From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Mar 8 21:08:41 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 VAA22929 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 21:08:41 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id UAA08868 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 20:44:10 -0600 Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 20:44:10 -0600 Message-Id: <199803090244.UAA08868@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 #666 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 Sunday, March 8 1998 Volume 01 : Number 666 In this digest: IN> Falling Malakim Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 Re: IN> Duality in Words IN> Review: _Liber Reliquarum_ Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 Re: IN> Duality in Words IN> Digest Turnover Re: IN> Duality in Words Re: IN> Red Clovers? What!?!?! Re: IN> The Hero's First Fall Re: IN> Wording 101 Re: IN> Digest Turnover Re: IN> Life in Firetime (a guide to life as a Gabrielite) Re: IN> Red Clovers? What!?!?! Re: IN> The Hero's First Fall Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 Re: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too IN> Wording 102 IN> More about words Re: IN> Re: IN- Lilith Re: IN> Superior PBEM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 21:16:59 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Falling Malakim >IIRC Malakim always had the potential of falling, it was just that the other Malakim destroyed the ones that were close to falling.< Well, that's one of the rumors..... - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 18:26:17 -0500 From: "David C. Shadle" Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 > David, Archangel of Flowers: Some think it odd that a Malakite would be an > Archangel with a word that resonates with peace, joy, and light. They don't > understand David: He understood long ago that the best way to make > something evil stop living is to make it good again. He is greatly feared > by demons everywhere, for his angels smother demons in love, while refusing > to bend in the roughest wind. Demons who do not convert after centuries of > pressure are destroyed -- individual Angels of Flowers are assigned to > individual cases. His angels are joyous, but tough. Why do I keep thinking Ned Flanders? ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 22:31:37 -0500 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 At 06:26 PM -0500 03/07/1998, David C. Shadle wrote: > >Why do I keep thinking Ned Flanders? ;-) Could be worse, I keep thinking of Micheal as John Travolta. :) "I'm an angel... not a saint" Micheal in "Micheal" - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | Frank Lazar http://www.interactive.net/~fmlazar | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 22:27:17 -0500 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Duality in Words >> In the IN cantos, Lilith was one of the three humans created perfect >>without blemish. The other two Fell from Grace at Eden. They, either > >I don't recall orginal sin in any In Nomine product, am I missing >something? I think i wouldn't have missed that. I know that in the >Catholic tradition the Maddonna was born with out original sin. > >-Jesse InNomine moves further from conventional Genesis than you think. According to the APG, there were humans existing before Adam and his two women. In this view they are not the progenitors of humankind, just factors in a celestial debate. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | Frank Lazar http://www.interactive.net/~fmlazar | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 23:30:03 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: IN> Review: _Liber Reliquarum_ I picked up the _Liber Reliquarum_ from my game store today. Here are my first impressions. - -- Overall grade: C (worth paging through in the store) In short: This is IN's big-list-of-stuff supplement. It's better than average for the genre, but nothing really special. The new rules are pretty good, and the widgets are decent if uninspired. The sample adventures are just plain bad, though. In full: Too bad the devil /wasn't/ in the details. My favorite game supplement, ever, is a big list of stuff: Greg Stolze's _Spherewalker Sourcebook_ for Everway. It took what was a bland and utterly uninspiring gameworld and transformed it into a /place/ where I knew the constellations and the names of the flowers by the side of the road. And it did this by inventing lots and lots of little details until they coalesced an organic whole. Fantastically impressive, but it's instructive to remember that the genre also contains such travesties as Shadowrun's _Street Samurai Catalog_ and the Jovian Chronicle's _Mechanical Catalog_, both of which serve to remind us that some trees can better serve mankind as two-by-fours than as books. The _Liber Reliquarum_ falls midway between these extremes. It's okay, even better than average -- if I had to compare it to a single supplement, I would say it is about as good as Shadowrun's _Shadowtech_ supplement. The individual pieces are (generally) of pretty good quality, but it all fails to come together in the end. There's 4 pages of the obligatory bad flavor fiction, about 25 pages of new rules and Resources, about 75 pages of actual artifacts, and about 15 pages of adventures and NPCs. In the flavor fiction we get to see what happens to Charlie and Marcus after the events of the IN main rulebook intro. Frankly, it's not very good, but that's about par for the course in RPGs. Besides, it's only 4 pages so it's no great loss. The new rules are the best part of the supplement. It's not at the level of complexity of Hero or even Amber's item rules, but it's still reasonably complete. It's straightforward and easily hackable, though items tend to be rather expensive. Plus, there's a nice sidebar on how to guesstimate the costs, if you don't feel like using the whole rules. It wasn't perfect, though. While there was a section on how to customize the rules to deal with the power level of a particular game, we could desperately have used a section on how to customize the artifact rules to fit the /tone/ of the game. IN's influences run the gamut from Gaiman and Pratchett's _Good Omens_ to Bergman's _The Seventh Seal_, and some advice on how to customize the rules to fit different styles of gaming would have been appreciated. I also liked the new Resources. They tended to work okay, though the songs seemed a bit overpowered relative to existing songs. The song of the symphony in particular seemed a little too powerful to add to an existing game. It would work fine, I think, if it was part of the GM's world from the beginning. But all in all a nice addition to the game, and it filled in quite a few gaps that needed fixing. The artifact list comprised the bulk of the book, and was less impressive than it really could have been. There were very few outright stupid artifacts, and a few gems (I really liked the Candles of Visions and the Finger of Lady Janice). The trouble is that while most of the artifacts were individually okay, together they failed to say anything about the IN world. It might have been a better idea to group the artifacts by conceptual type rather than by power level. Separate the mythic artifacts, the silly artifacts, and the gritty artifacts, and add advice for moving artifacts from one category to another. The adventures were not good. "The Nybbas Computer," despite having a bad case of Internet boosterism, had a decent premise and the plus of having a mention in the main rulebook. But it still managed to hit a lot of bad IN stereotypes, simply because it had so little space to flesh anything out in. It would have been a good job, I think, to have completely tossed out John Tyne's adventure -- "The Collector" -- in favor of expanding "The Nybbas Computer." "The Collector" was IMHO embarrassingly bad, which surprised me a lot given John Tyne's credits. But I suppose anyone can have bad days. On the whole, _Liber Reliquarum_ is an okay product. But I doubt you'll miss any sleep if you give it a pass. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 00:14:08 -0500 (EST) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 On Sat, 7 Mar 1998, Frank Lazar wrote: > Could be worse, I keep thinking of Micheal as John Travolta. :) > > "I'm an angel... not a saint" Micheal in "Micheal" Curiously enough, I use him as a model for Eli. - -- Casca, Seraph of Archives (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 03:24:07 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Duality in Words At 02:37 PM 7/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >>> >Of course the Celestial Word Hierarchy is confusing, just as the legal and beuracratic systems of our own society are confusing, because they weren't preplanned, they evolved, and changed as the Symphony did, Words that might once have held Archangels now just have simple servitors representing them, and viseversa, plus, yesterday the angel of rap was strong, today the angel of R&B is doing well, and Nybbas skyrocketed out of nowhere with the word media, one of the strongest words in our present society, do you think keeping an organized system under rapid changes and developments is easy, even for angels and demons? it's damn hard, and finally, most give up and just assume that you're stronger or weaker then they are. Simon, Demon of Confusion, Strong today, what about tomorrow? "You're a fool old man!" Han Solo, Star Wars ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 10:52:12 -0500 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: IN> Digest Turnover Well, here were are at Digest volume 1, #666. Going back to the archives, I noticed the mailing list is over a year old (Going on fifteen months), I think...So, I'm just wondering...when is volume 2 going to start? = http://www.io.com/~beholder ===================== nofori@pop3.utoled.edu === Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Andrew, Balseraph Baron of Theft, the Demon of Plagarism ===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 08:56:03 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Duality in Words >At 13:34 07/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >> I know that in the >>Catholic tradition the Maddonna was born with out original sin. >> > > >She was? I'm no expert on catholic theology (could this be the >understatement of the century?) but how did she manage that? This is all according to my wife, a Catholic. She was born without original sin so that she could be an acceptable host for the immaculate conception. The Protestants don't hold with this theory, but there you are. Armand ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 09:14:49 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Red Clovers? What!?!?! >The concept that God is everything is acctually heresay in the Catholic >tradition. It is number one in Rome's Syllabus of Condemned Opinions >complied by Pope Pius IX. It states that the following is heresay: > >1. There is no supreme, omniscient, all foreseeing Deity distinct from the >universe. God is the same thing as Nature and therefore subject to change. >He becomes God in the world and man; all things are God and have the very >substance of God. God is one and the same thing as the world; therefore >spirit is the same thing as matter, necessity the same thing as liberty, >truth the same as falseness, good the same is evil, justice the same >as injustice. Feel free to correct me if I don't have my world religions down, but doesn't this sound a lot like Hinduism? I think that the Catholic church has changed opinion on this. The triune god (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is in everything according to most of the Catholics I know. I would tack myself into that number, but it's been a few years. Popes waffle all the time. In the modern day, you have the Pope who disapproves birth-control and the Council of Cardinals (I may be getting the name wrong, but they're a group of Cardinal from the States that make doctrine as well) who advocate birth-control as a necessary evil. Just like IN canon, church changes to hopefully benefit those who folloe it. How's that for on topic? Armand ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 12:46:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> The Hero's First Fall > > Mind you, a lot of this is my take and from what I gather I diverge > >from canon slightly (who doesn't? :)! > > Beth, David, and esp. Dereck? Bite your tounge. They influence it, but as far as I have seen (from gaming with Beth and Walter) they don't exactly follow it to the letter... 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: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 12:46:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Wording 101 > Now, one addendum that I need explained, the hierarchy of Words, > how Words are ordered (ie. why the Archangel of Animals and the > Archangel of Flowers aren't both under the Archangel of Nature), > which is to say, is it more triangular (God -- Overriding Concepts > -- Grand Concepts -- Lesser Concepts -- Specific Concepts -- > Overspecific Concepts) or whether it is more weblike, with one Word > being linked to a number of other Angels, sort of the six degrees of > separation theory on the Celestial level.. and who decides which > Words are, well, superior words? Is it just scale? As far as I can tell, there is no specific set of rules; the decision of who is Archangel depends more on the whim of whoever appoints Archangels (I think the Seraphim Council, but it may be God's duty directly - AFAICT there is no canon established for this). The decision as to who gets a Word in the first place is also the purview of the Seraphim Council; they choose from a list of applicants based on who has shown themselves to best support the word. Who they serve is usually a secondary concern, although those that serve an Archangel that is somehow related to the Word are generally more likely to support that Word. 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: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 12:46:07 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Digest Turnover > Well, here were are at Digest volume 1, #666. Going back to the > archives, I noticed the mailing list is over a year old (Going on > fifteen months), I think...So, I'm just wondering...when is volume 2 > going to start? Volume one ends at #999, and volume two picks up there. 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: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 12:46:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Life in Firetime (a guide to life as a Gabrielite) > Now available at > http://www.dev-com.com/~marith/Keely/gaming/gabriel.html > is a (very long) discussion of life under the Archangel of Fire. Ooof. You weren't kidding when you said very long... It looks very good, though. I will definately be pilphering it for my games, in part... 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: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 12:46:07 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Red Clovers? What!?!?! > It's sort of a moot point since God is All anyways, and I am > glad they elected to keep Him away in the distance in the game. *ahem* Maybe it canon In Nomine... > ::coughcoughFizbancoughcough:: ;) > > > Pete > E-Mail: pover@golden.net ICQ#: 2192976 > "Yea, believe in me and ye shall live. First caller!" > -- Jesus, "South Park" 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: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 14:00:55 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> The Hero's First Fall >> > Mind you, a lot of this is my take and from what I gather I diverge >> >from canon slightly (who doesn't? :)! >> >> Beth, David, and esp. Dereck? > >Bite your tounge. They influence it, but as far as I have seen (from >gaming with Beth and Walter) they don't exactly follow it to the >letter... Well my tounge was already in my cheeck so that should not be to hard. - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 14:09:44 -0500 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 >Why do I keep thinking Ned Flanders? ;-) That would rule -- imagine a naked David waltzing up to a Servitor and say: "How-diddly-do, neighbor." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 14:06:18 -0500 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: Re: IN> Alternate Superiors -- ROT-13 >I take it this guy invented Barney, the large and boisterous stuffed >dino? Wow, that's almost as disturbing as the "David supports fascism" thread... -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, 9 Mar 1998 09:23:43 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> If Only Cows Could Fly Too In reply to: > 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... The original question was about the AA of Death I wrote. AFAIK, words don't have to have an corresponding Word on the 'other side'. Some do, such as Fire. It seems that having an opposite number can cause a Word-bound severe problems (although a lot of Gabriel's problems come from her nature, since Belial doesn't seem to mind that someone shares his Word, IMO). However, in my game I often like to create superiors with their opposite numbers (the AA of Death, the AA and DP of Music etc.) since I like the idea that these superiors must do all they can to enforce their Word while destroying their opponent. However they have to be extremely careful because by injuring their opponent they can cause injury to their own Word. Identities like Yves and Kronos may work against each other, but they don't have the problem I speak of above. Destiny can destroy Fate (if Yves was so inclined) without hurting Destiny (unless you need the Darkness to see the Light) and vice versa. Anyway, that's simply my reasoning of it. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 17:01:58 -0500 From: bruce dykes Subject: IN> Wording 102 > Damn, you people is good. ::smile:: Just leave your money on the dresser... > Now, one addendum that I need explained, the hierarchy of Words, >how Words are ordered (ie. why the Archangel of Animals and the Archangel >of Flowers aren't both under the Archangel of Nature), which is to say, >is it more triangular (God -- Overriding Concepts -- Grand Concepts -- >Lesser Concepts -- Specific Concepts -- Overspecific Concepts) or >whether it is more weblike, with one Word being linked to a number of >other Angels, sort of the six degrees of separation theory on the >Celestial level.. and who decides which Words are, well, superior >words? Is it just scale? Well, I wasn't satisfied with Jordi and Novalis either. I made Novalis AA of Healing, Jordi AA of Wilderness, and created an AA of Civilazation, Julius (believe it or not, Julius was derived from a bad 2am Comedy Central movie called "Limit Up"). Note that in that structure the Word of "Flowers" doesn't necessarily exist. You could have "Wildflowers" under Jordi, and "Gardens" or "Flower Gardens" or suchlike under Julius. Archangelic Words should be more generic, more metaphorical than more terrestrial Wordbound angels. As far as ranking Words goes, that is an essential part of your gameworld, and that's going be determined by the characters the players want to run, and the campaign setting you want to run in...if your campaign is set in World War 2, expect Michael and Laurence to be more prominent, and a good deal more detail should be devoted to their organizations. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 12:17:31 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> More about words Pete wrote: > Of course, my next question is, how do you tell where a Word fits > in the Celestial hierarchy? Which is to say, the Angel of Dogs is > under the Angel of Animals, who may be under the Angel of Nature? > How high does this Wording process go? And what is the roadmap of > this, because it must be a weblike mess of a hierarchy, especially > with such overlap. Where a word fits can be difficult to know and is all a part of the game of celestial politics. Some Words are easy to place, for example the Angel of Hawks would be under the Angel of Predatory Birds who would be under the Angel of Birds who would be under the Archangel of Animals (Jordi). However some Words are more difficult to place and seem to fall under whichever Archangel can get a Servitor to apply for and be awarded the Word first. As mentioned in the APG, some Angels are created and trained specifically to be able to apply for a given Word (although they are rarely told their purpose in life). This would add another element to the Heavenly politics which surround the realm. As an example, I can think of the Word of Military Hardware. Who would own this Word? The archangels I can think of who would have a valid claim to this Word would be Jean (it is technology, after all), Laurence (who co-ordinates the War for Heaven) and Michael (what else are you going to do with military hardware if not War). So the race could be on for the three of them to encourage their servitors to gain enough experience to be able to apply for the Word. What it comes down to is that the hierarchy can be as simple or as complicated as the GM likes it. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 22:50:51 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Lilith At 12:20 AM 7/03/98 +0900, you wrote: >At 11:12 AM 6/03/98 +0000, you wrote: >>> So just how does Lilith create the Lilim anyway, was what was bovering me the other day, what does she know that makes the Lilim so exclusive, and so sexy might I add? does she do it the old fashioned way, or does it involve crystals and strange vats? and how many can she create at a time? Well, I'm taking a stab in the dark here but I think it's possible she does it all with out the help of a partner (imagine how picky Lilith would be anyway) I think the Lilim are just derivations of herself, in a way the Lilim are Lilith but in different bodies and faces, that is why no Prince has succeeded in duplicating them, they need the essence of Lilith herself, and no matter how big the favor she'd never give it away. Also I see Lilith as one huge narcissist, only herself is good enough for her, plus the Lilim are not just daughters, but well, you get the idea, hope no one was offended here but to me it seems likely that she would be most attracted to a reflection of herself, both platonically and or otherwise. Simon, Demon Prince of Wondering ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 23:09:27 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Superior PBEM At 11:25 PM 6/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >>From Simon To all interested in In Nomine Superiors PBEM the deadline for submissions is coming soon (sorta kidding) but please get them in soon, I'm dying to get this thing on the way, oh yeah, here's some fiction I've complied for the game: The sound of gunshots faded away in the distance as the chopper moved away from the smoking vehicle, it's inhabitants riddled with high calibre rifle rounds, not a sound was heard, except for the car dying and a tiny breeze rustling up desert shrubbery, then footsteps could be heard. "Nice, real nice, they scrapped this thing to all Hell," the figure murmured as he stood there. He knew without looking who the occupants were, his saint and his soldier, together they had made a daring run for the border, but Baal's had got to them first. "Michael, this is just getting worse," the word bound angel of Escape that stood beside Michael said. Michael had pulled out a packet of cigars, he lit one and puffed on it contemplatively, a frown set on his wrinkled forehead, as the desert remained as silent as Limbo. "Perhaps," he mused "Perhaps we have to up the ante-" "Up the ante?" now Laurence was there too "I don't think so Michael, I have been working hard on setting everything up here, I don't want you to blow it, with some stupid feud, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, where's the soundness in that?" Michael glowered at Laurence, rimmed in a halo of light, in his Celestial Form, watching the skies for any sign of returning bad guys. He silently drew a halberd, with stains that Michael had never bothered to wash off, and pointed it in the direction the helicopter had left. "Sometimes revenge is the only thing that keeps you going, I've lost too many good warriors in this stalemated War to sit idly and watch Lucifer get away with murder," Michael stated grimly. "It remains a stalemate because you never plan for the future Mike, you're only concerned with the now-" "It's the now that is most important, there will be no future if you don't act in the now," Michael turned away with his word bound angel beside him, he supposed he would return to the Groves to contemplate. Laurence watched them return to Heaven, then took corporeal form, he drew his own rapier, and stalked away to find the demons responsible for the shooting, then hack them to pieces, sometimes it felt good to just wade in and forget everything that usually mattered, Michael thought he had turned cold, tonight he would prove to Michael he was not totally lost to his job, sometimes he could let his hair down too, just for a little while. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #666 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.