON'T CHANGE THE BOARD ANY. "We've been getting a lot of souls down there," Lucifer smiled, toying with one of his own bishops. "And there are at least five billion wandering around here on Earth. How many souls have you got left up in Heaven, anyway? I mean, the ones that haven't been born yet?" ALL OF THEM, the Lord smiled ineffably. IT'S YOUR MOVE. "Bishop to Queen's bishop four," Lucifer grumbled, plunking the piece into position, black facing white in a mirror image across the board. "Three ball, side pocket," Jean pointed across the board, pocketing his sextant and protractor and raising his pool cue. The dim light of the game room shone off his bald pate, scattering across the highlights in his short silver-white fringe of hair, casting shadows across his scowling, disapproving face. Drawing a careful bead, he pulled back the cue stick and struck, sending the white ball bouncing from the side of the table, striking the yellow one-ball, sending it into the red three-ball, which plunked quietly into the called pocket. An instant later, the cue ball dropped into a corner pocket, and Jean's opponent, a wild-haired middle-aged man with a maniacal grin and a sloppy lab coat, picked the hard white ball out and moved it over to the end of the table. "Scratch!" he grinned. "My shot!" "A minor oversight in my calculations," Jean huffed. "Still my shot," Vapula grinned. "I wonder what'll happen if I do this!" In a swift, flowing motion, he slapped the cue ball onto the table, drew his cue, and slammed it into the side of the one-ball. Both balls careened wildly across the table, knocking into the other balls, scattering them randomly, but sinking none of them. Jean smirked at Vapula, breaking out a slide rule as he studied the new arrangement of the balls. "What was all that for?" he chuckled. "You didn't sink any of them!" "This is nine-ball, my friend," Vapula giggled. "Only the last ball counts." Jean considered that, frowned, and studied the table a little more closely. KNIGHT TO KING'S KNIGHT FIVE, WARE QUEEN. Lucifer nodded, sighing, and knocked over the Lord's queen with his own. "Queen to Queen's Eight, takes Queen." ROOK TO QUEEN'S ONE, TAKES QUEEN. "Rook to Queen's Eight, takes Rook," Lucifer nodded. "Tell me, have you -ever- made a mistake? Even once?" MISTAKES, the Lord smiled, ARE IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. ROOK TO QUEEN'S ONE, TAKES ROOK. His eyes twinkled as he added, DO YOU THINK I MADE A MISTAKE? BESIDES NOT LETTING YOU RUN THINGS, THAT IS? Lucifer thought very carefully, then sighed, "Pawn to King's Knight Three." The Lord chuckled and fingered his rook, smiling his inscrutable smile. "What about that cloud?" Nybbas asked, his glasses reflecting the sunlight and totally concealing the eyes behind them, his usual toothy grin replaced by a thoughtful expression. His rakish white sport coat had a few grass stains on it, the damp earth adding a little brown to it as he lay on his back looking up at the sky. "Easy, man," Eli chuckled, his messy brown hair sprawling around his head as he lay beside Nybbas. He scratched his leg through a hole in his jeans as he said, "That's Nike riding in a chariot pulled by twin Andalusian white stallions, spear held high in challenge." "I see it as the hind end of a 1958 Chevy driven by a little old lady with a beehive haircut," Nybbas smirked. "And that cloud?" "The little one by the oak tree?" "No, the one above it." "Oh, that's a willow tree swaying in the breeze, its limbs bent down by years of storms and hard winters." "I see Pamela Lee Anderson baring her breasts on worldwide broadcast TV." "Hm," Eli nodded. "Yeah, I can see that, 'cept it's Elle MacPherson." "Elle MacPherson wouldn't take her top off on TV for any money," Nybbas protested. "Don't care, man, it's Elle MacPherson." Eli pointed over to the horizon and said, "That looks like a duckie to me." "Hm," Nybbas thought for a while, stared at it, then sighed, "Yep, it's a duckie. Just a duckie." "Damn," Eli sighed. "You win." Nybbas blinked. "How d'ya figure that?" he asked. "I couldn't think of anything." "Exactly," Eli groaned, leaning up. "I failed, you won." "Oh," Nybbas said, smiling wanly. "Whatever you say... wanna go to the ampitheatre and listen to the band there? They're really... well, loud." "Dude," Eli beamed, good humor restored, "I am so -there.-" Lucifer tapped his fingers on his jacket sleeve, watching as the Lord contemplated the pieces on the board. At the moment, God had a one-pawn piece advantage on the Devil, but the game could still go either way very easily. A couple of moves, here and now, could set the momentum for the rest of the game. As such, the Lord's dawdling over the board grated on Lucifer's nerves. Finally, unable to keep silent, he said, "You've been thinking for half an hour. Don't you have a move yet?" PATIENCE, PATIENCE, the Lord replied. I WAS JUST WATCHING SOMETHING MORE INTERESTING. "More interesting?" Lucifer asked. "There's nothing here but the board, the tree, the table and me......" He looked down at his tapping fingers, his wiggling foot, and frowned as he realized what the Lord had been watching. Planting both feet on the ground and laying his hands on the table, he grumbled, "Make your bloody move." The Lord chuckled warmly, shaking his head. WHEN WILL YOU LOSE THAT SILLY PRIDE, MY LIGHTBRINGER? He nudged his remaining bishop forward. BISHOP TO QUEEN'S KNIGHT FIVE. AND DO TRY TO CALM DOWN. DON'T WANT YOUR BLOOD PRESSURE TO GO UP, DO YOU? His eyes twinkled with merriment at his friendly joke. "Is everything a joke to you?" Lucifer asked. IF YOU BELIEVE IT IS, the Lord smiled. IF YOU BELIEVE IT IS. "SHO-OKEN!" Michael stared at the screen with a look of sheer dismay as his side of the video game screen filled up with blocks, a number readout in the upper right corner reading 99 as the two little cartoon characters in the middle flickered to life, Sakura blasting the living daylights out of Donovan. Baal smiled wryly at Michael, his hands still on the joystick and buttons, chuckling, "What's the matter, Michael? Oh, wait," he smirked, holding up his hands, "I'm keen to guess... you only know how to play fighting games, right?" Michael fished a quarter from the front pocket of his shorts, stuffing his ripped T-shirt back into the waistband, and held the coin up in challenge. "One more game..." "Simon says, hop up and down on one leg!" Three Celestials hopped up and down on one legs. "I feel -ridiculous,-" Malphas grumbled, holding his host's pants cuff, panting as the out-of-shape body strained to keep hopping. "You aren't the only one," Laurence grumbled, his ankle gripped tightly in his hand, his breath slow and steady. "Oh, try to relax, you two," Novalis smiled, bouncing playfully as she held both arms out for balance, "it's only a game." "Simon says rub your chest with both hands!" "Then again," Novalis grumbled, reaching up to rub her breasts, "some people take the rules for granted..." "Whose idea was it to let Kobal be Simon -anyway?-" Malphas growled. Kobal just laughed and said, "Simon says sing all the songs from 'Annie!'" The three Celestials grumbled and began singing, "The sun will come out/ Tomorrow/ Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow/ There'll be sun..." Kobal laughed and laughed and laughed. No matter who falls out last, he thought, I'm the winner.... Lucifer stared across the game table, frowning. His defenses were weakened, as the Lord had finally brought his knight and bishop forward to pin his king as his other knight roamed at will across the board. Now, the only way Lucifer could see to victory lay in a risky gambit which would leave his remaining rook and knight totally committed. Should he wait and see what counters he could make against the Lord's offense? Should he risk it all on the dangerous gamble and hope for the best? His fingers toyed idly with the head of his knight as his mind raced around the possibilities. "Park Place," Lilith smiled. "With hotel, you owe me fifteen hundred." "Hm," Marc considered, picking out three orange bills from his carefully organized piles and handing them over to Lilith. "Your turn." Lilith smiled and rolled the dice, moving her token forward around Go, landing on the Reading Railroad. "Safe," she smiled. "Two hundred, please." Marc reached into the bank, drew out the last two $100 bills in the Monopoly set and handed them over. He looked from one side to the other, noting the huge stacks of money on both sides, the coating of houses and hotels running up and down most of the properties, the negotiated contracts and IOUs which, by now, essentially cancelled each other out. "You know," he said at last, "maybe it wasn't such a good idea to play Monopoly." Lilith nodded, sighing. "Perhaps some tennis?" "All right." Yves and Kronos stared at each other across a small table. Between them, on a table, lay a sealed card deck. Quietly, each looked at the other, Yves smiling the same inscrutable smile the Lord wore, Kronos the same frown Lucifer often sported when displeased. Neither reached for the deck of cards. Finally, Kronos spoke: "Draw?" Yves shrugged and extended his hand. "Accepted. Good game, by the way." Kronos declined to accept the hand, staring into the old man's sparkling eyes. "Just because I accept my fate does not mean I must do so graciously." "Ah, but Kronos," Yves's smile grew even wider. "This wasn't fate... it was destiny." Kronos's scowl deepened, as he gripped Yves's hand and shook it resentfully. "Another day, old man." "Anytime, young one," Yves shrugged. KNIGHT TAKES PAWN. CHECK. CHECKMATE IN THREE. Lucifer looked at the board one final time. His rook was one move, ONE MOVE, away from checkmating the Lord... but he would not be allowed to make that move. Instead, he had to move -here,- and then he would have to move -there,- and then he would be unable to move anywhere. Sighing, he knocked his king over in resignation. "You win. Again," he mumbled bitterly. "You always win." WELL, WE DON'T KNOW THAT YET. For once, the Lord looked serious and thoughtful, his hands clasped, index fingers steepled in thought. "You've one every game we've played so far," Lucifer griped, waving his hand angrily at the chessboard. BUT THE MAIN GAME IS NOT YET COMPLETE, the Lord said, and his eyes contained, for a brief moment, a hint of sadness. Shaking his head, he stood and stretched, looking up at the sun; it shone almost directly overhead, the day drawing on to the noon hour. HOW ABOUT ANOTHER GAME AFTER LUNCH? I HAVEN'T HAD GOOD CHINESE SINCE 1836 IN SHANGHAI. "You didn't have good Chinese -then-, either," Lucifer smiled. "I know this place downtown, however..." FAIR ENOUGH, the Lord smiled. BUT I'M BUYING. Lucifer scowled, "What does one have to do to get out of debt to you?" WHAT DOES ONE HAVE TO DO TO GET OUT OF DEBT TO ONESELF? Lucifer sighed, shaking his head. "Sometimes I just don't understand you." ONE DAY YOU WILL, the Lord smiled. LET'S GO EAT. And God, the Lord of Hosts, the Creator, and Lucifer, the Ruler of Demons, the Adversary, walked off, side by side. --- a little bit of silliness and fun from the Redneck Kris Overstreet, will write for food... | "Nah, they can't start the http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck | Apocalypse yet- the new Star c/o White Lightning Productions | Wars movies ain't come out http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ | yet. Who'd miss that?" Webmaster for Antarctic Press | --- Eli, on the War http://www.antarctic-press.com/ | ***QUESTION EVERYTHING*** ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #388 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.