From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Dec 8 00:04:11 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07265 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:04:11 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id XAA16325 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 23:48:26 -0600 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 23:48:26 -0600 Message-Id: <199812080548.XAA16325@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1042 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, December 7 1998 Volume 01 : Number 1042 In this digest: Re: IN> Superior's Hearts Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality IN> Atheists in IN and Oops! Re: IN> Politics and stuff Re: IN> Lilim and Malakim Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality Re: IN> Disturbance\Causation Re: IN> Disturbance\Causation Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality IN> Liber Servitorum Contest Rules IN> Arabic Djinn? Re: IN> Arabic Djinn? Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality IN> Story: Cutstone Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 19:42:52 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Superior's Hearts At 1:51 PM +0000 12/7/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >On Sat, Dec 05, 1998 at 02:21:01PM -0500, Frank Lazar wrote: >> Actually, relatively few of the Demon Princes were Archangels prior to >> their Fall. (The bumping up of status might have been one of the things >> Lucifer used in recruitment) > >In particular: > >Alaemon: I think he's Hellborn, and a former Servitor of Secrets. He's a Fallen of Revelation. 700 years ago, IIRC. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 17:04:28 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality > >>>IMC, Dominic is reasonably sensible, but he still doesn't share all my > personal opinions, and has different ideas from me about justice. In > short, don't make all your archangels agree with you personally, because > your players *will* notice.<<< > > Oh, hardly any of the Archangels share my personal opinions. The Demon Princes, on the other hand... David's right up there with them. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 20:03:50 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Atheists in IN and Oops! >>>Actually, that should say 'Nowhere in Canon does it say,' because it is a fact of Christian religion that anyone who is not baptised cannot go to Heaven regardless of their actions on Earth.<<< Incorrect. That is a belief of _some_ Christian denominations; it is by no means a universal belief among all Christians. In fact, most of the major denominations (including the RCC) do NOT take that position. This has been discussed on the list before. >>>Read _Dante's Inferno_ (Actually, read the whole _Divine Comedy_), it's got references to some of the souls who are in Hell because they were born before baptism.<<< Dante was a medieval writer; his works certainly reflect the beliefs of the time, but they are not Christian canon. >>>Oh, and about human souls becoming angels. It may not be in Canon but it is 'in reality'. The Archangel Metatron was human before becoming an AA, so sayeth some angelic texts.<<< There are lots of myths about humans becoming angels -- on the other hand, most early (and contemporary) Christian canon does agree with IN canon that humans do _not_ become angels or demons when they die. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 17:09:03 -0800 From: Greg Jensen Subject: Re: IN> Politics and stuff At 10:03 AM 12/7/98 +0000, you wrote: >In more enlightened >> times today, this seems to be a more noble goal, and I can easily see >> Archangel Lilith. Anybody else? > >No. Why would she redeem? She can get everything she wants in Hell. Because, even though she is said to be selfish, her description really doesn't seem remotely evil or selfish to me. Look at some of her rites. They seem like things any decent angel would also like to see. Greg Jensen http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gjensen/gregpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 17:14:44 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> Lilim and Malakim Leath Sheales wrote: > > Walter wrote: > > > That's it. The Bands are the dark reflections of the corresponding > > Choirs, the Balseraphs are the worst of the demons (at least according > > to the Malakite resonance), just as the Seraphim are supposed to be the > > highest among the angels. And it grades inward from there, toward > > humanity sort of in the middle. > > I'd disagree with this a little. In general, the bands are listed > from least human (Balseraphs) to most human (Impudites), but Shedim > and Lilim don't really fit the mold. Shedim are the most inhuman > monsters around (they HAVE to corrupt) and Lilim have more potential I don't see the Shedim as inhuman at all, other than in appearance (which, if you think about it, is just a lot a human spread out all over the placce...). Kyriotates represent (on the humanity scale, to me, anyways) that touch of the divine on the mind which pushes you to greater heights... and Shedim represent that touch of darkness on the mind that makes you become more and more evil. Like a conscience, and that twisted little voice which tells you everything is okay... > to be human-like than any other Band (they are the offspring of a > *special* human, after all). The Choirs I agree with, but I think Yeah, but they're still demons, according to Canon, and their resonance ability (and resonance source) is on the edge of down-to-earth and heading into an Ideal state. > the bands are more listed in correspondance with the Choirs, so > things get a little muddled. > > > Why Lilim are where they are on the celestial "non-human/human" scale is > > unknown to me, and as far as I know, there's no canon answer. They > > certainly look to be at least as human as Impudites, and more so than > > Shedim. No matter what way you look at them, Lilim, like their mother, > > are anomalies. > > Since their mother is human (sort of) I tend to see Lilim as > potentially the 'most human' demons (see above). > > Leath. I wonder how human she is now... What with all of those demonic Forces she must have gained over the years... - -- Brian A.H. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 17:20:43 -0800 From: Greg Jensen Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality At 10:55 AM 12/7/98 -0500, you wrote: >Just as an historical by-the-way, the *degree* to which the >Church condemns homosexuality varies over time. For instance, >in Dante's "Purgatorio," Dante was trying to be as orthodox as >possible in his theology, and depicts Purgatory as a sever-tiered >mountain with a different deadly sin purged on each tier. The >worst sin, Pride, is purged on the bottom-most tier. Lust he >judged the lightest, and it is purged at the top, just below >the Earthly Paradise. Both heterosexual and homosexual lust is >purged there, and the only distinction made between the two is >that the heterosexuals run around their circle of fire clockwise, >while the homosexuals do it counterclockwise. In fact, there is historical precedent for the Catholic church performing same-sex marriages in the middle ages. This is way off-topic, I know, but I thought it was interesting. I'd agree, Dominic and most any other Archangel (maybe there's an Archangel of hetrosexual relationships somewhere, but I doubt it) couldn't care one way or the other; I just don't think Dominic would approve of people openly flaunting the law (if homosexuality is against the rules). Greg Jensen http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gjensen/gregpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 20:20:11 -0500 From: Perestroika Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance\Causation 1) Destruction causes disturbance because the celestial in question is preventing the object/person/whatever from achieving its Fate or Destiny. Hence, saving a life would only cause disturbance if it did the same thing. 2) You can resist Geasa, and go against orders. Soldiers, like Celestials, are very often given only very general orders. If this involves killing someone, so be it. A Superior won't cause disturbance if his soldier decides to kill someone or destroy something. Likewise - even if you handed someone a gun and said "Shoot that man", they still have the choice to go against that. If they shoot the guy, it's of their own volition, though you did influence them. Likewise with a Geas - although they're tougher to get around. On the other hand, if you set up a trap so that when the target walks through a certain door, they get an anvil on the head, that causes disturbance. Likewise, if you happen to be using Corporeal Motion and drop a rock, and it hits J. Random Passerby and he dies, you cause disturbance. My question is this, and I'm sure it's been answered before: Does a Shedite who abandons its host as it's headed toward certain death - plunging out of an airplane at 20,000 feet without a parachute, for example, and then leaving the body - take dissonance? :) - -EDG, Mercurian of Jean? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 20:20:46 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance\Causation At 10:46 PM +0000 12/7/98, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: BTW, please don't send italics and bold text to the mailing list. Not everyone has a mail reader than can handle it. (Indicate emphasis by *asterices* or _underlines_ or /slashes/, so that it's all just good clean ascii.) >/Causation/ > >If causing a disturbance to the symphony is caused by changing the >way things were "supposed to be", then why doesn't saving someone's >life cause as much disturbance to the symphony as killing someone. Interesting question -- probably has to do with predetermination, which there isn't that much of in IN. >Also *what exactly does it mean to cause some thing to happen*? It means to *directly* cause it. Cut the brake lines yourself, push the button, etc. If you can sucker a human into doing it, then any disturbance that the act causes is too small for anyone to hear. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 17:30:40 -0800 From: Greg Jensen Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality At 05:05 PM 12/7/98 +0000, you wrote: > >On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > >> the sexual act is an act of intimacy, which is "perverted", if you like, >> by selling it to someone you don't know. It's the lack of intimacy in an >> act that usually requires supreme intimacy that's bad, I think. > >Do you consider prostitution to effectively be an offence against sex? I >can see arguments that Dominic may or may not care two hoots :-) > >He _would_ perhaps be opposed to an offence against intimacy, since >intimacy is tied up with trust, selflessness, and other generally angelic >things, but sex is in principle distinct from those as far as my >(personal) reasoning goes, so prostitution is a 'perversion' of sex, >rather than of intimacy. That may be where we differ on axioms. (Where >'we' means me, you and Dominic). I had sworn not to get involved in this prostitution debate anymore, but I did just notice something that seems to be relevent. We have been discussing Dominic's attitudes towards victimless crimes, and whether or not he feels these too should be punished. I have been one of the few who believes that Dominic would consider these criminals to be in need of justice, even if they aren't as big a concern as crimes with victims. So how to justify this? Well, these laws can all be rationalized by claiming there somehow is a victim. All these crimes are "perversions" of the way things "should" be. In truth, I think these laws are nothing more than ways to enforce your own aesthetics on everyone else, but people who support such laws can come up with hundreds of reasons why this is a serious offense. And if all else fails, you can claim you are protecting the criminal from himself, so there's your victim. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 20:54:39 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Liber Servitorum Contest Rules Liber Servitorum Contest Rules As you might guess, the Liber Servitorum is going to have a lot of characters in it. Enough that I'm hoping to run a contest... However, contests have rules. These Rules Must Be Followed Exactly. Anyone who doesn't follow them _will have their submission rejected_, and will probably NOT be notified. I anticipate being very busy. (And for every brilliant submission that didn't follow the rules, there will be five equally-brilliant ones that did. Guess which ones I'm going to read?) #1: All Submissions *MUST* Have Correct Headers. I want each submission to say: LIBER SUBMISSION: [character name and/or number] in its subject. I'm going to be running a filter program to put all these in a particular email folder, and if the Subject is wrong, then the submission will be lost in all my *other* email. #1A: Send them to "arcangel@io.com" or "emccoy@nh.ultranet.com." Any submissions sent to the list will _NOT_ be considered for the Liber Servitorum. Watch that "To" field in your email. #1B: 1 character per email. If there's more than that, then I won't look at any of them. #2: All Submissions Must Be Correct English. If the submission isn't close enough to good English for me to read easily to start with, I won't read it. (If you get who/whom mixed up, or have 1-2 honest typos, no biggie; anything more egregious than that, and I go on to the next one.) If English is obviously not your first language, get someone else to help you with it before submitting it to me. No, I'm too busy to help for this contest. Sorry. #2A: you will probably find it helpful read the SJ Games writers' guidelines. Yes, they're currently for GURPS and Pyramid. Read them anyway. http://www.sjgames.com/general/guidelines/writers/ You may also find http://www.sjgames.com/general/author/ to contain useful information. #2B: The correct headers are arcane things, but find them anyway. Those are listed at the site too. Bold is indicated by bold and italics are italics. (It's like HTML, but without trailing /.) #2C: ALL SUBMISSIONS MUST BE ASCII TEXT. No smart-quotes. *NO ATTACHMENTS*. Attachments go into a different folder and I have to go find them. The character must be in the body of the message. #2D: No libel or slander. Sorry, you can't make Bill Gates a demon. Or a Soldier. Or a mummy. You could make him an angel, but I don't really want famous humans to be "non-human," frankly. #2E: No obscenity. There are a hundred more immaginative ways to have someone curse than using the seven-dirty-words; imagination is good, right? #3: All Submissions Must Use Correct IN Terminology. If I see "a Shedim" or "Calabites" or "Lilims," I'm not going to be pleased. Likewise, no using "dissonance" for "disturbance," etc. (And though I use "Geasa" in my own games, the canon is "Geases" for the plural noun, or geas/geasing for the verb.) http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/stylesheet.html This is one of my pet peeves; if I'm tired, I'll stop reading anything that doesn't keep the plurals straight. #3A: Characters Must Conform To Canon. Yes, there are a lot of interesting characters out there that bend canon in a good cause. But I don't want to see them submitted for this book. #4: All Submissions Must Be No More Than 625 Words. Total. This is going to include a short vignette (maybe), the character stats (yes, those count as words), and descriptive text. If I want you to make a submission longer, I'll ask. First, I want to know if you can write that tightly. If you can't, then I don't read it. #4A: put your Word-count in front of the rest of the character, above the character itself. #5: No More Than 10 Submissions. That's right, I'll look at up to 10 of your submissions, but no more. (If I need more from you, I'll ask.) #5A: I repeat: 1 character per email. #5B: I repeat again: LIBER SUBMISSION: [character name and/or number] in the subject line of your email. #6: Make It A Wonderful Character. This is the trickiest -- the character has to be one that I like, and that The Guy Who Runs Steve Jackson Games likes. (Why is this rule number 6? Because no matter how wonderful the submission is, if it doesn't follow the rules above, I won't look at it. Pity, that.) #6A: You have 10 submissions for a reason -- I want to see a typical Seraph of Stone as much as I want to see the Bright Lilim of Judgment you're using as an NPC somewhere. In fact, I want to see the more "typical" characters *MORE*, and I want them to be *interesting*. (I fully expect to get at least 15 Brights, of which 5 will be serving Laurence, Dominic and David. Two will be Creation in service to Judgment. Prove me wrong, please.) #7: You Must Agree To The Following Nasty (but necessary) Conditions: #7A: All submissions become the property of Steve Jackson Games, to edit as they wish, change as they wish, use as they wish in future books, etc., _whether they are accepted for the book or not_. Even if a submission is accepted, it may be edited. (Don't submit your favorite fictional character unless you can deal with this; Maya won't be submitting Caliah, for instance, and I won't be submitting Betharan or Tebah.) _Especially_ if it's accepted, a character may get used in, say, someone else's vignette somewhere down the line. #7B: You will not attempt to sue or harass Steve Jackson Games or anyone else connected with the Liber Servitorum (e.g., me) if your submission is altered. (I anticipate re-writing _at least_ half of the vignettes; prove me wrong, please.) Ditto if it is not accepted -- _even if a similar submission is!_ No, we are not going to steal your ideas and fail to give you credit for them. People come up with the same ideas once in a while. It happens. (Especially if you base it off of something that we can look up in Gustav Davidson's _A Dictionary of Angels_.) #7C: You won't post the character on your web-page until you've seen the Liber Servitorum in print and made sure that it isn't already there. (Or sell it to a gaming magazine like Shadis, either -- submitting a character gives up all your rights to it, and gives them to Steve Jackson Games. Using it as you would a character you still owned the rights to... is theft. Be polite, I don't want to be the meanie. If you don't want to agree to these -- see 7A, above. I'm not sending in *my* favorite characters, because I want them to remain as much mine as possible!) (Despite some of my mildly snide comments on the chat the other evening, only the authors and playtesters will be seeing your material, and stuff I reject out of hand won't be shown around anywhere but the bitbucket.) Now, here's What I Want (and Don't Want): * Interesting, Useful Characters. Each character should have a well-defined personality. Each character should have a defined *game use*. I.e. (and I am endebted to Jo Hart for this concept), each character should have a role to play within the game: victim, sidekick, aggressor, villain, immediate superior/boss, etc. (Note that this is not the same as a Role, and also note that the _PCs_ are going to be the heroes -- don't submit a character that does everything himself and is so utterly perfect that if he's introduced into a game, he'd logically take over the campaign and Solve All Problems. Even "Here Comes The Cavalry" characters need a reason not to join up with the PCs every time they're in trouble.) You don't have to put the character's game-role into the description, but should have it firmly in mind when you're writing the character up. (And if you *did* put in a sentence saying what its game-role is, I wouldn't mind. Put it up with the word-count, and don't count it with the rest.) (I reiterate -- even if the character is 9 Forces and point-balanced, write it as an NPC, not a PC. PCs are either too bland (if painted broadly) or too detailed and weird. NPCs have roles in the universe and are a GM aid.) * No Superiors. (We have plenty of Archangels and Demon Princes. We don't need more.) Likewise, no ethereal gods. * _Few_ Word-bound, and _No New Ones._ There are plenty of Word-bound in the books already: check out the INdex/INcyclopedia for names and locations. (And include all previous page references to that character if you submit him/her/it, so I can find it easily.) Just don't use one who's stated to be dead now. Go to www.sjgames.com/in-nomine, and follow the Resources Link. I have a list of Word-bound at the bottom of this message which I *do not* want to see. Someone else is already working on them. (As a note: non-Superior Word-bound do not have Band/Choir Attunements, and their "Servitor Attunement" tends to be simple and relatively weak. They also get a special Rite. Both their ability and Rite need to be described. No, you can't go over the word-count budget to do so.) (Seneschals can be used, but they're going to count as Word-bound, mostly. (Even the attuned ones.) I will much prefer to see one illustrated in detail who was just a single-line mention in the past (or even not mentioned at all, with just his Tether described). Again, there are already a few of them mentioned, and anyone who has a playtest copy of the Liber Castellorum can come up with _countless_ others.) * Previously mentioned non-Word-bound. If you want to scrape together all the references to a character from an example, whose stats have not already appeared in Pyramid, and make it conform to all those, I may be pleased by that. (I'm trying to cut down on name-proliferation.) * A range of power-levels. Anything from demonling servants to lesser Word-bound, concentrating on the middle ground -- 7-11 Forces or so. I do want to see a few 7 Force demons. 7-9 Force celestials, ideally, will be point-balanced, so that they provide examples of character creation _as well_ as being cool NPCs. * A range of _kinds_ of characters. I don't want to see fifty Fire-Malakim. Even if they're all gems, this is not going to be the Big Book of Fire Malakim! Don't make your 10 submissions identical or interchangeable. * A range of _personalities._ To para-quote Em: Not all Lilim and Impudites are great wonderful people who are going to redeem at the drop of a hat. (Even the _nice_ ones aren't going to do this, 99.9% of the time! Yes, you can be selfishly nice; if it's no skin off your nose, it keeps the surrounding environment more pleasant to live in.) Not all angels are Nice either -- and not all non-Nice ones are headed for a Fall or dissonance! (I want to see the whole spectrum -- nice demons, truly evil nasty demons, enigmatic angels, nasty angels, nice angels, etc.) * Few Linked Characters. If you have two (or more) characters who are linked in some way -- archenemies, partners, parent-child, etc. -- and one is rejected, the other will probably get rejected too. 95% of the characters in the book should be able to stand alone. (This makes it easier to use them in someone else's campaign -- one doesn't have to worry about fitting in more than one NPC at a time.) Now, the categories are: Angels and Demons: these will be the majority of desired characters. I do not want to see any Grigori, celestial Children of the Grigori, or Nephallim/Nephalim. Outcasts and Renegades are okay. There may be as many as 2 Remnants accepted (1 per side). Relievers and Demonlings (inc. Imps & Gremlins): Familiars or otherwise. There will probably be only one reliever and at most 2 demonlings (imp and gremlin) in the final book. Tough competition. Don't duplicate the ones in the APG/IPG. Humans: I have some space for humans. I don't want many mundanes (and any mundanes _have to have a reason why a GM might want them in his game_). I do want Soldiers (both sides), Saints, sorcerers, Undead... Any Zombi, though, will have to be _brilliant_ -- zombis are dead, lacking in will, and rotting. Not very interesting NPCs. Humans must be brilliant. I do not want to see Joe Schmoe the Gas Station Attendant, even if he has the most fascinating fate or destiny; these should be humans (mundane or aware-but-not-Soldiers or otherwise) who will be interacting with the PCs, not just being the living McGuffin. Don't duplicate the undead in _Night Music_. Ethereals: Yes, I have some space for Ethereals. These are going to be tricky -- canon on them isn't as clear as for the others. (And some of the examples -- such as those in _Heaven & Hell_'s scenerio -- have errata. Check All Errata if you're planning to submit an ethereal.) I'm more likely to look favorably on a character which doesn't seem to have potential to make it really hard to retrofit ethereal canon around it. (That's an evil sentence, but it stands.) *NO* ethereal gods/ethereals of Superior class. I don't want to see anything of a higher "power level" than one of the Fair Folk. The format is going to be: Characteristics Vignette Description Art Notes (what the character looks like, roughly; this will be handed to the artist, and doesn't count for the wordcount. Remember that the art will be about [inches] by [inches], and we can't fit in great gory groupshots.) The vignette ***MUST*** concisely illustrate some facet of the character. It must ***NOT*** waste words, be "filler," or just be a chance to show off your great fiction-writing talents. It must be useful to a GM *and* fun to read. The Vignette does not necessarily need to introduce the character. It could come in the middle of the description, or even at the end. It *must* conform to the above. There does not have to be a vignette, and it does not have to be long. If you have a 9-Force, balanced character, I advise a *short* vignette. Say, 3 sentences, if you can manage that. Deadline for characters is: January 10. Format: - -------- General Character format: (Note that there is *no space* between the -Head: or @Normal: and the text that follows it. (Use exactly those capitalizations, too...) Also note that in the IN Stats section, each characteristic is separated by a , not spaces. There should be no spaces there. If your emailer inserts spaces for tabs, tell me. I am using CAPS as a placeholder for a variable value. Do not fill in the NAME of a character in all-caps.) @C-Head:NAME [if Word-bound] @D-Head: Angel/Demon/Seneschal of WORD/TETHER'S NAME @D-Head:CHOIR/BAND TITLE of WORD [If no distinctions, then "Title" is either "Servitor" or absent (if in good standing)] For Renegade and Outcasts, the last D-head reads: @D-Head:Renegade/Outcast CHOIR/BAND TITLE of WORD. For those in service to someone, the last D-Head reads: @D-Head:CHOIR/BAND TITLE of WORD in service to NAME The rest of the character sheet should be in this format: @Normal:Vignette, if any. [Vignette is commonly placed here in Cyclebooks; for the Liber Servitorum, it may be elsewhere in the description.] @IN Stats:Corporeal Forces - # Strength # Agility # Ethereal Forces - # Intelligence # Precision # Celestial Forces - # Will # Perception # @Normal:Vessel(s): Vessel1/# (gender/description [e.g., "female" or "old lady"]), Charisma +/-#, Sex Appeal +# [if any charisma/Sex Appeal]; Vessel2/# (gender/description), Charisma +/-#, Sex Appeal +#; [etc.] Role(s): Role Name1/#, Status/#; Role Name2/#, Status/#; [etc., making sure that if Roles are attached to a vessel, this is obvious.] Skills: [etc.] Songs: [etc.] Attunements: CHOIR/BAND SINGULAR of WORD, [etc], any distinctions Malakite Oaths: [if Malakite; a Malakite will have oaths! If he does not, he needs to.] Discord: [if any; a CALABITE will have Discord! If he does not, he needs to.] Artifacts: [if any] Special Rites: [if any] Special Ability (-ies): [if any; these are where "cute abilities" of the Word-bound should probably go] @Normal:The Rest Of The Description. - -------- When doing a Seneschal, the format is thus: Word Bound Seneschal: @C-Head:NAME @D-Head:Seneschal of TETHER'S NAME @D-Head:CHOIR/BAND TITLE of WORD Attuned Seneschal: @C-Head:NAME @D-Head:CHOIR/BAND TITLE of WORD [stuff] Attunements:[stuff], Seneschal (attuned to TETHER'S NAME) Alain, the talented person who does layout, says, "There should be a period at the end of a stat only if that stat is a sentence. Skills, Songs etc. don't need periods. Special abilities, descriptions of unusual artifacts etc. usually do need a period." - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Characters who have been spoken for already: Arael, the Angel of Birds Jophiel, the Cherub who guards the gates of Eden (Dominic) Mihr, Elohite Angel of Mercy (Dominic) Nathanael, Seraph Angel of Punishment (Gabriel) Pelial, Angel of Righteous Vengeance (Laurence) Raguel, Malakite executioner (Dominic) Raziel, Ofanite Angel of Mysteries (Yves) Sandalphon, the fastest Ofanite in Heaven Seraphiel, Seraph Angel of the Inquisition (Dominic) Azazel, Lucifer's Djinn secrtary Iblis, Baal's Djinn aid-de-camp "I'm Going to Hell," Lilim Demon of Gambling Debts (Mammon) Marau, Impudite seductress (Andrealphus) Mastema, Asmodeus' chief prosecutor (a Balseraph) Moloch, Impudite Demon of Blood Sacrifices (Baal) Murmur, Calabite Duke of the Game who commands all souls in Hades Saleos, Impudite Demon of Fecundity (Andrealphus) Sammael, Calabite Demon of Poison (Fleurity) Tamiel, Djinn Demon of the Deeps (Beleth) Tchort, Balseraph Demon of Atheism Vaphoron, Fallen Mercurian of Purity - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ (I just know I'm going to find something here that I wanted to fix before sending, but that's the ethereal god Murphy for ya.) (Oh, right. What do *you* get. At the moment, all I'm sure of is the fame part. Your name, in the front page. Other bennies to be determined later.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 21:15:03 EST From: Gruzzle@aol.com Subject: IN> Arabic Djinn? >I was also under the impression that they could kill their attunement if it >was part of a specific request of the person. So they can kill someone if >they ask. I also thought they could trick people into these requests, just >like the classic djinn from Arabian folklore. For example, they may say "I >wish I had a new porsche." The djinn says "as you wish, master" and drives >a porsche into the wisher. "your wish is my command." I do agree they could trick someone into requesting death, but they can't get away with dropping 1 million dollars worth of gold coins onto someone just because they wished for a million bucks. They have to be more cunning than that. They have to actually convince the person to request death or physical harm... and if the victim is trolling or tripping or whatever, then hey, it's even easier. (reminds me of "Waiting for Godot" when vladimir and estragon convince each other that hanging themselves would be fun.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 22:15:37 -0500 From: Perestroika Subject: Re: IN> Arabic Djinn? Gruzzle@aol.com wrote: > I do agree they could trick someone into requesting death, but they can't get > away with dropping 1 million dollars worth of gold coins onto someone just > because they wished for a million bucks. They have to be more cunning than > that. They have to actually convince the person to request death or physical > harm... and if the victim is trolling or tripping or whatever, then hey, it's > even easier. Well, sure. "I wish I had a million dollars" gets them a million dollars. Of course, a Djinn of Valefor might use Corporeal Form to shape himself into the target's shape and then rob a bank and kill everyone inside, giving the mark the money just before the cops arrive; a Djinn of Belial might burn the target's house down to get said target the insurance money ("What? You didn't have insurance?"), and one of Vapula might "invent" something in the target's name, get him insanely rich off it, and then reveal the debilitating side effect (vide Steve Martin's "The Jerk"). - -EDG, Mercurian of Jean? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 22:35:12 -0500 From: Perestroika Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality Greg Jensen wrote: > In fact, there is historical precedent for the Catholic church performing > same-sex marriages in the middle ages. This is way off-topic, I know, but > I thought it was interesting. I'd agree, Dominic and most any other > Archangel (maybe there's an Archangel of hetrosexual relationships > somewhere, but I doubt it) couldn't care one way or the other; I just don't > think Dominic would approve of people openly flaunting the law (if > homosexuality is against the rules). Mm. Interesting factoid, that I'd forgotten but that Perry and Ben (in the room at the moment) reminded me of - Blandine and Beleth were once lovers. If Dominic didn't condemn that, I don't think he's going to condemn homosexuality in general. :) - -EDG, Mercurian of Jean? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 23:01:10 -0500 From: Perestroika Subject: IN> Story: Cutstone This mucks about with canon slightly - but I had fun writing it. :) - -EDG - -- The figure got up out of the pile of rags, rubbed the sleep out of her eyes, and looked at the duo in the mouth of the alley. They were backlit - the many stories of building above, and the many layers of clotheslines and porches, denied the alley light except at high noon - and she could make out only their silhouettes. One was tall, wide, in a stance that suggested a powerful build; the other was perhaps a head shorter, obviously female, wearing what looked to be a power dress and heels, carrying a briefcase. "You are Cutstone, Malakite of Eli in service to Death, declared Missing in Action and Presumed Destroyed by your... colleagues." The woman spoke with an authority that was obviously inhuman. "I am Adrienne, Seraph of Judgment. This is Xavier, Cherub of the Sword. You will come with us." Cutstone looked down. Still clothed in this body, the one his Superior had given him as a test. It had withstood what he'd put it through so far. Of course, an 18-year-old human female was generally not the most resilient of bodies, but his Superior had at least given Cutstone the benefit of a powerful vessel. Clad now in torn, faded fatigues, trusty duffel bag still slung over her shoulder, the Malakite looked every inch of her a simple ragamuffin to the casual onlooker. "I am Cutstone," she said finally, "I suppose." She looked up at the Seraph and the Cherub. "What do Judgment and the Sword want with me, though?" "Dominic," said the Seraph, "wishes to question you on the issue of your journey into... foreign lands. Laurence has sent his representative because he is unable to locate one of his servitors - an Elohite who was apparently accompanying you. Marc has sent a request of the same sort." "Laurence...." The angel thought slowly. "Simon. And Porter... served Marc. I think. Malaki... bastard betrayed us. Shanti... in Trauma. Madeline... dead. Human, so she's dead. The Box!" Cutstone suddenly stood bolt upright, looked hard at the Seraph. "What happened to the Box?" Seraph and Cherub exchanged confused glances. "We were told nothing of a box," the Seraph admitted. "And Simon and Joseph are gone?" Cutstone growled softly. "Then Hell probably has the Box. The... other place hurt. It hurt to be away from God, to not be able to hear His Symphony. Hurt Joseph and Simon, too. Good people - I hope they didn't Fall. Know I didn't..." The Malakite retreated into her thoughts again, looking pensive. Adrienne and Xavier exchanged another look. "Cutstone, I have orders to bring you with us-" Cutstone cut her off with a sharp look. "I've been told just how much your Superior likes my Archangel and his servitors. If Dominic honestly wants to talk to me, tell him he can find me here." Adrienne looked confused. Dominic had told her that Cutstone was a Remnant, with no Ethereal Forces to speak of. "I suppose his willpower would be unaffected by that," said Xavier softly, following the same train of thought, "but still - he should be more tractable than this." "Cutstone," the Seraph spoke, "I need you to come with me. Jean and Yves also are looking for information on this topic. Your cooperation will be appreciated, and your hardships will not go unrewarded." "Jean... and Yves? Oh, Lightning and Destiny... right." Cutstone sat down on a trash can and stared at the ground. A puddle of water was slowly sending a tendril out toward the far wall. Adrienne sighed and opened her briefcase. She'd hoped it wouldn't come to this. "Cutstone," she said, taking out a sheaf of paper, "I have here a subpoena from Dominic himself. You will come with me." Cutstone looked up. The water had run into a piece of paper. "That's nice. Tell Dominic if he wants to know more, he can come and find me." The angel looked down at the water again, which was managing to slide around the paper. "I've told you everything I can remember right now." Xavier looked at Adrienne sadly and shook his head. "I don't think we're going to get much farther with him... um, her. Let's let her be; tell Dominic this one isn't much more than a remnant and what she told us, and I'll tell Laurence the same. It's only true, and it's all we've got. If we need him later, I can always find him." "But..." She concentrated for a moment, then deflated visibly. "You're right. Let's go. Sorry to take up your time, Cutstone." The Malakite nodded slowly, then returned to watching the puddle. Seraph and Cherub were long gone when the water finally reached the far wall and the angel looked up. "Time to move," she said softly, and the ancient man cleverly disguised as a pile of rags stood up and bowed to her, a gesture which she returned. "Dominic'll be down shortly." "So I heard," came the withered reply. "I'll return for you when he's gone." The old man grinned disarmingly, as he always did, touched the Malakite's forehead lightly, and, while Cutstone was enraptured by the ecstasy of the new Force, he slipped away into the daylight. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:33:28 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality In a message dated 12/7/98 9:44:04 PM Central Standard Time, anthoch@earlham.edu writes: > Mm. Interesting factoid, that I'd forgotten but that Perry and Ben (in > the room at the moment) reminded me of - Blandine and Beleth were once > lovers. If Dominic didn't condemn that, I don't think he's going to > condemn homosexuality in general. :) Celestials are genderless, remember? Brian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 22:45:26 -0700 (MST) From: Jason Corley Subject: Re: IN> Law and Judgment and Morality On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, David Edelstein wrote: > > >>>If any Archangel is going to be the kind of 'knee-jerk reactionary' that > Mr. Edelstein so dislikes, it is Dominic, because he Knows He Is Right.<<< > > The difference between him and most knee-jerk reactionaries being that he > probably IS Right about 99% of the time. Heh. I just think that in many cases, Dominic himself would Reserve Judgment if he wasn't sure. He's not the angel of Guesses, not even Good Guesses, Best Guesses or Lucky Guesses. Jason onwards ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1042 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.