From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Mar 6 04:40:21 1998 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 EAA29324 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 04:40:21 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id EAA22986 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 04:12:04 -0600 Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 04:12:04 -0600 Message-Id: <199803061012.EAA22986@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 #661 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 Friday, March 6 1998 Volume 01 : Number 661 In this digest: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Animal Sapience IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? IN> Cats & Fools IN> Animal Sapience IN> Fascism IN> Falling Malakim IN> Falling Malakim IN> Animal Sapience Re: IN> Cats IN> Re: IN- David (re: Judaism) IN> Re: IN- Fascism (was Re: Judaism) IN> Re: IN- Geometry IN> Re: IN- Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Celestials Re: IN> Fascism (was Re: Judaism) Re: IN> Animal Sapience Re: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) IN> Re: Divine Wrath Re: IN> Celestials IN> Cloned Lilim Re: IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? Re: IN> Dru Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Wind ( was Re: IN> David (re: Judaism)) Re: IN> Celestials ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 18:29:05 -0500 From: Pete Overton Subject: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too Hello again! Yes, the dashing young hero braves to post again in the same day, truly a miracle, but his questions must be answered and hopefully not at all decisively. ::smile:: (1) I was reading about the Archangel of Death, Charon, written by Leath Sheales (I liked it BTW :) and Leath has a section on the reasoning why Charon was the second AoD as opposed to the first, that when Lucifer rebelled and went south taking xxx angels with him, the Archangel vanished mysteriously and Charon and Saminga (I think that's who it was) both popped up for Death on opposite sides of the war. So my first question is, does this duality of angels exist across the board and if not how far does it go? Is every Word paired off with an opposite on the enemy side? Let me point out too that if this is the case, it is perhaps wildly ironic that the victory of the War will most likely be to merge with their opposites and literally obliterate the enemy. Otherwise any victory would not serve the Balance in the least and end up scarring creation. Something to think about. ::smile:: (2) Okay, listen, I know I am a flaming idiot, I have accepted this, but can someone give me an idiot's version of the idea behind the Words? I don't really understand the hierarchy involved in it, which is to say, the structure of the Words. I assume since Lucifer was the first created (Yves, pish :) that he was given the Word of Light since light was one of the first words uttered by God. But I don't really understand how they went from there, how you determine which Word an Archangel has, and so forth. Basically I need the whole nine yards on the subject spelled out so that my feeble mind can understand it. Please. :) (3) I would like to drag Clarielle kicking and screaming into an IN PBeM, but there seems to be an abhorrent lack of them around. If anyone on the list knows of one or is running one, please let me know because I would really like to get into one! (4) Has anyone archived a comprehensive history of Heaven and Hell and the War in general? The history from the APG seems a little thin. I realize the current Cycle probably expands on it a lot but I have not the revenues to purchase such lovely books at the current moment although you can bet I will get to it ASAP. :) (5) Has anyone considered sort of alternate evil possibilities? What I mean is, as opposed to Good God Bad Devil, something maybe like Tyrannical God Different-Agenda'd Devil? Or any information on what literally appears to be the evolution of God (ie. starts off rather cold and cruel and grows to be warm and loving)? I don't know, these probably aren't the best first-time-on-the-list questions to ask. Thank you ahead of time for any help you can give. :) Pete E-Mail: pover@golden.net ICQ#: 2192976 "Today is the tomorrow that you were worried about yesterday, and now you know why." -- Fortune Cookie ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 11:00:08 +1100 From: christopher.stevenson@aihw.gov.au (Chris Stevenson) Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) >Jo Hart wrote: >> > >> >> Scary thoughts. But dogs can't be trained to do the washing up! >> > >Neither can many humans... I wonder who invented disposable plates etc.? >-- >Mark McKenzie >E-mail: markadv@kinekom.com >ICQ 7946364 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 11:02:24 +1100 From: christopher.stevenson@aihw.gov.au (Chris Stevenson) Subject: Re: IN> Cats >On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 09:43:51AM +1100, Chris Stevenson wrote: >> >Hey, I'm *trying* to put it into IN perspective.... What are >> >Soldiers and servants, if not pets? >> > >> >> Hubris? >> >On whose part? In what way? > >Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. An angel's? Human pets? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 16:15:49 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Animal Sapience >At 8:26 AM -0500 3/5/98, David Edelstein wrote: >[Re: IQ tests] > >> Gorillas being a good example; is a gorilla really "as smart" as >>a retarded human? In many ways, the human is probably smarter, and yet the >>human is defective and probably could not function on his own, whereas the >>gorilla is a fully functional gorilla who is able to interact with her >>_natural_ environment much more effectively than can the human. Giving an >>IQ test designed for humans to an animal will only prove that animals don't >>have human thought processes. > >What about "wild children," who somehow survive in a non-human >environment? >Animals definitely have more hardwiring for the basics of their >lives (a cat will pounce and bite, though they usually have to >learn how to kill effectively). And that hardwiring is the >"adult survival" stuff, most of the time. But if you can sort >out what's hardwiring and what's actual learning/reasoning....? > >(Humans have hardwiring too. We just don't notice, 'cause we >all have it. If you ever want proof of human hardwiring, then spend a coulple of nights at a convenience store during the night shift. You'll see people that are literally incapable of "learning" beyond a set level. Animals have a better response system than these individuals. I've seen a guy arrested for public intoxication 7 times in a week. You'd think that he would learn after 7 times, nope. The only different reaction that showed that this experience had any lasting affect was that one night he asked the clerk not to call the cops. Most animals will hunt somewhere else after such a bad experience. I tend to think that animals are a bit more sentient. Armand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 16:57:45 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? >David Streeter wrote: >> >> I read somewhere that in the US, the name David is an almost exclusively >> Jewish name, whereas here in Australia it is a reasonably common name, >> regardless of faith. >> >> I was wondering if that is true? It was written in a reasonably old book >> of baby names. > >At one time this was true, but at this point I don't believe it. How >old is that book by the way? I imagine with info like that it would be >written in the early 1900s maybe as late as 1940 0r 50. Well, I don't have the book anymore, but I think my parents used it to name me, so hmmm... 25 years old? :-) David means "beloved" ("of God"?) in Hebrew, apparently. Interesting choice for the brutal Archangel of Stone! David ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 17:01:26 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? >Quite untrue. I've known many Davids here in the US, some Jewish, more not. I guess it's one of those international misconceptions. Like, that we don't have skyscrapers here, and wild kangaroos roam the streets :-) Or that my country is in the middle of Europe somewhere :-) How many Australians are on in_nomine-l, anyway? I know there is at least one other. SurturZ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:33:33 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Cats & Fools >Beth, I hope you're properly ashamed of yourself. How dare you talk about In Nomine on the list when David is talking about the real world? :ț >>>On an almost completely unrelated issue, why does David refer to himself as a fool on his web page?<<< If you read the explanation for the handle, you'll know. ;) - -David aka Amadán ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:26:35 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Animal Sapience >I was thinking that until there's a cat sitting in a chair with a talk show host spilling its guts about how it anguishes over killing things, its all heresay.< Well, that implies we can't know anything about animal behavior unless/until animals can talk to us, which is not true. >>>>Mmm, no. A scientist doesn't "fight against" evidence, he _tests_ it. Perhaps, but does one term exclude the other? Scientists of different persuasions 'fight' tooth and nail to validate their own position and deny others.<<< That's a metaphorical expression to describe a vigorous debate, which is definitely part of the scientific method. Saying a scientist "fights against" evidence means to me that you're talking about someone perceiving legitimate evidence and attempting to suppress or ignore it, rather than introducing contradictory evidence and seeing where the weight of evidence falls. >>>Perhaps, but subjective usually infers bias.<<< Yes, but I repeat, it doesn't mean it is necessarily inaccurate. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:38:32 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Fascism >Hence I repeat that it irks me that David supports extreme clannishness, because I personally find that behaviour repulsive.< _You_ find that behavior repulsive. Which is part of the point of In Nomine; angels often do things and support things that many humans would consider evil. We can't see the "big picture" the way they can. Or alternatively, sometimes they don't look closely enough at the "little picture". >>>There are people who close the castle gates all night to keep out the cold and wet, and there are people who will open them if a stranger seeks shelter. <<< And David is the sort who says "If you weren't smart enough to get together with a group and build a castle, why should we weaken ourselves by allowing you into ours?" - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:44:46 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Falling Malakim >As for Fall of the Malakim itself, I hope it isn't some sort of teaser. I think that it will provide great roleplaying opportunities if some Malakim do fall. Having fundamental parts of your belief system overturned at a stroke is surely very traumatic, especially if friends of yours are involved.< An excellent example of why one person's bane is another person's role-playing opportunity. Obviously, if Fall of the Malakim says that Malakim _can_ Fall, some people will be happy and some people will be unhappy. If Fall of the Malakim says that Malakim _can't_ Fall, some people will be happy and some people will be unhappy. This suggests to me that a diversity of opinion exists among hard-core In Nomine fans. Go figure. Bear in mind that whether or not Malakim do in fact Fall in "Fall of the Malakim," individual GMs have the freedom, _as always_, to *change anything they don't like for their campaign*! - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:44:46 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Falling Malakim >As for Fall of the Malakim itself, I hope it isn't some sort of teaser. I think that it will provide great roleplaying opportunities if some Malakim do fall. Having fundamental parts of your belief system overturned at a stroke is surely very traumatic, especially if friends of yours are involved.< An excellent example of why one person's bane is another person's role-playing opportunity. Obviously, if Fall of the Malakim says that Malakim _can_ Fall, some people will be happy and some people will be unhappy. If Fall of the Malakim says that Malakim _can't_ Fall, some people will be happy and some people will be unhappy. This suggests to me that a diversity of opinion exists among hard-core In Nomine fans. Go figure. Bear in mind that whether or not Malakim do in fact Fall in "Fall of the Malakim," individual GMs have the freedom, _as always_, to *change anything they don't like for their campaign*! - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 20:52:20 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Animal Sapience >What about "wild children," who somehow survive in a non-human environment? They were obviously surviving well enough in a "natural" environment... A retarded human might be able to function perfectly well in a very simple environment -- they just can't interact with more socalized humans.< A "wild child" would have to be very lucky and _very_ adaptive to survive in the wild, since without our tools, humans aren't exactly the most well-equipped species when it comes to hunting for food, finding shelter, and avoiding predators. I doubt a retarded person would survive in such a situation; he wouldn't have the adaptivity. >(And a feral child apparently doesn't have very "human" thought processes, from what I recall of the matter -- after a certain age, language is harder to learn, for instance. And sensibly, they don't think clothing is very comfortable.)< Clothing is cultural. And language acquisition is a cognitive process all its own, which is only loosely tied to intelligence. The younger you are, the easier it is to learn languages; this is why children pick up languages much faster than adults. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 14:03:55 -0400 (EDT) From: gibsonc@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Cats We should drop this, Dogs can learn tricks because they are smarter than cats, Cats are the spawn of satan and the root of all evil, next to murder and things like that. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 19:02:00 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- David (re: Judaism) >> I agree. The "worst" angel is still "better" for humankind than the >> "best" demon. Another thing to keep in mind is that AA David is probably more interested in saving people's souls than saving their bodies. SurturZ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 19:25:44 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Fascism (was Re: Judaism) >Rev. Pee Kitty suggested that David hasn't been stated to support Fascism, >which I would probably like to be true, so I'll check. To support a >philosophy which has never lead to long-term good, because it is always >badly parcelled, is daft. Even Dominic realised eventually that the more >extreme methods of the Inquisition were a Bad Thing. In defense of my Archangel, I'd like to say that David "counts skinheads among his followers". True, skinheads are normally associated with fascists, but that does not mean that he supports fascism. It could merely mean that some of his soldiers are skinheads, depending how you want to run it. And not ALL skinheads are his followers - the skinheads in "No Dinero" aren't, for example. As far as I can tell, David subscribes to the (Nietszchean? - sp?) philosophy "What doesn't kill me makes me stronger". The brutality his servants employ is out of kindness - to prepare mankind for the yet greater brutality to come: armageddon. Encouraging humans to fight each other is in preparation for them to fight Satan and his minions. Then again, my opinions could be the old dissonance acting up again. I think it's going to rain... :-) SurturZ Dissonant Elohite of Stone ...who things IN would be much the poorer for lack of bastard AAs ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 19:29:17 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Geometry >the fall. one of the angels to fall Remiroel, the angel of art, was Isn't "Art" the angel of art? Or is he in pyramid, rather than canon? SurturZ Dissonant Elohite of Stone ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 19:43:59 PST From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Cats >We should drop this, > >Dogs can learn tricks because they are smarter than cats, > >Cats are the spawn of satan and the root of all evil, next to murder and >things like that. Agreed. "Dogs are the best people" [The Fauves]. Cats are evil. And smelly. Admittedly, dogs are smelly too, but a *friendly* kind of smelly. :p SurturZ Habbalite of Factions - "Dog or Cat? Choose now!" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:25:43 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Cats >We should drop this, > >Dogs can learn tricks because they are smarter than cats, > >Cats are the spawn of satan and the root of all evil, next to murder and >things like that. I secound. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:32:22 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Celestials An idea I've been toying with is that the basic nature of each choir of angels is tied to one of the 7 cardinal or theological virtues. Like this: Justice Seraphim Faith Cherubim Hope Ofanim Prudence Elohim Fortitude Malakim Temperance Kyriotates Charity Mercurians I could see the Elohim and Kyriotate associations being switched, as well as the Cherub and Malak associations. Though I think I will simply make this an in-game argument, with different angels arguing which virtue their choir represents, and with no mechanical effect whatsoever. - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:39:31 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Fascism (was Re: Judaism) > > Okay, I'd point out that Fascism itself is not an evil idea; it's > > 'evil' because people associate it with Hitler (which isn't quite > > right - Fascism was the Italians) and other dictators. > > Accepted - sort of. Fascism could be applied in a non-racist manner, > but the very idea 'we stand together' almost inevitably leads to > 'and you aren't in the group, so stuff you.' There is that. > Hence I repeat that it irks me that David supports extreme > clannishness, because I personally find that behaviour repulsive. > There are people who close the castle gates all night to keep out > the cold and wet, and there are people who will open them if a > stranger seeks shelter. I think, if you wish to have him be a little nicer, that he would support lower restrictions on who can join. Although I see him as being very stern; you can be part of the group, but if you break the rules, you're on your own, if the group doesn't actually come after you. > > Fascism has nothing inherently against foreigners. > > In principle maybe not. In practice, yes it does, because it > advocates extreme patriotism, which leads to nationalism, via the > principle that 'my country is inherently better than yours'. Agreed; it does usually lead to that. > > David supports Fascism because of it's 'United We Stand' philosophy, > > not because of the xenophobia that is often parcelled with it. > > Rev. Pee Kitty suggested that David hasn't been stated to support > Fascism, which I would probably like to be true, so I'll check. To > support a philosophy which has never lead to long-term good, because > it is always badly parcelled, is daft. Well, I think he supports the philosphy of strength in numbers, and agrees with that aspect of Fascism, rather than supporting Fascism wholely. There are plenty of example of strength from community that don't involve the clannishness (although the best one I can think of at the moment is the SCA, strangely enough...) > Even Dominic realised eventually that the more extreme methods of > the Inquisition were a Bad Thing. Sayz who? ;-) In my game, Sammael (Uriel's successor to the office of Divine Judge) Fell like a stone...he's the Demon Prince of the Inquisition (ie - Asmodeaus...) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:39:31 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Animal Sapience > > Well, IQ tests are not considered all that significant except > > as a very general indicator. They are notoriously culturally > > biased (as your example indicated), and below (or above) a > > certain threshold, they are virtually worthless. > > Wouldn't the cultural bias factor mean that the test would tend to > *under*-estimate the intelligence of a subject from outside the > culture? Meaning gorillas would be smarter than indicated. I would point out that one of the first apes to ever learn sign language used it to lie. When asked who had crapped on the floor, he first indicated that it was one of the researchers; when pressured, he admitted that he had been wrong - it had been the janitor... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:39:31 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too > Yes, the dashing young hero braves to post again in the same day, > truly a miracle, but his questions must be answered and hopefully > not at all decisively. ::smile:: Out of curiousity, do you have a website? > So my first question is, does this duality of angels exist > across the board and if not how far does it go? Is every Word > paired off with an opposite on the enemy side? It depends how you mean opposite, and even then it varies. For instance, the opposite of Fire is Fire, but the opposite of Stone (Unity) is Factions; one pair are reflections of each other, while the other is polar opposites. > Let me point out too that if this is the case, it is perhaps > wildly ironic that the victory of the War will most likely be to > merge with their opposites and literally obliterate the enemy. > Otherwise any victory would not serve the Balance in the least and > end up scarring creation. In canon it is implied that very little of the duality is truely symbolic; Yves and Kronos are about the only canon duality that is (oh, yeah, in case you haven't heard - Kronos is apparently a fallen aspect of God, not a Balseraph. Go figure). Even the duality between Gabriel and Belial is more a product of having exactly the same word, and should Belial die, Gabriel wouldn't have any problem going on without him. After all, she didn't have a polar opposite before the Fall... However, if you like the Dark Crystal-esque feel, by all means go for it. Play up the mirror between Gabriel and Belial. Make Michael and Baal true opposites, instead of simply tangetal opposites. Make Beleth and Blandine aspects of one unified entity... > (2) Okay, listen, I know I am a flaming idiot, I have accepted > this, but can someone give me an idiot's version of the idea > behind the Words? I don't really understand the hierarchy > involved in it, which is to say, the structure of the Words. > I assume since Lucifer was the first created (Yves, pish :) > that he was given the Word of Light since light was one of > the first words uttered by God. But I don't really > understand how they went from there, how you determine which > Word an Archangel has, and so forth. Basically I need the > whole nine yards on the subject spelled out so that my > feeble mind can understand it. Please. :) There is mystical rules behind the hierarchy involved in Words, and trying to make one will only cause your poor head to ache. Trust me. Having said that: Words are a way of attuning an angel or demon to a specific part of the Symphony; they are granted to angels by the Seraphim Council, and to demons by Lucifer. This attunement gives the Celestial special powers related to that part of the Symphony, and the ability (at some level) to bestow that power to others. However, it makes that Celestial tied to their Word; if their Word is Cheeseburgers, and Cheeseburgers become less important to the Symphony, they loose power. The heirarchy itself is more political than mystical. The angel of Marijuanna (assuming there is one) would probably serve either Novalis (because Marijuanna is a plant, which furthers her Word) or Eli (because it fits in with his attitude); the demon of Atomic Bombs might be contested for between Baal, Belial, and Beleth (for all the nightmares atomic bombs have caused). As for who is made Archangel or Demon Prince - DPs are elevated to that position by Lucifer. It hasn't been firmly established, however, whether the Seraphim Council can elevate AAs, or whether that is solely God's role. > (3) I would like to drag Clarielle kicking and screaming into > an IN PBeM, but there seems to be an abhorrent lack of them > around. If anyone on the list knows of one or is running > one, please let me know because I would really like to get > into one! Actually, there are plenty, but most of them have already filled. New ones pop up every once in a while, so if you do not find one soon, don't dispair... > (4) Has anyone archived a comprehensive history of Heaven and Hell > and the War in general? The history from the APG seems a little > thin. I realize the current Cycle probably expands on it a lot but > I have not the revenues to purchase such lovely books at the > current moment although you can bet I will get to it ASAP. :) No history archived; most of us use alternate histories anyway. That is a good idea, however... > (5) Has anyone considered sort of alternate evil possibilities? What > I mean is, as opposed to Good God Bad Devil, something maybe like > Tyrannical God Different-Agenda'd Devil? Or any information on what > literally appears to be the evolution of God (ie. starts off rather > cold and cruel and grows to be warm and loving)? I don't know, > these probably aren't the best first-time-on-the-list questions to > ask. You haven't encountered Dark Victory, Bright Victory, Em's In Nomine backwards, or my In Nomine sideways, have you? Hehehe... Dark Victory - Hell wins, mostly. After winning Armageddon, Lucifer realizes he has doomed the universe, and repents, redeeming to the position of the AA of Light. The War begins anew, between angels and demons on the side of the Preservers, who want to prevent the universe's destruction, and the loyal-to-hell Destroyers, headed by Saminga, who want to destroy everything, and who currently control most of the Celestial Plane. Bright Victory - Heaven wins, but not in a good way...there is a second rebellion against the destruction of DPs and not-so-good AAs after the victory... In Nomine backwards - akin to watching TV with the contrast almost all the way down. Nasty good guys, nice demons, and lots of uncertainty as to who is truely Right. In Nomine sideways - Yahweh is a big old Ethereal spirit, who just managed to get more powerful than the others... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:39:31 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) > Yes, it is -- but check out Dogs -- they have Int of 1-3 themselves! > This is scary. p. IN191... So if the average dog has 2 > intelligence, then the difference between a dog and a human is > actually *smaller* than a human and an Intelligence 6 celestial... And the difference of intelligence between the dumbest dogs (and trust me, there are some doozies) and an average human is still less than the difference between the human and the celestial. > Ow. I think my head hurts. Of course, if you go by chance of success, it get's even nastier, but we won't go there, now will we? (Okay, maybe we will: The average celestial succeeds at a Intelligence roll about 42% of the time. The average human (3 Int) succeeds about 8% of the time. The average dog (2 Int) succeeds about 3% of the time. Thus, the average celestial is 5 times as smart as the average human, while the average human is about 3 times as smart as the average dog. Luckily, the stupid dogs won't succeed at an unmodified intelligence roll at all, so we don't have to worry about them. Woof.) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 23:54:42 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: IN> Re: Divine Wrath >From: Elizabeth McCoy > >At 8:06 PM +0000 3/5/98, Jo Hart wrote: >>Good grief! Sharon (Malakite of fire, personification of Gods wrath etc >>etc) only has Int 3. Dogs must be cheaper to create and easier to control >>than celestials are... >> >>I think Gabriel should be told! > > (Only Intelligence 3? Personification of God's Wrath? >Hm. What does this say about the virtues (pun intended after the >fact) of Wrath, anyway?) "Anger -- no peevish fit of temper, but just, generous, scalding indignation -- passes (not necessarily at once) into embracing, exultant, re-welcoming love. That is how friends and lovers are truly reconciled. Hot wrath, hot love. Such anger is the fluid that love bleeds when you cut it. The /angers/, not the measured remonstrances, of lovers are love's renewal. Wrath and pardon are both, as applied to God, analogies; but they belong together in the same circle of analogy -- the circle of life, of love, and deeply personal relationships. All the liberalising and 'civilising' analogies only lead us astray. Turn God's wrath into mere enlightened disapproval, and you also turn His love into mere humanitarianism. The 'consuming fire' and the 'perfect beauty' both vanish." C.S. Lewis, Letters to Malcom, ch. 18 - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 21:35:48 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Celestials > Justice Seraphim > Faith Cherubim > Hope Ofanim > Prudence Elohim > Fortitude Malakim > Temperance Kyriotates > Charity Mercurians Most of that actually works pretty well. I would agree with your suggestion of switching the Kyrios and Elohim; Elohim seem more Temperance to me than Prudence, and you must always be Prudent when politely borrowing somebody else's body :) - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 02:11:24 -0500 From: "Ehrbar" Subject: IN> Cloned Lilim >Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:20:30 -0500 (EST) >From: Emily Dresner >I agree! I agree! If any old Demon Prince can have Malakim, then any >old Demon Prince can have Lilim all to themselves. Bring on the >cloned sheep! Bring on the symmetric armies of identical celestials! >Woo hoo! To hell with Lilith! To hell with exclusivity! Yes! Em, you want a job over here in Paperback Books? I like your sense of excess -- we'll put you in the RPGs division, TSR subsection. I need a few more overpowered immortal female wizards to tease Elminster, and your Lilim-cloning idea proves that you're fully qualified. You will be under both Asmodeus and Haagenti in that post, but that just means more opportunities for advancement. Trust me -- after all, I'm a Calabim, not a Balseraph. (Yess, this is all a subtle way of saying I'm not thrilled with the idea of Falling malakim, either.) Steve, Duke of Paperback Books, Calabim of Haagenti ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 07:21:51 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- [Fluff] David? At 16:57 05/03/98 PST, you wrote: > > >David means "beloved" ("of God"?) in Hebrew, apparently. Interesting >choice for the brutal Archangel of Stone! > I'm not so great on names but I do know that people often shorten David (in hebrew-speaking circles) to Dov, which means 'bear'. jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 09:27:19 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Dru On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 02:19:42PM -0500, bruce dykes wrote: > > 2: We haven't been given any details about Dru's victims. If they're all > innocent teenagers, then Dru is bad, very bad. But maybe they're not, maybe > he's looking for the school drug dealers and bullies. I'm sure that if he had, it would have been mentioned. And to be honest, I doubt that he would have interfered with Hugo's friends, given their relationship. And the deaths of those people wouldn't have had the same impact if they were universally despised. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 09:36:57 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 11:39:31PM +0000, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > > The average celestial succeeds at a Intelligence roll about 42% of > the time. The average human (3 Int) succeeds about 8% of the > time. The average human actually has an Int of 20/6, which can't be modelled on a 2d6 system. And given the way stats in In Nomine work, most humans will be in the 3-5 range. The system breaks down very badly when dealing with non-celestial stats, so I don't use those probabilities when conceptualising about them. I use White Wolf concept instead, mapping 2pts in an In Nomine characteristic to 1 in White Wolf. I know the probabilities don't map, but I don't want them to map. The concept maps well enough. And it does handy things like give me a Feats of Strength chart so I can know what celestials can do with 12 strength. > Luckily, the stupid dogs won't succeed at an unmodified intelligence > roll at all, so we don't have to worry about them. > It may be noted that unmodified intelligence rolls don't tend to happen. Either you have the knowledge, in which case it's intelligence + level, or you don't, in which case the default kills your roll. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 09:48:45 -0000 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: Wind ( was Re: IN> David (re: Judaism)) Kevin writes: > Personally, on the concept level, I also find Janus very scary. Change is a frightening thing. You're hard-wired to feel like that. But if things can change, then they can get better. If things stagnate then they can only get worse. IMO this is why it doesn't say anything about beneficial change, because thats a destiny kind of thing. When you set something up for a big change you don't really know what all the fall-out is going to be, you just know that whatever happens, it won't stay the same. So its all about risk-taking and opening people's eyes to the fact that the future doesn't have to be the same as the past. ie. A mercurian walks into a bar (surely not!?!) and spots a guy who is trying to decide where his life is going. He is bored with his job and just split up with his wife etc etc. The angel sits down next to him and says 'You know, you could just sell up your house, withdraw all your life savings and spend a year hitch-hiking round Australia.' And the guy gives it a funny look and finishes his drink. But later, he gets home and thinks to himself 'Could I really do that?' That's scary stuff. Janus doesn't have to go a big deal on the ideology, he just sends his angels out to stir things up -- the theft in this case is mainly to prove to people that their possessions may not be as important as they thought. You'd hope some of the angels would be able to work out what they are really out there to do, but Janus doesn't mind if they never get past the 'cause chaos' part. Change is the thing that comes after Gabriel/ Jean/ Eli have dealt out the inspiration. Someone has had an idea. The next step is just in seeing that the world is a fluid kind of place, and they can make the idea real. Stagnation scares me more than change, so I like Janus better than David ;-) jo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 10:03:01 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Celestials On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 11:32:22PM -0500, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > An idea I've been toying with is that the basic nature of each choir > of angels is tied to one of the 7 cardinal or theological virtues. > > Like this: > Interesting stuff, but do angels care about the cardinal virtues? Anyway, I was wondering which Words resonated with which Bands and which Choirs most strongly. Seraphim - Revelation, presumably, though I haven't read it. Cherubim - Protection. Ofanim - The Wind and Fire both have dissonance which resembles Ofanite dissonance, in that their dissonances are stillness and inaction, respectively. Elohim - Any suggestions? Faith is justifiable, but apparently Khalid is a bit disturbed, which is a bad sign. Malakim - Currently the Sword. I noticed recently that Laurence is imposing Oaths on his Servitors. Kyriotates - Animals is the only one that suits, as it's plural. Mercurians - I'll have to think about it, though Trade works. Balseraphs - Hmm... Djinn - The Game. It's so arbitrary and obsessive at the same time. Calabim - Fire. The dissonance is a metaphorical extension of Calabite dissonance. Habbalah - Cruelty for the moment, though I haven't seen the write-up, for obvious reasons. Lilim - Slavery. Shedim - Corruption, except he's dead. Ah, well. Impudites - Gluttony, but is the Prince of Gluttony an Impudite? No. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #661 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.