From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Jul 30 09:57:03 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13640 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 09:57:02 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA26455 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 09:39:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 09:39:17 -0500 Message-Id: <199807301439.JAA26455@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #884 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 Thursday, July 30 1998 Volume 01 : Number 884 In this digest: Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) IN> The question of questions IN> [NPC] Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon Re: IN> Armageddon (the location) Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Re: IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) Re: IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) IN> Names Re: IN> [NPC] Re: IN> Names Re: IN> The question of questions Harmegiddo (was Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Re: IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon Re: IN> The question of questions Re: IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon Re: IN> Valefor and Yves Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one? IN> Roles Re: IN> Roles Re: IN> Roles Re: IN> Armageddon (the location) Re: IN> Uriel's Crusade ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 10:55:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Jayson Howell Subject: Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) It's actually not too contradictory... If a tether is a link between the corporeal and the celestial, and is an "earthly celebration of its master's Word" (IN p.59), it follows that if it fails to be a celebration of the Word, its position as a tether would be jeapordized. Granted, in this case the tether is linked to the word "Volcanos", but as a tether of Gabriel, it's only strong enough to form a tether to her domain during active periods. Any volcano could be a *potential* tether to Gabriel, but as her word is Fire, it's not likely to establish a link unless it's celebrating her word. (i.e. spewing forth magma, smoke, heat, sulfer, all that good stuff.) A dormant volcano might then become a link for David, or even a tether of Novalis if perhaps a period of rapid wild growth occurs. (Case in point, Mt. St. Helens. When it went, miles of forest were laid waste. Since then, every visitor there can't help but recognise the rapid conquest of the dead dry ash by the lush vegetation. This is how my little world is working. -Jayson - ---Steve Jessop wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Walter Milliken wrote: > > > [Gabriel] can have only one active volcano Tether at a time, > > unless it's a long-term volcano (like Mauna Loa in Hawaii), in which > > case it may be a permanent Tether, since it's such an important > > instance. Since most volcanoes are very short-lived, one volcano Tether > > at a time isn't really much of a problem. > > > > Umm... Most *eruptions* are short lived. Many volcanoes spend most of > their time dormant. But a volcano doesn't cease to exist just because it > isn't on CNN. > > So unless Gabriel can only turn any *erupting* volcano into a tether, > there is still a contradiction. I like the idea of temporary tethers > though, especially since it solves the Janus Seneschal problem - Janus > might *only* have temporary and mobile tethers. > > 'Seneschal of The Point on Earth with Highest Windspeed'. Works for me. > > Steve > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 13:54:23 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> The question of questions Message text written by INTERNET:in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >>> But if you haven't a clue, why are you continuing to post? Whoso can answer this question, he will finally and truly understand the Net... Doug M. < Because it gains him essence? Adam Dahak@Compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 19:20:22 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: IN> [NPC] (This is based on a genuine newspaper cutting, allegedly ;) ) Lucher, Impudite of Dark Humour, aka 'Lucky' the guide dog (7 forces) Str: 4 Int: 4 Per: 5 Agi: 4 Pre: 4 WP: 7 Songs: Motion (Cor/2, Eth/4, Cel/4) Tongues (Eth/4) Vessel: Dog/2 (Golden Labrador) Skills: Emote/4 ("What's that, Lucky? You want to go for a walk?") Dodge/2 Move Silently/2 - --- Lucky is a guide dog with a very unfortunate history. He's a good dog really, all his previous owners have adored him. It is just that sometimes he gets a little overenthusiastic. No, scratch that, everyone knows it isn't his fault. It is just that his last seven owners have all met with unfortunate and deadly mishaps. Either they've been run over, fallen into gulleys or in front of trains, or in one case walked into the middle of a fire-fight. The guide dog centre send someone to collect him from grieving families who are so keen to insist that another good home be found for the dog. It never takes long for him to find a new placement as he is a naturally friendly creature, and people take to him quickly. The centre do comment that they are not in the habit of informing new owners about the dog's history because "If they knew about his past they might be concerned, which might make Lucky nervous. And if Lucky is nervous he might do something stupid..." - ---===--- "Some people leave money for the improvement of public buildings. I can leave dynamite for the improvement of public buildings." - --- G. K. Chesterton ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 98 14:39 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) >> [Gabriel] can have only one active volcano Tether at a time, >> unless it's a long-term volcano (like Mauna Loa in Hawaii), in which >> case it may be a permanent Tether, since it's such an important >> instance. Since most volcanoes are very short-lived, one volcano Tether >> at a time isn't really much of a problem. > >Umm... Most *eruptions* are short lived. Essentially what I meant -- I should have said "active volcano". > Many volcanoes spend most of >their time dormant. But a volcano doesn't cease to exist just because it >isn't on CNN. True, though many of the more violent ones are pretty much one-shots, if I remember right (the cinder cone type). The more persistent type, as I recall (especially the shield volcanoes like Mauna Loa), mostly operate at lower levels of activity, though even the Hawaiian ones can get pretty energetic from time to time. Over geologic time, of course, volcanoes are pretty short-lived, relative to the mountains they build. >So unless Gabriel can only turn any *erupting* volcano into a tether, >there is still a contradiction. This is what I meant. > I like the idea of temporary tethers >though, especially since it solves the Janus Seneschal problem - Janus >might *only* have temporary and mobile tethers. He'll probably have a few fixed ones, like the Mt. Washington one I have in my game. And he probably has a new one at whatever place now has the land wind speed record (Malaysia?). For Janus, I specifically identified Seneschals for Tornadoes and Hurricanes. But he's almost certain to have other Tethers. The first X-15, maybe? One or more of the hyper-velocity wind tunnels? And don't forget he also represents change as well as wind, so anyplace that's connected with major changes might be a Tether to him, though a lot of those might also have other affinities. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 98 14:54 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> More on tethers (just a little though) >Don't forget the travelling carnie tent tether of Janus. I'd sure like to.... > It only works >while it's erected as in The Marches. Yeah, well, that sort of Tether is *possible*, by the new canon, but I wouldn't allow it in my game. > Another tether would be active >motorsport raceways on racedays! I think that would be cool! That might work, though it would be more likely to be a permanent Tether, not an intermittent/transient one. The Tether canon allows lots of different kinds of weird things, though most Tethers are more "vanilla". - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 14:53:42 -0400 From: Stacy Stroud Subject: IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon What *I* had heard about this place, which may fit in perfectly well with everything others have reported, is that it's been a battlefield *more often* in history than any other spot on Earth. More blood has been spilled there than anywhere else. That's probably due to its key location in the region, as another poster pointed out. Also -- OK, it's a transliteration, so maybe there's no one way to spell it. But is it a double D or a double G? Or are both correct? Double-D looks "better" to me, and seems to be the more common English spelling, but I've seen double-G as well. Stacy Stroud sstroud@uky.campus.mci.net P.S. Mentioning this reminds me of that *other* Biblical valley of great significance, the Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna, which Jesus (at least) used as a physical example of the afterlife of the damned. It was a garbage dump and (alleged) site of human sacrifice outside Jerusalem, right? And Jerusalem is the physical model used by several Biblical writers when describing Heaven (hence the layout of the Eternal City in In Nomine). So, is there a place on Earth where one can more or less literally stand 'twixt Heaven and Hell? That just appeals to me somehow. I want to visit there someday. (I won't mention the possibility of Tethers in these locations, since we already had the huge and vehement argument over the Temple.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:12:57 +0300 From: Yossi Gurvitz Subject: Re: IN> Armageddon (the location) At 06:29 PM 7/29/98 , you wrote: >I've always liked this explanation, but am not 100% sure of its >veracity, so if there's anyone who knows for sure, please advise. To be pedantic about it, it is extremely unlikely that whomever wrote the Book of Revelations, no matter what he was on at the time, knew anything of Egyptian history, or, for that matter, *any* history. I've heard an explanation that says it was selected because that's where the headquarters of the Roman army in Judea was, but I'm pretty sceptical of this - AFAIK, the headquarters were either in Caesaria or Jerusalem, and there are no significant ruins from the Roman period at the place. Actually, thinking of the location, I can imagine the disappointment of the Four Horsemen when they arrive there and find just one poor kibbutz, and one that makes its living out of dairy products at that... Yours, Yossi ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:00:13 +0300 From: Yossi Gurvitz Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting At 05:01 PM 7/29/98 , you wrote: >Correction, it's Hebrew, not Assyrian. I'm messed up on Benadryl today. Armaggedon, in Hebrew, simply means "Mount Meggido". Yours, Yossi ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:47:36 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) At 7:07 PM -0700 7/28/98, E Kumar wrote: >Mark wrote: >>the implied >> meaning of "Prosecuting Attorney." It's a job title more than anything >>else. >> Of course, Lucifer means "Light-bearer," and is also a title. >Uh, job-titles? So Mrs. Carpenter down the street is a craftsman? >And Mr. Baker is a chef? Originally, yes! That's how people *got* such names -- from what they mean, or where they lived. (It's also one of the things I tend to name my celestials. Especially angels. Galalidan... Wheel of Judgment, if I mangeled the syllables right...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:43:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) > (It's also one of the things I tend to name my celestials. Especially > angels. Galalidan... Wheel of Judgment, if I mangeled the syllables right...) Em thinks about Galalidan, who will never be functional around Lilim again, and just starts cracking up. :) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:59:50 -0400 From: NICK_JOST@Non-HP-USA-om42.om.hp.com Subject: IN> Names - --openmail-part-0e642180-00000001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="BDY.TXT" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="BDY.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Likewise I have a Seraph of Michael that believes law is the extension of the war in corporeal form; hence Lex (Latin "Law"). Nick - --openmail-part-0e642180-00000001-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:30:36 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> [NPC] Jo Hart wrote: > (This is based on a genuine newspaper cutting, allegedly ;) ) > > Lucher, Impudite of Dark Humour, aka 'Lucky' the guide dog Were you rereading "The Tasmanian Babes Fiasco" over the weekend as well? - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 15:17:54 -0700 From: "E Kumar" Subject: Re: IN> Names Yea, I know that names have significance about someones history but generally they take on a whole different association once historians get their hands on them. Most of the times the old references just don't apply! So 'Armageddon' means all the Celestials are gonna go hang out on a hill in Jerusalem? No. It represents a final battle or conclusion to a cycle or the Final Judgement. The present reference has far more impact on things than the basic meaning or definition. Just ask Yves! - ---------- > From: NICK_JOST@Non-HP-USA-om42.om.hp.com > To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > Subject: IN> Names > Date: Wednesday, July 29, 1998 1:59 PM > > Likewise I have a Seraph of Michael that believes law is the extension of the > war in corporeal form; hence Lex (Latin "Law"). > > Nick ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:42:51 +1200 From: "Al.Bri" Subject: Re: IN> The question of questions Doug Muir wrote: >>> But if you haven't a clue, why are you continuing to post? > >Whoso can answer this question, he will finally and truly understand the Net... Recognition? Andrew Martin Shared email: Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz Web Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin Dirtside II Web Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII Dirtside II FAQ Web Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/FAQ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 01:00:44 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: Harmegiddo (was Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Dale Friesen wrotes > >>> I seem to recall that Armageddon is in Israel, and that it isn't >>> very exciting to see (a hill in a dessert, or something). Anyone >>> know anymore? >> >>I believe Armageddon is Har Megiddo, a valley in Israel. It has >>been a battlefield many times. I believe it significant here >>because it was the place where King Josiah fell. > >I think it was also significant because it sat at the crossroads of >the trade routes between Egypt and the rest of the middle east. If >you controlled Megiddo, you controlled trade with Egypt. > Armageddon is the greek transliteration of Harmegiddo (Mount Megiddo) From a modern perspective, Ramat David - an important Israeli air base - is within this region toward the north. It would likely be a prime target for Syria in any military confrontation. - -- Julian jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:29:06 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon Stacy Stroud wrote: > What *I* had heard about this place, which may fit in perfectly well with > everything others have reported, is that it's been a battlefield *more > often* in history than any other spot on Earth. More blood has been > spilled there than anywhere else. That's probably due to its key location > in the region, as another poster pointed out. That it has been fought over more often than any other place is possible; I am highly dubious of a claim that more blood has been spilled there than anywhere else. The scale difference between ancient and modern combat is mind-boggling. Verdun, the Somme, Stalingrad, etc. each probably saw more death than the whole mid-east combined. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:21:58 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> The question of questions On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Al.Bri wrote: > Doug Muir wrote: > >>> But if you haven't a clue, why are you continuing to post? > > > >Whoso can answer this question, he will finally and truly understand the > Net... > > Recognition? Since I'm the one who got that question asked of him in the first place, I kinda feel I have to defend myself here. What I said was that I don't know about the Torah, not that I don't have any idea of what I was talking about. The Torah isn't discussed as such in IN, and hardly any of it's parts, except for Genesis, is even discussed indirectly. Therefor it's not true that IN asserts the veracity of the Torah. Besides, isn't this whole thing rather off-topic? Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:25:48 +0200 (MET DST) From: Jasper Reijer Floor Subject: Re: IN> Meggido/Megiddo/Armaggedon/Armageddon On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Stacy Stroud wrote: > Also -- OK, it's a transliteration, so maybe there's no one way to spell > it. But is it a double D or a double G? Or are both correct? Double-D > looks "better" to me, and seems to be the more common English spelling, but > I've seen double-G as well. Websters gives it as Armageddon, and various (english) bible translations give it as Armageddon, Armaged'don and Armagedon. > P.S. Mentioning this reminds me of that *other* Biblical valley of great > significance, the Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna, which Jesus (at least) used > as a physical example of the afterlife of the damned. It was a garbage > dump and (alleged) site of human sacrifice outside Jerusalem, right? And I found the following passages when doing a search on Hinnom, but nothing on Gehenna. There were a few more references to hinnom, which either echoed these, or were from when the jews first conquered the place, and were dividing up the land (you know, and all this land from here to there was the lot of the tribe of...) Jeremiah 7:31-32 31 And they have built the high place of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I did not command, nor did it come into my mind. 32 Therefore, behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when it will no more be called Topheth, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of Slaughter mvg, Jasper Floor p.s. If anyone is interested, the site I use to get these references is "http://bible.gospelcom.net/". Its got a fairly good search engine, and alot of translations (no greek or hebrew though) "There's never an excuse for rudeness" - Doon Mackichan "Oh bollux" - Graem Garden If I ruled the world (BBC game show) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 18:28:53 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Valefor and Yves On Sun, Jul 26, 1998 at 05:23:40PM -0400, Pee Kitty wrote: > > Based on that information, she could only conclude that there was no way > > Valefor could have stole anything from Yves' Library (well, that plus the > > statements on pg. 69 about how it is essentially impossible to steal from > > the Library). At least, not without Yves *knowing* about it. And if Yves > > knew, why did he allow the book to be stolen? > > This isn't a very popular take on things, but I think Janus and Valefor > are two different people. Valefor impersonated Janus as part of a weird > plan to ruin Janus' reputation; he crafted his attunements thusly. > Of course the question arises as to how he made the Habbalah of Theft attunement, as it bears no more relation to Theft than to War. (One might argue considerably less.) The answer that he stole it is too cheap for my tastes. One thing I like is for Wind angels and Theft demons to have occasional doubles on the other side; sort of like the Evil Twin Discord at Level 0. Naturally, Kobal is the culprit. A stupid plot seed arising is that you either play or encounter a Lilim of Dark Humour who is trying to get a demon/angel who's already been handed the right type of Vessel to change the name they go by in mortal society. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "Yet it cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire, but not glory." Machiavelli, the Prince. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 17:59:31 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one? On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 11:44:21PM -0800, Armand wrote: > >In my mind, if they have the press pass and other necessary credentials, > >the person will tend to believe them. If not, the person will or will not > >believe them, depending on how suspicious the person is. > > My wife and I have a theory. We call it the First Barrier theory. In > essence, if you make it past the first barrier in any situation, then > proceed in a rational fashion; you can get either in or out of just about > anywhere. Again, just a theory. > This can work for individual scenarios, but as an ongoing thing people will start catching on, and at best will charitably assume that you're a liar. > I see this being a really important issue in beaureaucratic games, but I > don't like running things that way. I also like the idea of celstials > being more than just spirits inhabitting bodies. I think that there should > be Distubance free ways for them to interact with humans without making > them "humans". > Of course there are. They can talk to people, and buy them drinks, etc., without having Roles. Doing so on a regular basis can build up a Role/1 or Role/2. The Role may turn out to be "Weirdo masquerading as Social Welfare Officer" rather than "Social Welfare Officer", but it's something. > For a moment though, think of how long it would take a celestial to plant a > Role 3. First of all, you need the paper work: birth cert., some form of > state/national ID, school records, I don't know about America, but apparently it's very easy to get fake birth certs in Ireland. And once you have a birth cert you can get most other things. So it isn't that hard to put the documentation together for a Role/3 in a relatively short time. But the thing about Role/3s is that they're fairly easily broken by a thorough investigation. credit reports, tax forms, > degree/diploma, etc. This doesn't include optional forms: car/house > titles, club memberships, signed credit card receipts, awards, video store > membership, etc. > You get this stuff the simple way. You rent/buy a house/flat, thus giving you titles/entries in rent books. You get tax forms by paying tax, which one assumes you're likely to do if you're working. (And there are few Roles that don't involve work.) > Now that we have made a life on paper, it needs human interaction. First, > family: Mom, Dad, assorted sibs, aunts, uncles, etc. Second, friends and > associates: classmates (k - ?), kid next door, nutty neighbor, Mr. > Whipple, Mr. Wilson, Brad from the office, first kiss, first black eye, > boss, etc. > One technique for the family end is to have Soldiers of whoever willing to back up your story. > How much time have you alloted? Personally, I tally up at least twenty > years. Now, your Malakim has spent 20 years making a Disturbance free > Role. Any Malakite of mine who has a Role is doing so in order to destroy evils only tangentially related to demons, or as backup for the War. Accurate intelligence for an area is quite important in wartime, you know, and there's such a thing as long-term planning. 20 years have gone by. Say good-bye to those 20 years in which no > demon was punished beyond the sound thrashing he gave the Tompson boy after > that one dance. > I must be imagining all those people in the North who had jobs while shooting people in their spare time. (Admittedly many of them were unemployed, which would be expected in areas of 70-90% unemployment, but that can be a Role too. And many of them had a trade, even though they didn't have a job.) And there is the option of having a reliever set up the Role, and slips made by the angel are attributed to bad memory. The argument that relievers have better things to do doesn't make sense to me. This is very important work, and someone has to do it. > I just like my celestials to get to the work that they were created for. > If I was running a game like an FBI investigation, then I might want a more > paper based role system for my characters. There's nothing wrong with that. I reckon you can get by in various special missions without a Role, and if you're good at keeping your head down, you can go a long time in a big city without one, but if you want to run a shelter for the homeless or promote abortion or know all the "made" guys in town, you need a Role. However, for now, they just > need a reason to be able to requisition 40 cc's of elephant tranquilizer > and a dart gun. > Temporary fake credentials supplied from the same quarters who set up the paperwork for Roles, but which aren't actually Roles. Roles are long-term. And that has uses. If your house is searched and police find a number of butchers' knives, you're much better off if you can prove that you're a butcher's apprentice, or better yet are known to the local police as a butcher's apprentice, and thus could be expected to have them. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "Yet it cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire, but not glory." Machiavelli, the Prince. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:16:56 +0100 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: IN> Roles If you go for the full paperwork model of role-creation, then creating some types of roles must have become quite a lot more difficult in the modern day than in past ages. (Drifters would always have been easy). I like the idea of moving some of reality's building blocks around so that a celestial can slip sideways into the gap and plug a role. It at least gives some explanation as to why having a role gives you the ability to mask disturbance. Otherwise we might have to assume that bureacracy contains the secrets of some strange arcane ritual which influences the way that the celestial and the corporeal interact. The power of bureacracy! With no more than a medium-size database, a set of passport photographs and a laserjet 5, humanity will one day conquer both heaven and hell and set all those spare celestials to paper-pushing! Maybe in some alternative universe, this has already happened... (Its a dream ;) ). jo - --- "Some people leave money for the improvement of public buildings. I can leave dynamite for the improvement of public buildings." -- G. K. Chesterton ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 14:09:29 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Roles On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Hart, Joanna wrote: > If you go for the full paperwork model of role-creation, then creating some > types of roles must have become quite a lot more difficult in the modern day > than in past ages. (Drifters would always have been easy). > > I like the idea of moving some of reality's building blocks around so that a > celestial can slip sideways into the gap and plug a role. It at least gives > some explanation as to why having a role gives you the ability to mask > disturbance. Otherwise we might have to assume that bureacracy contains the > secrets of some strange arcane ritual which influences the way that the > celestial and the corporeal interact. I'm not really fond of the "less disturbance if you act within your role" thingie, just because it seems so weird. I can find an explanation for it, though. Building up a high-level role as X requires you to spend a certain amount of time acting as X, which might make the Symphony used to the idea of you doing that sort of thing, meaning it isn't disturbed when you do things that X normally do. X could be "a policeman", "a hobo", "a kindergarten teacher", "a twelve year old ghetto-kid" or whatever. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 14:53:12 +0200 (MET DST) From: Jasper Reijer Floor Subject: Re: IN> Roles On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Hart, Joanna wrote: > > > If you go for the full paperwork model of role-creation, then creating some > > types of roles must have become quite a lot more difficult in the modern day > > than in past ages. (Drifters would always have been easy). > > I'm not really fond of the "less disturbance if you act within your role" > thingie, just because it seems so weird. I can find an explanation for it, > though. Building up a high-level role as X requires you to spend a certain > amount of time acting as X, which might make the Symphony used to the idea > of you doing that sort of thing, meaning it isn't disturbed when you do > things that X normally do. X could be "a policeman", "a hobo", "a > kindergarten teacher", "a twelve year old ghetto-kid" or whatever. I don't believe it is harder to create roles nowadays, I think it is even easier in some ways. In olden days, everybody knew everybody, or else you were an outsider. It was alot harder to fit yourself into a community. OTOH, there wasn't really all that much paperwork (compared to today). Today however you can fit in quite easily, because there are just too many people. Paperwork starts the moment you show up somewhere, and only high level roles will need to extend this back to your birth. Of course high level roles will need alot of work anyway, but in some ways that has become easier because you can fake your past quite efficiently, so that unless someone goes to check with actual living people, they won't be able to see anything wrong. I believe that highlevel roles are set up over years of work, and I personally only grant them at character creation. Relievers or imps can (and do) fake paperwork, but I don't allow reality rewrites, no messing with people's minds, and such, that would disturb the symphony. So, after you have spent some time making your role real (years) then it is essentially part of the local symphony. The people who know you and think you are John Doe, the friendly local grocer, who has been at the same location for 15 years, and is a well respected and loved member of the community, represent the symphony accepting you in that role. Thus, as Mr. Doe, it would be perfectly allright to buy the store next door, take a sledge hammer, and knock out the wall sperating the two (assuming local ordnances, and building structure allow this), without generating dissonance. mvg, Jasper Floor Stone walls do not a prison make,| Nor iron bars a cage; Minds innocent and quiet take | That for an hermitage; If I have freedom in my love, | And in my soul am free, Angels alone that soar above | Enjoy such liberty. Richard Lovelace - To Althea from Prison iv ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 09:51:27 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Armageddon (the location) Yossi Gurvitz wrote: > To be pedantic about it, it is extremely unlikely that whomever > wrote the Book of Revelations, no matter what he was on at the time, > knew anything of Egyptian history, or, for that matter, *any* > history. It seems to be popular to assume that Revelation is a collection of hallucinatory ravings, induced by whatever fungi grow on Patmos. Actually, the vision in the book is rather intricately structured; some of the structure is quite visible -- the repeated use of sevenfold events, and the splitting of the sevens into four, then three, for instance -- and other structures are less apparent but, I think, quite real. One thing the book is, is a recapitulation of the visions and sacred history of Israel. Lots of items in Revelation allude to things like the plagues of Egypt, and the visions of Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel, plus assorted minor prophets. Since he is so carefully referencing sacred history, I think John was quite familiar with those bits of Egyptian history that intersected Israel's history, in particular Josiah's death at Megiddo. But the reference to Armageddon in Revelation (and there is only one) is probably a reference to its use by the minor prophet Zechariah. Zechariah 12 begins: "This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him, declares: "I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples reeling. Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem. On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will injure themselves. " So we are talking Apocalypse here, just like John. Zechariah goes on to say: "On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo." And that's it. Not much of a reference, but then neither is John's. John's use of Armageddon is a reference to Zechariah's, which is a reference to the accounts in Kings and Chronicles. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:23:05 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's Crusade On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, E Kumar wrote: > Personally I believe Uriels represented his word so well that god realized > it had no place in the symphony ( except as horses names). Purity by its > nature is 'free of sin'. So as everything is a part of God and Uriel was > trying to destroy elements of God he was basically cutting out the cancer > without regards to the host entity. Another way to look at it is like this: God, in In Nomine, is the universe. God also has a Destiny and a Fate, personified as Yves and Kronos. It may be that these two beings exist as part of a grand experiment by God, to determine whether or not He has free will. Uriel is the Archangel of Purity. I would (and did) assume that the original function of his Word was to be the "immune system" for God. He found defects in the Symphony and purified them. It wasn't until after the Fall that Uriel took the offensive with that purification. It may very well have been that Uriel performed his function too well. After all, if God was really trying to determine if He had free will, Evil (the Fate of God) had to exist as an option. Uriel was steadily eliminating it, and the Purification Crusade marked the beginning of Uriel's final offensive against the impurities in the Symphony. Therefore, to preserve the integrity of His experiment, God recalled Uriel. (Of course, this doesn't fit my campaign. But it is an interesting point for specualtion, in my opinion.) > Uriel was really purifying God who is unpure. ( Don't want to insult > anyone here, I'm talking about the game). So He took him out of the > heavens and anywhere near the corporeal realm because if he really wanted > to 'purify' everything there would be nothing left! I'm still not sure Uriel target the Corporeal realm for purification. The inhabitants of the Corporeal realm are part of the Symphony, and cannot cause disturbances as long as they remain in the Corporeal and don't use Songs or controlled Essence). I would assume the same remains true for the Ethereal creatures and realm. I get the feeling that destruction was not the point of the Crusade; Uriel merely wanted the Ethereals to remain where they belonged so they would not cause any more disturbance in the Symphony. The slaughter began when the Ethereals refused. > If you don't agree with any of that then at least think of what would have > happened if the Seraphim Council had voted and cast Uriel into hell! Game > over! As I recall, being voted outcast is not the same thing as being a Renegade. Uriel would have retained his Word and his power, and most of his Servitors would probably have followed him into exile (including Laurence, Angel of the Sword). If the Council actually cast him into Hell, it would get bloody. Again, most of his Servitors would have followed him. Hell would interpret it as a full-scale assault by Heaven, and it would probably ignite the Final Battle. Or... Gustav Davidson's _A Dictionary of Angels_ identifies Uriel as being, among other things the "presider over Tartarus". Assuming that the Seraphim Council *had* cast Uriel into Hell, this might have become true in In Nomine. I see two different ways it could happen: 1) Uriel is not stripped of his Word (since I don't believe the Seraphim Council can do that anyway). He becomes an outcast Archangel in Hell, supported by his faithful Servitors (none of whom may Fall either, because they are protected by the Word). The arrival of Uriel and his Legions in Hell catches everyone off guard. Since he is still an Archangel (even though he is in Hell), he decides that it is the will of God that he is in Hell. This leads him to launch an immediate offensive against Lucifer, which drives Lucifer into hiding somewhere in the Marches. Uriel then offers the Demon Princes a choice: accept him as God's representative in Hell and their new master, or die. The Habbalim flock to Uriel, seeing him as the vindication of their beliefs that God had chosen them to be Angels in the Pit. The extra troops bolster Uriel's forces to the point that no single Demon Prince dares to rise against him (and they will not band together against him, as they fear betrayel). Hell is no longer a "safe house" for demons, but is now a place of punishment and torment for the souls of the wicked. Uriel reigns in Hell, administering what he believes to be God's justice, and awaiting the day of the Final Judgement so that he may finally return to Heaven. 2) Uriel is somehow stripped of his Word by the Seraphim Council before he is cast into Hell. Shatered by what has happened to him, Uriel Falls. His faithful Servitors, who followed him into exile, Fall as well. Uriel and the rest of the Fallen Malakim become the Gaalim (which I *think* means "the abominations" - somebody please tell me if I am wrong). Lucifer makes Uriel the Demon Prince of Purity, and he becomes one of the greatest allies of The Game and The War, and one of the greatest enemies of Fire (their Words are too alike for comfort). Laurence becomes Demon of the Sword. Without Uriel and his Word, the Malakim that remain in Heaven are now vulnerable to Falling. They begin to police themselves even more strictly than before, and many of them enter the service of Judgement (in order to guard each other from Falling). They will remain vulnerable to Falling until the Word of Purity is reassigned, which may never happen (Light has never been reassined, after all). Oh, and the Gaalim. Just as the Malakim are the greatest defenders of Heaven, the Gaalim are it's greatest enemies. They are filled with wrath and hatred for all that Heaven represents, and seek to destroy it. In Celestial form they resemble Malakim that are the color of molten steel (the metaphorical fire of their anger). They retain a version of the Malakim resonance for honor and use it to destroy all that is pleasing in the eyes of Heaven; they also retain their immunity to trauma. All of the Gaalim serve Uriel to start with, but eventually they are found in service to all the Princes. > So either way Uriel was an oversight by God . An AA who had far too much > power and so God remedied it. I don't really think it was an oversight. I just think that Uriel lost sight of the purpose of the Crusade as it dragged on, and became caught up with the killing. The Seraphim Council called him in to prevent more bloodshed, and God recalled him to prevent a second War from occuring. > Will Tahariel gain the word of Purity? Maybe in Armageddon because it > might be necessary as a last ditch effort but I personally doubt it. Tahariel will never gain the Word of Purity, because Uriel still holds it. Will Purity be turned loose at the Final Battle? Probably. (Of course, Uriel has already returned in my campaign, but that's another entirely.) > We know the destructive powers of a nuclear bomb so we wisely refrain > from it's use. IMHO, Uriel is more like chemotherapy. When you need him it's good to have him around. But you don't want to go through it if you don't have to. Richard "Mr. Uriel" Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment, or a company entire than to destroy them. -Sun Tzu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #884 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.