From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Mar 27 11:15:37 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 LAA17906 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 1998 11:15:36 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id KAA21953 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:46:54 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:46:54 -0600 Message-Id: <199803271646.KAA21953@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 #697 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 27 1998 Volume 01 : Number 697 In this digest: Re: IN> Uriel Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer IN> Re: Re: IN> Heisenberg In IN Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... RE: IN> Dameron, the Demon Prince of Slavery Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> Falling vs. "retirement" Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> Liber Reliquarum: Complimentary Copies Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two IN> Ofanim Motion IN> IN- Uriel, good-guy Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) IN> Re: Marc and Valefor Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) IN> My Apologies to you all Re: IN> Ineffability (was Falling vs. "retirement") Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... [none] IN> Ethereals as PCs? Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? Re: IN> IN- Uriel, good-guy Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? Re: IN> God changed his mind? Subject: IN> Word-Bound Outcast NPC Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:31:28 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Uriel On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 04:02:53PM -0000, Hart, Joanna wrote: > > ** God's office. A sign on the window reads 'You don't have to be crazy to > work here but it helps.' God is doing the filing when there is a knock on > the door ** > > ** The door opens and Uriel enters, a weedy bookish looking guy played by > Jeff Goldblum. That is just classic. It's an image that will remain with me as long as I remember it. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:34:34 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 10:55:50AM -0500, Jesse wrote: > > Ah, but as a Calabite if he fails his resonance role he could end up > destroying himself. That is pretty cannibalistic. > To the best of my recollection, failing resonance rolls is not dissonant for Calabim. Taking the backlash is. I don't know what's supposed to happen when an attempt to recover from a backlash fails, because the rulebook doesn't quite say. Do you reckon you could resist one of Haagenti's resonance rolls? Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:36:25 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 11:12:27AM -0500, Jesse wrote: > >> Evil Twin (Corporeal) > >So tell me. Is it Janus or Valefor who has this Discord? > > No, Marc and Valefor have it, as did Janus and Merserach. > It makes more sense that the Words of the twins be opposed, > rather than complementary, as is the case with Theft and Wind. > Well, it does say they're always assigned to deal with the same area. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:36:07 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: IN> Re: >Jeff Goldblum No, no NO! It isn't fair! Take it away! Take it away! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 98 11:34 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Heisenberg In IN >A reasonably well known law of physics (which is defined as one I know of) >is the Heisenberg Principle, which is (IIRC) that it is impossible to know >both the speed and direction of any given particle with any certainty. Position and momentum, actually.... Or energy and time (duration). >Specifically, what if it was possible to know the Will of God, OR the >Existence of God, but never both, with any degree of certainty (of course, >it is still possible to be totally ignorant of both of those). Interesting thought. I had a somewhat similar notion with regards to time and foreknowledge -- that you can either know the future, or change it, but not both, at least for certain. I.e., your ability to change the future is inversely proportional to your ability to know it with certainty. This would explain much about why God doesn't intervene much, assuming omnipotence (which isn't necessarily true in IN canon, as I understand it). This would also explain why Yves, the AA who presumably most knows the future, is the least interventionist. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:48:45 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... >Do you reckon you could resist one of Haagenti's resonance rolls? David. "Stone! Yuck! I didn't come all this way for peebles to feed on!" - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:12:39 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: IN> Dameron, the Demon Prince of Slavery Just checked out your writeup on Dameron. Good stuff. If it's all right with you, I may just use him and his servitors in my PBeM. :) Think that'd be all right? :) - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd The Soldiers of Linn webpage is back in business! http://159.28.171.24/sol Gaming Quote of the moment: "Your balls are mellifluous, sir!" - Perry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:39:18 -0500 From: Sean Michael Whipkey Subject: Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer At 10:39 -0500 3/26/98, Emily Dresner wrote: >... well, what can I say. Valefor is the only well dressed Calabite in >existance, although he became the Prince of Theft because of his >disturbing tendancy to lose buttons. You're sick you know that? The lot of you. Sick sick sick sick. You've given my players sick ideas, and now I've got to deal with that! Eeek! This is pretty much perfect material it seems for In Anime...which is supposed to be released in under a week, right? SeanMike - -- Sean Michael Whipkey, smw4s@virginia.edu Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, Publications Div. 804/924-4185 voicenet, 804/982-5536 fax http://www.virginia.edu/~cpserv/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:55:18 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two > >> CABBAGE: Originally for 'cherubs', now a catch-all term for Player > >> Characters. Coined by Archangel Beth. > >> > >I give up. Why? > > Em, I think it was, claimed that "Cherubim" really mean "cabbages," > not some breed of angel. Or maybe some breed of angel as well. Not > sure. Anyway, I started referring to certain characters as "cabbages" > instead of "Cherubim." From there, it spread to *all* PCs. Especially > ones doing non-sensical things. > Not me. My grasp of Hebrew is pretty.... bad, let's say. I just thought it was funny and exploited it for my own evil and malicious whims. It's a good term to use for Players sometimes. :) And I thought about it when the Lilim put tomato slices on his face last night and claimed he was a Seraph. (It's better then boiled cabbage on your face.) - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:57:06 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... > >Has anyone ever seen Eli in the same room with Kobal at the same time? :) > > Actually, I'd rather know if anyone has seen Kobal and either Janus or > Valefor at the sime time. Or Kobal and Dominic. "It's like Clark Kent and Superman!" *grin* - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 13:04:58 -0500 (EST) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer Kevin Walsh writes: > >On Tue, Mar 24, 1998 at 11:39:53PM -0500, R. Sean Borgstrom wrote: >> Evil Twin (Corporeal) >> The character has an evil twin (or possibly a good twin, if >> the character is a demon.) This twin is working for the >> character's Superior's most hated enemy, whether that is a >> Demon Prince or an Archangel. By unlucky coincidence, both of >> them tend to be assigned to the same areas and are asked to deal >> with the same issues. > >So tell me. Is it Janus or Valefor who has this Discord? Valefor, obviously. It's his intrinsic Calabite discord. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 18:11:54 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 12:57:06PM -0500, Emily Dresner wrote: > > >Has anyone ever seen Eli in the same room with Kobal at the same time? :) > > > > Actually, I'd rather know if anyone has seen Kobal and either Janus or > > Valefor at the sime time. > > Or Kobal and Dominic. "It's like Clark Kent and Superman!" *grin* > I go with the Kobal is Lucifer theory. Consider such statements as "The Adversary does have a sense of humour, but his laughter is something to be feared", the general inexplicability of his support for Kobal, and the fact that before he fell, Kobal was given a mysterious assignment that no one else was allowed to know. Personally, I reckon that Lucifer fell because he said "I am Kobal" too many times. (They weren't good at evasion back then, poor things.) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:33:29 -0800 (PST) From: Querent Subject: Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... Anyone ever see Patton and Hitler in the same room at the same time? George Washington and King George III? The Pope and Marilyn Manson? Sometimes I think people avoid sharing each other's company for philosophical or political reasons. I think Kobal and Eli avoid each other because they're *enemies*. - ---Emily Dresner wrote: > > > > >Has anyone ever seen Eli in the same room with Kobal at the same time? :) > > > > Actually, I'd rather know if anyone has seen Kobal and either Janus or > > Valefor at the sime time. > > Or Kobal and Dominic. "It's like Clark Kent and Superman!" *grin* > > - Em > > == --Querent, Angel of Widescreen. Mercurian Servitor of Creation. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:42:06 -0800 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> Falling vs. "retirement" For purposes of the one game I ever ran and the wonderful gaming group arguements this kind of thing spawns, I always felt this was what happened when Uriel went upstairs: GOD: Uriel, you know why I have recalled you? Uriel: My Lord, I understand not thy reasons and it humbles me. GOD: You cannot simply slaughter every impure being you can find. Uriel: Why? GOD: The Ethereal beings must be allowed their place. Uriel: Why? GOD: Because I am THE LORD THY GOD and I say it is so! Uriel: Okay, I love you, bye-bye! Okay, okay, the last part is a joke. But I envision it taking hundreds of years for God to explain to Uriel WHY what he was doing was wrong. Keep in mind that I have plans for a Uriel Comeback Tour, which is going to influence my perceptions of things. Sean, Habbalite of Asm--uh, Vapula. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 14:54:16 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... > Anyone ever see Patton and Hitler in the same room at the same time? > George Washington and King George III? The Pope and Marilyn Manson? > > Sometimes I think people avoid sharing each other's company for > philosophical or political reasons. I think Kobal and Eli avoid each > other because they're *enemies*. > As I sit here and lean back in my chair and stare at the ceiling, the word 'joke' comes floating through my mind. It might just be an old acid flashback, it might just be gas, but for some reason it seems to stick in my craw. A coincidence? JUST MAYBE. Of course, I ate a delicious ham sammich today that looked like Elvis and spontaniously learned the skill Nuclear Physics, which is just as much a coincidence as anything else. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 15:01:33 -0500 From: John Karakash - LUCENT ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Liber Reliquarum: Complimentary Copies David Edelstein wrote: > 3) You should wait a couple of weeks before inquiring whether you've been > overlooked. If you do seem to have been overlooked, I am not the person in > charge. I believe that would be the Managing Editor. > > 4) _I_ haven't recieved my comp copies yet! (Of course, I expect them to > take a little longer to reach Korea...) Hey, I'm here in the USA, and I haven't gotten mine, either. Have patience people. Scott is as busy as a .... well, fill in your own favorite phrase here. The point is, that he's busy! ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 15:11:34 EST From: MarkDEddy Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two In a message dated 3/25/98 1:25:26 PM, earlw@mc.com writes: >As I (dimly) recall the "cherubim" and "cabbages" business, >it was a cross-language wordplay of some sort. Like, the >Hebrew for Brussel sprouts sounds a lot like "cherub" or >something like that. Actually, one of our Hebrew-speakers said that Ofanim means bicycle and Cherubim (Kheru'uvim, if I remember the transliteration correctly) means cabbage in modern Hebrew. This led to a lot of questions about 'Why *cabbages*?' and so forth. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:33:55 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 03:11:34PM -0500, MarkDEddy wrote: > Actually, one of our Hebrew-speakers said that Ofanim means bicycle and > Cherubim (Kheru'uvim, if I remember the transliteration correctly) means > cabbage in modern Hebrew. This led to a lot of questions about 'Why > *cabbages*?' and so forth. > Remember the demonic plot to fix Cherubim as cute pudgy little babies in the eyes of mortals? Now does anyone remember the Cabbage Patch Kids? It's something to do with Kobal's last joke. That's by far the most likely explanation. (Would I be correct in assuming that Ofan is actually the literal Hebrew for wheel? If I am, calling a bicycle wheels is hardly remarkable.) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 15:46:49 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Kevin Walsh wrote: > (Would I be correct in assuming that Ofan is actually the literal > Hebrew for wheel? If I am, calling a bicycle wheels is hardly > remarkable.) I do know that much Hebrew. Yes, "ophan" is just "wheel." The Ophanim make their appearance in the Bible in the visions of Ezekiel, where the accompany the Cherubim: "As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like chrysolite, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not turn about as the creatures went. Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around." The "creatures" are the cherubim, and even more surreal in appearance than the wheels. So an Ophanite might not look like a simple wheel of fire, but like a system of wheels, sort of like an armillary sphere or the orbitals on a Bohr model of the atom, all the wheels rimmed with eyes. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:15:35 -0500 (EST) From: Casca Subject: IN> Ofanim Motion On Thu, 26 Mar 1998, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > So an Ophanite might not look like a simple wheel of fire, but like > a system of wheels, sort of like an armillary sphere or the orbitals > on a Bohr model of the atom, all the wheels rimmed with eyes. On a related though incidental note, I always thought that the reason Ofanim were made of interlocking, rotating wheels was because it made them the ultimate fly-by-wire system. No matter which direction they want to move, at least one of their rings is spinning that way. They just think, "I want -this- ring to be my primary axis for the moment," and off they go. Ofanim: Heaven's Starfuries. (B5 reference for the non-Kosh) - -- 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: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:38:43 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: IN> IN- Uriel, good-guy Here's an idea about Uriel that I don't think anyone has toyed with: What if, Uriel was doing God's will and got recalled when all the creatures of myth were destroyed. Since he did such a great job, God decided to reward him like not many other angels have been rewarded. In this scenario, Blandine would be the one who was wrong. Besides, God must have more creative puinishments than "Go to your room." - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 17:13:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two > And I thought about it when the Lilim put tomato slices on his face > last night and claimed he was a Seraph. (It's better then boiled > cabbage on your face.) > > - Em Boy, Em, your players really take that "everybody goes insane" mentality from CoC to heart, don't they... (I'm wondering whether it's safe to ask, or whether it's safer to die curious.) 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, 26 Mar 1998 17:13:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) > << Hmmm, God changing from a absolutist stance of Purity to a more > catholic (in it's meaning of universal) point of view. I can live > with that. For a start the idea of God changing his mind in the > first place is pretty cool. >> > > Sure -- this is process theology, as I understand it. A lot of > theological contradictions vanish if you assume that God isn't > all-knowing or perfect, and therefore that God can change. Or you could assume that different times really do require different measures, and that God knows this and always planned to call Uriel back. Personally, I like the non-omnipotent God, but it is possible to see God changing without God being imperfect. 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, 26 Mar 1998 17:13:08 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Questions man was not meant to ask.... > Anyone ever see Patton and Hitler in the same room at the same time? > George Washington and King George III? The Pope and Marilyn Manson? Not since the last Lodge...er, no. No, but then the names are just a bit too obvious. No, but I sometimes wish I could, just to see if the pope would try to exorcise Manson, and to see whether it would work... > Sometimes I think people avoid sharing each other's company for > philosophical or political reasons. I think Kobal and Eli avoid > each other because they're *enemies*. That, and neither can stand the other's jokes. 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, 26 Mar 1998 17:30:44 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two > > And I thought about it when the Lilim put tomato slices on his face > > last night and claimed he was a Seraph. (It's better then boiled > > cabbage on your face.) > > > > - Em > > Boy, Em, your players really take that "everybody goes insane" > mentality from CoC to heart, don't they... > > (I'm wondering whether it's safe to ask, or whether it's safer to > die curious.) > Luckily, and safer for the rest of the world, that was an NPC, so it was just me being utterly bizarre. :::> - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 98 17:36 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two >So an Ophanite might not look like a simple wheel of fire, but like >a system of wheels, sort of like an armillary sphere or the orbitals >on a Bohr model of the atom, all the wheels rimmed with eyes. One is reminded of the giant wheel thing in the movie "Contact", which may not be coincidence, since the movie has an underlying religious theme. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 17:50:07 EST From: JFZeigler Subject: Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) In a message dated 98-03-26 17:24:24 EST, you write: << Personally, I like the non-omnipotent God, but it is possible to see God changing without God being imperfect. >> Only if you're not a Platonist :-). - ---------- Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, freelance writer, amateur historian, science fiction fan, occasional scribbler of bad poetry JFZeigler@aol.com "Never speak for others. You can get in enough trouble speaking for yourself." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 23:17:05 +0000 From: "Ad." Subject: IN> Re: Marc and Valefor > Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:12:27 -0500 > From: Jesse > Subject: Re: IN> New Discords & A Guide to Life as a Creationer > > >> Evil Twin (Corporeal) > >So tell me. Is it Janus or Valefor who has this Discord? > > No, Marc and Valefor have it, as did Janus and Merserach. > It makes more sense that the Words of the twins be opposed, > rather than complementary, as is the case with Theft and Wind. Marc and Valefor, aren't oposites - they are practically one and the same. Well, no, Marc is a respectable, legal thief, Adam, Impudite of Gluttony. - -- "The seas boiled and the living envied the dead. All was shattered and all but memory lost, and one memory above all others, of him who brought the Shadow and the Breaking of the World. And him they named Dragon." - - from: The Breaking of the World, Author Unknown, Fourth Age. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:45:57 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> God changed his mind? (was Why Uriel got pulled out) At 11:57 AM 26/03/98 +0000, you wrote: >On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 10:44:10PM +0000, Peter Frederick wrote: >> Hmmm, God changing from a absolutist stance of Purity to a more catholic >> (in it's meaning of universal) point of view. I can live with that. For a >> start the idea of God changing his mind in the first place is pretty cool. >> >God is a Balseraph! Sorry, I had to say it. I'm just feeling >strange today. > >Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. >-- > "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times >wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, >at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a >pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." > >No, wait, God isn't a Balseraph (yes that's it, I covered that up pretty well!) Simon, Demon Prince of Pearls ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:08:17 PST From: "Chris Crowe" Subject: IN> My Apologies to you all I'd like to start off with the obvious. I'm sorry. >>>Completely un-called for penis brain.<<< that was obviously a bad choice of words to start with, considering my intent was the same as what you all (or at least 12 of you when just Beth would have been enough) recently said to me. I was quite angry at that time and should have waited to reply until i had cooled down. Again, i am sorry to all of you, it won't happen again. Krowe, (Outcast) Malakim of Destiny, (Arch)Angel (in need) of Redemption. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:49:36 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Ineffability (was Falling vs. "retirement") At 10:56 AM 26/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >Emily Dresner wrote: > >> God: I'm ineffible, kid. Don't try to eff. > >This reminds me of a footnote from "Good Omens," by Gaiman & >Pratchett, one of the sources of inspiration for IN. (At least, >it's in the bibliography.) -- > >"It is said that God does not play dice. In fact, He plays an >ineffable game of his own devising, which might be compared, >from the viewpoint of the other players (i.e. everyone), to >playing poker for infinite stakes, in a dark room, with blank >cards, against a Dealer who won't tell you the rules and *smiles* >*all* *the* *time.*" > >(From memory, so inaccuracies are likely.) > >Earl > >Pretty much that's it! (I'm reading Good Omens at the moment, very funny book) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 21:20:46 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... On Thu, 26 Mar 1998, Kevin Walsh wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 10:55:50AM -0500, Jesse wrote: > > Ah, but as a Calabite if he fails his resonance role he could end up > > destroying himself. That is pretty cannibalistic. > > > To the best of my recollection, failing resonance rolls is not dissonant > for Calabim. Taking the backlash is. I don't know what's supposed to > happen when an attempt to recover from a backlash fails, because the > rulebook doesn't quite say. Your recollection could be better. :) If a Calabite fails a resonance roll, he can either (A) lash out at a different target, or (B) take dissonance. He can do (A) as long as he likes, until he runs out of targets, at which point his only target is himself. Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 19:03:21 PST From: "Chris Crowe" Subject: [none] >>>Gazezael, Outcast Elohite of War, Angel of Brutal Necessity.<<< I really loved this. It's a great idea. If everyone still isn't mad at me, i'd would really appreciate some input about my Tsayadim write-up and the songs i created. they're at: http:www.geocities.com/Area51/Labyrinth/9870/ i should have some artwork from my campaign up by late afternoon tomorrow if you like that sort of thing. Gant, do you have a write-up for Uriel? One of my players is mildly interested in being his servant and if you already have one i'd like to use the same one to keep on the same wavelength as your campaign (if you're still interested in linking our campaigns, that is). Krowe, Outcast Malakim of Destiny, (Arch)Angel (in need) of Redemption ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 00:36:41 -0500 From: Soviet Subject: IN> Ethereals as PCs? This came up in my gaming group....is there any official/unofficial ruling for this? - -- "I want that power. By right, it is mine. For ultimate power is the ultimate destiny of Doom." Spectacular Spider-Man #159 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 23:14:53 -0600 (CST) From: Dataweaver Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Soviet wrote: > This came up in my gaming group....is there any official/unofficial > ruling for this? Unofficial: why not? As long as they're interesting, and everyone enjoys themselves... Personally, I've been considering playing one of the surviving gods of the Olympian Pantheon... a little-known one (read: "not one from actual mythology"; although I've toyed with the notion of playing Iris, the Goddess of the Rainbow and the other messenger of the gods...). - ---- Jonathan Lang ---- x ------- alias: Dataweaver --------- Webpage: http://www.io.com/~traveler /@\ The Dogma of Otherness insists GURPSnet's Benevolent Tyrant for Life ~~~ that all voices deserve a hearing, FAQ: http://www.io.com/~ftp/GURPSnet/www | that all points of view have Archive: http://www.io.com/~ftp/GURPSnet | something of value to offer. submit new files to gurpsnet-files@io.com | --David Brin, "Otherness" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 06:24:29 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> IN- Uriel, good-guy At 16:38 26/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >What if, Uriel was doing God's will and got recalled when all the creatures >of myth were destroyed. Since he did such a great job, God decided to >reward him like not many other angels have been rewarded. I like that very much, actually. 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, 27 Mar 1998 18:16:20 From: Peter Frederick Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? At 11:14 PM 26/3/98 -0600, John wrote: >On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Soviet wrote: > >> This came up in my gaming group....is there any official/unofficial >> ruling for this? > >Unofficial: why not? As long as they're interesting, and everyone enjoys >themselves... Personally, I've been considering playing one of the >surviving gods of the Olympian Pantheon... a little-known one (read: "not >one from actual mythology"; although I've toyed with the notion of playing >Iris, the Goddess of the Rainbow and the other messenger of the gods...). One of the players in my FTF campaign wrote up his background as an Outcast Seraph of Dreams who had most of his memories removed and was ejected to Earth because he had been too curious and had gone meddling in the Far Ethereal. Taking the opportunity, I love it when Players say "my character has had most of his memories removed", I decided that he was actually an Ethereal spirit that had asked Bladine to help him join Heaven. As it happens that player decided to help me co-ref the game instead so his character sort of faded into NPC'dom, but I liked the idea. Regards, Peter. Reply to peterf@wr.com.au May the Goddess shelter you in the palm of her hand until we meet again. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 98 06:42:04 -0500 From: David Wood Subject: Re: IN> God changed his mind? Quoth "Peter Frederick " on Thu, 26 Mar 1998 22:44:10... >Perry Lloyd wrote >>I have heard it whispered in the Symphony that Uriel was a Pure >>Manifestation of God's aspect of Purity. After trying that out for a bit, >>He changed His mind and decided that The Sword was a much better Word to >>lead His Armies. >Hmmm, God changing from a absolutist stance of Purity to a more catholic >(in it's meaning of universal) point of view. I can live with that. For a >start the idea of God changing his mind in the first place is pretty cool. I don't know... I think him having exactly the same plan as before has a certain compelling feel to it. And all he's been doing over the æons is making small changes to particular steps to it. Wrap your brain around this: Assume God's plan is never changing, has in fact never changed before, and requires as little communication with his creations as possible in order to ultimately succeed or fail. The Fall? Unpleasant. A potential threat to the plan, or alternately it can be used to help his plan along. Nobody really knows what it is, after all. Uriel's purge? Also unpleasant, but God didn't complain until the trial, which threatened to divide Heaven against itself (And really, this happened before -- see above -- and God didn't do anything to stop it then. Hmmmm...). God had to intervene somehow, and he did. To what end, he never told anybody. Eli's disappearance? God hasn't said a word. Either his disappearance doesn't alter the plan, it accidentally helps the plan, or it was *part* of the plan. And what is the plan? Sorry, can't tell you that. To know it would be to threaten it. The pseudopatient problem on a very grand scale. The Plan is the GM's advantage: something so vast and unknowable the player characters can never quite be sure they're following it (if they're angels) or properly working against it (if they're demons). I gotcher inscrutability RIGHT HERE pal! - -David http://www.bluecrab.org/members/dwood/ Got a minute? Try the Great Malakite Gag! http://www.bluecrab.org/members/dwood/tabletop/innomine/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 09:04:04 -0500 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Subject: IN> Word-Bound Outcast NPC [Gazezael, Outcast Elohite of War, Angel of Brutal Necessity] Very nice; I think Mercurians and Elohim of War have a lot of rp potential. There's an angel similar to Gazezael in my own campaign: Esek, Angel of the Balance of Terror, who was partly responsible for prodding the US and USSR into a nuclear stalemate. (What does a Mercurian of War do when his attunement shows him that the only way to prevent a horrible war is nearly as bad?) I think I will steal your angel wholesale and make him Esek's former boss. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 15:19:33 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Questions man was not meant to ask.... On Thu, Mar 26, 1998 at 09:20:46PM -0500, Pee Kitty wrote: > > To the best of my recollection, failing resonance rolls is not dissonant > > for Calabim. Taking the backlash is. I don't know what's supposed to > > happen when an attempt to recover from a backlash fails, because the > > rulebook doesn't quite say. > > Your recollection could be better. :) Indeed, it could theoretically be eidetic. If a Calabite fails a resonance > roll, he can either (A) lash out at a different target, or (B) take > dissonance. He can do (A) as long as he likes, until he runs out of > targets, at which point his only target is himself. > You describe what happens when a Calabite's resonance roll is resisted by the target. Although the main rulebook uses the word "fails" in this context, it clearly isn't a failure, as the term is defined in the rulebook. Looking at the effects of genuine failure in the preceding paragraph, it's stated that the Calabite may not invoke its resonance for the next check digit minutes. Further down, referring to a backlashed resonance roll, it states that that target may not be resonated on again for a number of minutes equal to the victim's successful check digit. As for what happens when a Calabite fails an attempt to attack another target with a backlashed resonance roll, that it is still unclear, though I think the spirit of the wording is that they get to keep going at a rate of one attack per round. What effect continually having to lash out on Dodge rolls and such attunements as The Art of Combat is also not stated directly, though the wording "can do nothing" implies that they are unavailable. More generally, the only instances in which a failed resonance roll leads directly to dissonance is when a Djinn or Cherub fails a Will roll to remove an attunement. It is far more often the case that successful demonic resonance rolls lead to dissonance. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 14:22:34 +0000 (GMT) From: "The blue eyes, the leather, some guys just like leather" Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? I'm planning in my game a confrontation of some sorts with the gods of olympus. After making a deal with Nybas, the gods are getting more powerful due to mass worship of greek gods due to the amazingly popular show Xena warrior princess, and to some extent Hercules the legendary journies. This will possibly be found out by my players as they are currently living in Austin, Texas which just happens to be the home town of one of the Stars (Renee O'Connor) and there seems to be a lot of servitors of the media swarming around the place. so what do you think? oh and speaking of Xena, surely I'm not the only one to notice the amazing similarity between Lucy Lawless and Gabriel? Starsurfer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 98 11:26 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals as PCs? >This came up in my gaming group....is there any official/unofficial >ruling for this? There's nothing in canon (and probably won't be for a while, I expect)I don't think I've seen anything much here either. The Marches is a pretty good starting point, and should give you an idea of what Ethereals are like, and to some extent the kinds of powers they're likely to have. I thought I might be getting one in my campaign at one point, but it didn't happen. Basically, it's easiest to treat them as low-power celestials, possibly without a Superior (even the most powerful Ethereal gods are only roughly comparable to a 9-Force celestial these days). They're likely to have something like their own Rites and attunements, related to whatever their powers or abilities are. They shouldn't have Words, at least in the celestial sense, though they often have something similar. I don't think they're subject to dissonance or Discord -- I'd use the human rules. I believe they do cause disturbance in the Symphony, like celestials. They can make their own vessels, somehow, though possibly this is beyond their current powers. Ethereals can have all kinds of Songs, and some of them may be unique to them, unless they've shared them. - ---Walter ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #697 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.