From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue May 5 04:09:49 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 EAA04253 for ; Tue, 5 May 1998 04:09:49 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id EAA29316 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 5 May 1998 04:11:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 04:11:43 -0500 Message-Id: <199805050911.EAA29316@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 #752 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 Tuesday, May 5 1998 Volume 01 : Number 752 In this digest: Re: IN> Upsetting Dominic Re: IN> Upsetting Dominic Re: IN> Dominic Re: IN> More (but different) random strangeness Re: IN> IN: LARP Re: IN> Shedim and dead hosts Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment Re: IN> Angels and Dicey Words Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment Re: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) RE: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) Re: IN> Dominic Re: IN> Shedim and dead hosts IN> Upsetting Dominic, other weirdness RE: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) IN> The Coverage of DPs vs. AA's Re: IN> Dark Destiny, Bright Fate Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions IN> Re: IN- Angels and Dicey Words Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN>Demon Prince Audition Re: IN>Demon Prince Audition ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 17:52:00 -0500 (CDT) From: Titus 3 11 Subject: Re: IN> Upsetting Dominic On Mon, 4 May 1998, Emily Dresner wrote: > > > >>Deluded Malakim of Creation... Yeah, that's gonna be a fun trial... > > > > > >"Trial? Isn't this the set of Full House? Divine Wraith and all?" > > > > Hey, Em, we gots a Malakite of Kobal here! > > I've had Kobal on the brain all day, because I listened to Being For the > Benefit of Mr. Kite. > > All I can say is that he'd be amused, in new and ugly and very Kobalish > ways. Kobal. With his very own Malakite. Hee hee hee. heheheh...me...working for Kobal > > > > Of course, Creationers have managed to summon Kobal before, in some > > games... Never roll a 666... > > > > What, Star? There was actual plot involved in that. Don't ask me what it > was, as it certainly makes sense, but just not a lot of sense. > Creationers are weird. It's amazing what they can do when they're trying > not to do anything at all. > > - Em > Dont make me invoke my superior! I have no idea who she/he/it is anymore, but... hmmmm. Enosh ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 17:52:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Titus 3 11 Subject: Re: IN> Upsetting Dominic On Mon, 4 May 1998, Jesse wrote: > >>(As a side note, I am currently helping run my frat's initiation, which > >>involves staying up for about three days for everyone involved. [...] > > > > >with a fraternity or sorority. Who, me, wimp? Why yes, and smile when > >you say that.> > > Greeks scare me. Did you know that 85% of Congressmen are Greeks? > > -Jesse > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:03:44 -0400 (EDT) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: IN> Dominic neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) wrote: [...re: Michael's trial and acquittal...] >Well, if we take God to be necessarily good and all that, then it follows >that He would not forgive someone who had sinned and not asked forgiveness >of Him. So either: Is that necessarily the case? Let us recall that the God of IN, more or less definitionally, wants the angels to win the War. (Or at least, so it appears.) On the other hand, despite nominal omnipotence, he does not act to assure that victory by simply squishing the Bad Guys out of existence. Given that he is good, he presumably has some good reason for this, in both the ethical and the practical sense. Perhaps the victory of the War would be meaningless if not achieved by means of angels' own efforts. So Michael is necessary to the War. Without him, the Good Guys will lose. But Michael, being finite, is capable of making mistakes. Perhaps, indeed, he was guilty of pride, vainglory, and everything else Dominic accused him of; not as crimes against his Creator, nor as dissonance-generating betrayals of his own nature, but simply as an honest mistake of judgement in upholding the warrior ethic that comprises such a large part of his Word. Dominic, unfortunately, displays an all-or-nothing sort of personality in his canon actions. Anything short of perfect obedience is disobedience, and so forth. Dominic's insistence that Michael should not only fight the War, but do so according to *Dominic's* rules, could have cost the angels all hope of victory. So God intervened. In this view, Michael is indeed innocent, having transgressed only against Dominic's standards rather than the laws of his own nature or of God; Dominic, while mistaken, is by no means a closet Balseraph. On the other hand, they could *both* be absolutely right. One can see the problem as an irreducible conflict between their Words: War *must* be concerned with winning, even if the rules get bent or the innocent sometimes suffer; Judgement *must* be concerned with justice and doing things the right way, even at the risk of losing the War. So Michael could be right in his actions *and* Dominic right in prosecuting Michael for them -- and only the intervention of the ultimate referee could get these two well-meaning but imperfect servants working together again. To the extent that they are. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:20:10 -0500 (CDT) From: Titus 3 11 Subject: Re: IN> More (but different) random strangeness On Mon, 4 May 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >On Sat, 2 May 1998, Titus 3 11 wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 May 1998, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > >> > On Sat, 2 May 1998, Titus 3 11 wrote: > >> > > >> > > For those REALLY BAD NPCs or PCs, give them a note of dissonace. Let the > >> > > malakim (my favored choir) pick it up as an ignoble act (ie, that seraph > >> > > lied) hmmm..he lied...he has dissonance (confirmation is good, but > >> > > notreallyneeded). Kill said seraphs vessel. > >> > > >> > Why kill the vessel, just like that? > >> Because the seraph (especially one of Dominic) isn't clean. And I think > >> it is going to get worse. And as a malakim, I have the right (rite?) to > >> do so. > >> That's an IC explanation. OOC, it shows players to 1)avoid dissonance > >> (the malakim really are fanatics) and 2) not to abuse powers (hopefully). > >> And because I can't get to the celestial form. > > All I can say is, that if any PC in my games did that, even once, > the very next triad would have a much tougher Seraph in it. I didn't mean in a triad...but it's an amusing tangent...hmmmmmmm Say, > a certain Archangel...? (Heck, if someone suggested that, I'd > make it be Time For Dominic To Check On His Servitors. Or perhaps > Eli shows up and enlightens the Malakite with a stick instead.) "Hey Domn its time you got up here, man, Eli had something to say to you...hey there's Eli anyway...I'll let him tell you, okay man?" > > IOW, celestials who IC rules-lawyer, will have run-ins with Superiors. > Perhaps even the Princess of Nitpicking. (What does IOW mean?) completly agree - some characters just need a good nitpicking > > > --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 20:03:41 -0400 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: Re: IN> IN: LARP MarkDEddy wrote: > - -snip- > >potentially or innately failed to "notice" IC), you also annoy every > >non-player in earshot. > > One of the risks of it. But consider the level of disturbance we're tracking > on here. > Note the difference between "non-Celestials" and "non players". Non players can only detect a bunch of dubious yahoos ringing bells at irregular intervals for no apparent reason. > >2) Bells, beepers or other "noisemakers" add a significant, and probably > >prohibitive, cost to the presentation of a LARP. > > Only the referees/judges/storytellers need them, really. > That depends on the underlying game mechanics. Large games (by which I mean games with 100+ participants) do not, generally, run smoothly with game mechanics that require lots of referee intervention/interpretation. Or, to make them do so, there is a costly ref/player ratio. It is perfectly possible to run a 300+ player game throughout a huge game site for several continuous days with no more 6 to 8 referees on duty at one time - I did it for years. But it couldn't happen if everything went "through the ref" - players need to be largely capable of adjudicating their own conflicts, relying on referees only for clarification for the most part. A game mechanic that boils down to "go ask a ref" is going to bite you eventually (he says, favoring the occasional toothy scar :-) ) and a game that runs entirely through a referee interface is not exactly a LARP, IMO, it's a tabletop game played on a table that just happens to be large enough to walk around on. > >3) If there's a better "mood killer" than ringing bells everytime you > >start a conflict, I cannot think of what it might be. > > Of course, thats what's happening in the main In Nomine rules... Either you > care about the disturbance or you don't. The participants hear the noise. Not all (or even most) potential witnesses/passersby can detect Disturbance. > Bystanders can hear the noise, potentially, and disturbance is not just for > conflicts/combat. > Sorry, verbal shorthand. Conflict does not simply equate with "combat" - by conflict, I mean any game mechanic that involves a "test" or has the potential to create Disturbance (capital D, game mechanic), not just disturbance (small d, noise and/or mayhem that may distress the people not actually playing the game). I'm assuming, for sake of argument, that the game venue may be a "public place" on occasion. (For instance, the convention setting originally cited earlier in this thread). If your stock game mechanic is "make lots of audible Real World noise when creating Disturbance", you'll create a disturbance of an entirely different sort (the sort that gets your game shut down by whatever passes for Security at your game venue). At most conventions, LARPer population is a decidedly small fraction of the whole. LARP games that are too intrusive to "whatever else is going on" find themselves abruptly invited to "be elsewhere". This is not, of course, universal - LARPs can and do take place at venues where one can raise the roof, so to speak, without fear. However, a *commercially viable* LARP must, as stated before, work in a variety of places and situations, including those where ringing bells and the like would not be appropriate. - -- Mark McKenzie or someone like him markadv@kinekom.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:29:56 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Shedim and dead hosts At 10:01 PM -0700 5/3/98, Sean McCarthy wrote: >(p57) >For either outcome, the check digit determines how many hours he must >wait before using /any/ supernatural aspect of his resonance again! > >A Shedite whose host dies out from under them gains a point of >dissonance but it not zapped back to Trauma if they can find a new >host in time. But barring Intervention, their resonance will be >useless for at least 1 hour...and they don't have that much time. > >So while not directly contradictory, there is a perceived difference >in the rules and I was wondering what part if any I was >misinterpreting. Looks accurate to me, actually. Though a 6-Cel-Force Shedite could get a chance to grab at something if it had a CD 1 to contend with... >This has, of course, all kind of new problems. Balseraphs in >particular are in trouble, because of how easily they gain >dissonance...and how hard it is to shed said dissonance without their >resonance. They have to be careful, is all... Dissonance can be gotten rid of later... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 22:42:41 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment At 10:16 AM 4/05/98 -0500, you wrote: >Simon Hailes wrote: >> Lovecraft was not a perpetual Goth, and don't let me hear you say >> that again, he was one of the greatest horror writers of the 20th >> Century and has influenced the likes of Robert Bloch (Psycho) >> Stephen King and Ramsey Campbell. > >Live E. E. "Doc" Smith, Lovecraft founded a genre. (Space opera, >in Smith's case.) Like Smith, his creativity lay in founding the >genre, not in his literary abilities. Both wrote atrocious prose. >Both are good for a giggle, if you're in the right mood. > >> Also, there are some who would say that what he wrote about was >> not completely fancy either, his dad was a member of a mystical >> Freemason lodge, and owned many esoteric books of lore.... > >"There are some who would say" just about anything. > >Loecraft was pretty public about being a skeptic and materialist. >You can, of course, suppose that this was cover for a more >secret mystical position, but then that line of "reasoning" >becomes impervious to any evidence whatever. > > >It seems a little strange that he wrote stories like these about all manner of mystical things but was in real life a skeptic, sounds like a cover to me, like the army men who say 'We don't believe in aliens' and then walk off in to Area 51 to run some more tests. And prose atrocious? Good for a giggle, what makes you such an expert on good and bad prose, huh? A writer is free to write in whatever style he wishes, look at James Joyce's work and then tell me Lovecraft had bad prose, or what about Samuel Taylor Coleridge, as far as I'm concerned, his approach did the genre the justice it needed. But enough of my Lovecraftian ranting, needless to say a flock of Mi-Go will be reprimanding you later tonight, at the Darkest Hour! hahahahahhahahaha Simon, who knows more then he should > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 22:44:18 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Angels and Dicey Words At 11:30 AM 4/05/98 -0400, you wrote: >According to Elizabeth McCoy: >> "[...] The Final Trumpet has expanded writeups on Michael, Baal, >> Kobal and Malphas; two new Superiors -- Khalid, Archangel of >> Faith, and Magog, Demon Prince of Cruelty; [...]" > >So it's going to have two Archangel write-ups and 4 Demon >Princes? > >Will any of the other supplements even this out? I'm just >curious as to why when other supplements came out with it even >they decided to favor the DPs this time.:) > >SeanMike > >-- > __^\ | SeanMike Whipkey | Smile! The Illuminati are > __/ * | | Professional Student| watching. >/ \ | GWAR Cyberslave | I don't see you, so don't >--------- | Hail Eris! FNORD | pretend you're there. > >The Angelic Players Guide states, somewhere, that the Archangelic Host isn't equal to that of the rapidly growing League of Demon Princes, hence they are just being true to Canon. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 20:22:42 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment > >>>>> "PML" == Perry M Lloyd writes: > > PML> Who fights for Earth? We do. The plants, the animals, the > PML> humans, the stone, the water. With what weapons? Our dreams, of > PML> course. They were powerful enough to fight before, to grant us > PML> power. Now they have been pushed to the Far Marches, Heaven > PML> carefully monitors our dreams and behaviors so that such > PML> creatures of Myth cannot ever be created again to fight in our > PML> name. > > Oooh, I like it. Very much. This is definately becoming part of the > backstory for the Gnostic/Albigensian IN campaign I am planning on > starting in June. It's definately going to trample on many Canon > Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty, in vastly heretical ways. Ahh... heresy... Gotta love it. > PML> What will we fight with, now that our dreams have been slain, > PML> cast out, and shattered? I have no idea. Perhaps with our > PML> Nightmares... > > Are those dark wings on the ethereal horizon Malakim, or Nightgaunts? > With flaming swords or "obscene clutch that tittilates and stings" ? Perhaps the PC's will be curious enough to stick around and find out; rather, stupid enough. Now I want to run a Dream-lands adventure. Or may be just make it one part of the greater adventure... Cool, thanks Jason. I'm glad that I was able to help flesh out your game world. :) > -- > +----------------------------------------------------------------+ > | Jason F. McBrayer jmcbray@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu | > | The scalloped tatters of the King in Yellow must hide Yhtill | > | forever. R.W. Chambers _The King in Yellow_ | Titus 3 11 writes: > Okay, I was initially forming my own camp of "what a silly idea I shan't > post a word." But Jason has reminded me of something that I had forgotten > - in the IN universe, Lovecraft was probably prophet of some kind, not > the (awesome) perpetual goth he was in this universe... > "Forgot the demons for a second!! That's Nyarlathotep coming at us!! HE > takes priority!!!" > I can see it already... > Randolph Carter leading armies of Shantek and cats, Pickman at his side > with his armies of ghouls... > hehehe... > Eli approves... > Enosh > Malkim of Creation Hey, if you *really* want to see a kick_@ss webpage about The Marches and H.P. Lovecraft's work, check out: In Nomine - Where Angels Fear to Tread http://www.meta-earth.com/nomine/ethereal/index.html I forget who the author is, but... damn. What a page. ANYONE who plans on using The Marches should at least *look* at this page. - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Gaming Quote as of right now: (Re: The Pope and the Pope-mobile) "Chrono-Pope! Saving souls throughout the ages! Putting right what once went Protestant!" - Ben H. "...okay, all you Catholics can shoot me now..." - Ben H., subsequently The Soldiers of Linn webpage: (*so* not updated) http://159.28.171.24/sol ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 21:38:42 -0400 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment >From: Emily Dresner > >Actually, I put the Lovecraftian Mythos as 'A Good Reason Not To Walk >Out Into The Far Marches'. You really don't know what's out there, and >this is very possibly some of it. The Mythos sort of exists in my game, but mostly they are there to demonstrate just how powerful the celestials are. It's considered a bit of a status symbol among servitors of Beleth to own a Great Old One -- kind of like owning a Rolex among yuppies. Of course, the equivalent of owning a BMW is owning a demon who owns a Great Old One. The Mythos? Soul-destroying? You should see what they sell in the vending machines of Shal-Mari. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:18:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) On Mon, 4 May 1998, Charybdis GreyDragon wrote: > >> Knowingly speaking a falsehood is lying. Unknowingly speaking a falsehood > >> is being mistaken. Seraphim are allowed to be mistaken, but they cannot > >> lie. If I've managed to totally convince John Q. Seraph that I'm a Cherub, > >> and he believes it, then he doesn't get dissonance for calling me a > >> Cherub. OTOH, if he knows that I'm a Habbalite, he cannot call me a Cherub > >> without gaining dissonance. > > And I'd guess that if John Q Seraph really thought you were a Cherub, > mistakenly told others that you were a Cherub, and then later learned that > you were in fact a Habbalite, he'd probably have to tell everyone he > inadvertently misinformed that you that he was wrong. Yep, that sounds right. Of course, he'd probably do that anyways, even without the dissonance scare. 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: Mon, 04 May 1998 21:30:17 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) Thanks: Pee Kitty, Andrew, Charybdis, Jo, and Elizabeth. :) I guess it all boils down to how sure any of us can be of anything. The Seraph thus can only speak the truth as it knows it, not the Truth, except with CD of 6. Thus, their chief ability is to determine when OTHERS speak truth or lie as far as they know. Not whether or not something it objectively true or not. Seraphim have suddenly lost a lot of their appeal. They do not have much of a connection to the Truth, rather they're living portable lie detectors, sensitive to subjective truth. In a way, that certainly makes them more playable. :) - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tiny thing: (And does this help explain their Resonance?) "Dammit, man, where is the captive?" barked the Malakite. The sound of injury to a human rang yet in the Symphony. "The child is in the barn," responded the terrorist, nursing his bruised rib. The Malakite glanced over at the Seraph and raised an eye brow. "He is a liar, he wishes to prevent us from finding her," said the Seraph. "But, what's the TRUTH?" demanded the Malakite. "Time will most likely tell," replied the Seraph, for he knew not the Truth. "Try hitting him again." - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here's my problem: Balseraph versus Seraph. The Balseraph's Resonance is resisted by the Seraph, yet the Balseraph swallows the dissonance and keeps talking. It still believes every single word it says with its heart and soul, yet the Seraph KNOWS that it's lying, yet everything its Resonance gives it is that the Demon is speaking truthfully. "Luke, I am your father." (let us pretend that Vader was a Bal) (1) The Balseraph does not believe it's lying (2) - (3) The Balseraph spoke the truth as it knows it in order to better convince Luke to join the Dark Side. (4) - (5) (Could a Balseraph invoking its Resonance know the Truth, or could it only know IT'S OWN truth?) (6) The Truth is that Luke is the son of Anakin (sp?) Skywalker who has since become Darth Vader who now stands before you. However, since Vader's Resonance is ON, does this mean that *everything* he says is a lie (since it is fabricated), or would the Seraphim Resonance be able to pick out Truth from the Synthetic truth? Or is this GM's call? - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Gaming Quote as of right now: (Re: The Pope and the Pope-mobile) "Chrono-Pope! Saving souls throughout the ages! Putting right what once went Protestant!" - Ben H. "...okay, all you Catholics can shoot me now..." - Ben H., subsequently The Soldiers of Linn webpage: (*so* not updated) http://159.28.171.24/sol ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:58:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Dominic On Mon, 4 May 1998, York H. Dobyns wrote: > On the other hand, they could *both* be absolutely right. One can see > the problem as an irreducible conflict between their Words: War *must* > be concerned with winning, even if the rules get bent or the innocent > sometimes suffer; Judgement *must* be concerned with justice and > doing things the right way, even at the risk of losing the War. So > Michael could be right in his actions *and* Dominic right in prosecuting > Michael for them -- and only the intervention of the ultimate referee > could get these two well-meaning but imperfect servants working > together again. To the extent that they are. This is EXACTLY how I consider it in my game; you worded it perfectly. I think it makes the most sense. 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: Mon, 4 May 1998 23:02:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Shedim and dead hosts On Mon, 4 May 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 10:01 PM -0700 5/3/98, Sean McCarthy wrote: > > >(p57) > >For either outcome, the check digit determines how many hours he must > >wait before using /any/ supernatural aspect of his resonance again! > > > >A Shedite whose host dies out from under them gains a point of > >dissonance but it not zapped back to Trauma if they can find a new > >host in time. But barring Intervention, their resonance will be > >useless for at least 1 hour...and they don't have that much time. > > > >So while not directly contradictory, there is a perceived difference > >in the rules and I was wondering what part if any I was > >misinterpreting. > > Looks accurate to me, actually. Though a 6-Cel-Force Shedite could > get a chance to grab at something if it had a CD 1 to contend with... So basically...if they get dissonance by a host dying, any normal Shedite will end up kicked out of the Corporeal Plane and looking at his heart, in trauma, after 10xCF minutes? Weird. Why even bother with the wait then? I mean, if every Shedite in play (ignoring the 6CF one with a CD of 1) that loses a host is going to end up in trauma anyway, why not just say that the oozer goes straight to trauma? Why have a 30-40 minute wait between death and trauma? If trauma is inevitible, that just doesn't make sense. 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: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:09:39 -0500 (CDT) From: Titus 3 11 Subject: IN> Upsetting Dominic, other weirdness Thanks to earl, elizabeth, emily, anders, and anyone else who contributed (and/or) is contributing to either of these way-to-long threads. Input is (frighteningly enough) being used to shape my character for IN - a Malakim of Eli. Any further contributions on the topics of upsetting the inquistion abusing (yes, I chose that verb on purpose) the two required vows. These aren't just threads to make GMs unhappy w/ me in game - they actually serve a purpose...weird huh? Mind, i still want to work for Kobal...any Demon Princess lurking around who could put us in contact would have my (hopefully) eternal gratitude... Enosh Malkite of Creation ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 23:40:30 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: RE: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) > >However, since Vader's Resonance is ON, does this mean that *everything* >he says is a lie (since it is fabricated), or would the Seraphim Resonance >be able to pick out Truth from the Synthetic truth? Or is this GM's call? > The way I run it, is that being that the Seraphim have a particular insight to their Choir's opposite analouge which justifies a slight modfication to their resonance. The reason the Balseraphs, stand above (or below) the other Demonic bands is that not only do they have a personal Symphony, but they actually project that personal Symphony onto others, overwritng the True Symphony for the purposes of their lie. When a Seraph's resonance clicks home on a Bal, it's highlighting the Bal's False Symphony. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | 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: Mon, 4 May 1998 23:43:36 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: IN> The Coverage of DPs vs. AA's >As related by Highway Star >>According to Elizabeth McCoy: >> "[...] The Final Trumpet has expanded writeups on Michael, Baal, >> Kobal and Malphas; two new Superiors -- Khalid, Archangel of >> Faith, and Magog, Demon Prince of Cruelty; [...]" > >So it's going to have two Archangel write-ups and 4 Demon >Princes? > >Will any of the other supplements even this out? I'm just >curious as to why when other supplements came out with it even >they decided to favor the DPs this time.:) > > I guess the SJG authors have been sucessfully taken in by the Nybas "Demons Are Cool" ad campaign. Chalk up another for the Prince of all Media! :) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | 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: Mon, 4 May 1998 23:48:24 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Dark Destiny, Bright Fate At 08:32 AM -0400 05/04/1998, Shadowstar wrote: > > I also apologize in advance for the style of the voice of the Symphony. >*evil grin* > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Oh great, I always suspected that God was a Gen-X wannabe hacker :) Is this better or worse than bat-toting Wally? Who only knows. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | 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: Tue, 05 May 1998 03:12:21 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions A >The Final Cuts for Andre, Asmo and Beleth are in folks, and I am damn sorry to all those who didn't make it blah, blah. Andrealphus-Congrats to Antonio Banderas, not only can you play the ultimate sleaze, your spanish just like I believe Andre to be. Asmodeus-Ohh, this was a toughie, you all did really well, but Anthony Hopkins was the one who made it through, good for you! Beleth-Angelica Huston, I saw an Addams Family rerun a couple days back, your right, she is good for the role, and quite hot for someone from her era :) And so we are done with them, we move on to Baal, Belial and Kobal (lets skip Haagenti, we can animatronic him), so get suggesting people! Simon > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 23:06:39 PDT From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Angels and Dicey Words {NO DINERO SPOILERS!!] >My other theory is that there is something in the adventure that requires >the additional superiors and the expanded writeups. Although this theory >can be rather incorrect - it hasn't been exactly supported in the previous >supplements, other then superfluosly. As in, we ended up with Christopher >and Fleurity because NPCs in the adventure required their existence, but >the existance of say, Mammon in H&H was not supported by anything other >then passing mention in some of the text. Actually, a tether of Mammon is in the No Dinero adventure. SurturZ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 02:48:32 -0400 From: Ron Carnegie Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's next assignment At 10:42 PM 5/4/98 +0900, you wrote: >> >It seems a little strange that he wrote stories like these about all >manner of mystical things but was in real life a skeptic, sounds like a >cover to me, like the army men who say 'We don't believe in aliens' and >then walk off in to Area 51 to run some more tests. And prose atrocious? >Good for a giggle, what makes you such an expert on good and bad prose, >huh? A writer is free to write in whatever style he wishes, look at James >Joyce's work and then tell me Lovecraft had bad prose, or what about Samuel >Taylor Coleridge, as far as I'm concerned, his approach did the genre the >justice it needed. > But enough of my Lovecraftian ranting, needless to say a flock of Mi-Go >will be reprimanding you later tonight, at the Darkest Hour! hahahahahhahahaha > >Simon, who knows more then he should >> > It is not really that strange. The character Sherlock Holmes had no faith in the unproven at all. Whenever something in the stories appears to be mystical, it always ends up being explained by normal means, and yet Conan Doyle also wrote some fantasies and was a supporter of the Cottington Fairy girls. Authors of fiction are supposed to write fiction (though I guess not all do ;) ) Cheers, Ron Carnegie rcarnegie@widomaker.com ************************************************* "The poetry of history lies in the quasi-miraculous fact that once on this earth, on this familiar spot of ground walked other men and women as actual as we are today, thinking their own thoughts, swayed by their own passions but now all gone, vanishing after another, gone as utterly as we ourselves shall be gone like ghosts at cockcrow." G.M. Trevelyan ************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 03:04:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions On Tue, 5 May 1998, Simon Hailes wrote: > And so we are done with them, we move on to Baal, Belial and Kobal (lets > skip Haagenti, we can animatronic him), so get suggesting people! BAAL: Al Pacino. Suave and classy, with his own style of honor, but can become cutthroat and viscious in a heartbeat. BELIAL: Laurence Fishburne. I still don't know why he wasn't Spawn; he just screams 'burnt up guy'. :) KOBAL: Larry Miller. The dean from The Nutty Professor and Necessary Roughness. He can play serious and jaded, or very comedic. Second choice would be Bob Newhart for similar reasons; he's also an incredible deadpan. 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: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:23:06 +0100 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Beleth: Terence Stamp in drag (he is in Priscilla: Queen of the Desert) Baal: Ian McKellen. (Did anyone see his film of Richard III?) Kobal: Jim Carey, but he has to be bound, gagged and tied up in a mailbag. *HAH* Let the little annoyance try to irritate me now!!! jo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 03:45:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions On Tue, 5 May 1998, Simon Hailes wrote: > And so we are done with them, we move on to Baal, Belial and Kobal (lets > skip Haagenti, we can animatronic him), so get suggesting people! Baal: the guy who plays Gul Dukat on Deep Space 9. Belial: Laurence Fishburn is okay...I get the feeling I'm going to come up with a better choice later. Haagenti (Hey, he's gotta have a vessel, right?): The guy who played Baron Harkonnen in the Dune movie. Kobal: Dennis Leary - -- 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: Tue, 5 May 1998 03:19:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Titus 3 11 Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Audition Casca beat me to it, but Dennis Leary for Kobal...no competition. Baal - Claudia Christen ( i think (?)) - the person who played Ivonova on B5 Belial - Dennis Leary..I'm just thinking of all the close-ups of him with his giant lighter flame lapping up onto his cig, and his total lack of subtlety. Haagenti - not animatronic... animated---preferably by Silverstein. Enosh. On Tue, 5 May 1998, Casca wrote: > On Tue, 5 May 1998, Simon Hailes wrote: > > > And so we are done with them, we move on to Baal, Belial and Kobal (lets > > skip Haagenti, we can animatronic him), so get suggesting people! > > Baal: the guy who plays Gul Dukat on Deep Space 9. > > Belial: Laurence Fishburn is okay...I get the feeling I'm going to come > up with a better choice later. > > Haagenti (Hey, he's gotta have a vessel, right?): The guy who played > Baron Harkonnen in the Dune movie. > > Kobal: Dennis Leary > > -- 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: Tue, 5 May 1998 05:01:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Audition On Tue, 5 May 1998, Titus 3 11 wrote: > Baal - Claudia Christen ( i think (?)) - the person who played Ivonova on > B5 What?! You dare profane the name of Ivanova by comparing her to a Demon Prince? I smite thee, blasphemer!! *smite smite smite* - -- Casca, Seraph of Archives, working for Gabriel these days (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 ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #752 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.