From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Mar 6 13:24:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07689 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:24:58 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id NAA22792 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:24:17 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:24:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199903061924.NAA22792@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 #1135 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 Saturday, March 6 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1135 In this digest: Re: IN> FLUFF: Getting a cherub's attention Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) IN> Re: Nature of evil Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil IN> Are you player enough? Hangin' with the Superiors IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Getting a cherub's attention Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 14:12:56 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> FLUFF: Getting a cherub's attention > Ummmm.... Who knows who wandered by while the Lilim was in the > Council Spires? I mean, it would probably take a half-dozen > to have a *prayer* of keeping the Trouble out of trouble. Somehow, I suddenly have this image of a large platoon of Cherubs on Bright Lilim duty. "This is why we don't redeem many - we'd run out of Cherubs, and they'd all die of heart attacks at early ages." > >And should we tell them that the Lilim is once again vehicle enabled, and > >about to spread pain and suffering across the entire DC area instead of > >only in designated spots? That is, until Judgment realizes it loaned > >a car to someone who charged it for a bar tab which is the size of a small > >country's defense budget.... > > (And people wonder why Cherubim of Judgment *don't have to worry* > about the Subject of Investigations!) Well, not after they see the way the Lilim drives. Speed limit? What the heck is a speed limit? > Actually, I think you only have to worry at the end of the week or > the beginning of the next one. After all, sometime around then is > when Dominique drops by to check on how things are doing. "I have not killed myself, my partner, or anyone vaguely, well, angelic. I have not blown up any really important buildings that we really liked. I've only pissed off one Archangel this week - but he was naked. I haven't broken any major international laws. And I've only slept with one French stripper - but she has a snake named Dominique, which I thought was all sorts of cool." Yeah, okay. I can see why Dominic might be a tad peeved. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 18:22:37 -0500 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Earl Wajenberg wrote: > >Matthew Rice wrote: > >> The most important objection that has been made, IMHO, is that >> whatever plans you had in the material realm have probably been >> wrecked by your corporeal death, and the plans that other celestials >> (and Superiors!) might have had that involved you are ALSO messed up. > >Okay, that's another objection to add to my list of four. The >answer, if I may venture to speak for Neel, is that he isn't >(we aren't) saying that celestials should dive into trauma carelessly, >to the endangerment of mission, but that in fact the mission is much >MORE important than trauma. A celestial takes great care not to die >if dying is going to screw up plans, but if dying can be of USE, >then a celestial is going to be much more willing to die than a >real mortal. Exactly -- corporeal death is not permanent for a celestial, so it's a serious and real option in the celestial character's tactical toolbox. The celestial shouldn't think, "Oh my god! I'm going to die!", it should think, "Is my death something that will fit into my plans at this point in time?" Losing a vessel for a celestial is kind of like losing an Internet account for a human -- it's a pain, and it will take expense and time to resub to lists and make sure everyone knows your new username and so on, but it's not the end of the world. And if that account was getting flooded with spam, or if the new account has a faster connect, then getting a new account can be a highly positive thing. (The other 4 Earl answered better than I could have. "As for the pain of Trauma, well, one side is notoriously selfless and the other side calls everlasting torment home." That was a great line.) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswv.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 15:32:27 PST From: "Hydrax 59" Subject: IN> Re: Nature of evil >>I guess what I'm really asking is, in your version of the world, is it >>personal belief or some higher power which decides good, and if the >>second, how can I join the Rebellion? > >Habbalah think they serve God too, remember... I know, but is there any case in your world for people who are acting out of unselfish motives but in what the world considers an "evil" way (such as members of militant groups who seek to ppurify the world of an ethnic group {ie the KKK, the black panthers, oor the crusasders}) who would gain their destiny through doing what they believe to be right. but others wrong. Or do you think that every single one of the crusaders is damned? Yes, Habblah believe they serve God, and I've always found that very %$#&*^ked up personally. I've always found the whole Elohim, Habblah thing very stupid, but that's another story. >a person >with good intentions who does evil will also go to Hell. why if they truly believe it was right? And does this mean that every leader who ever ordered an execution is damned? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 19:04:48 -0800 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Hydrax 59 wrote: > Yes, Habblah believe they serve God, and I've always found that very > %$#&*^ked up personally. I've always found the whole Elohim, Habblah > thing very stupid, but that's another story. Okay, i just -have- to hear more about this. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 01:56:34 -0500 From: Matthew Rice Subject: Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil Hydrax 59 wrote: > > I know, but is there any case in your world for people who are acting > out of unselfish motives but in what the world considers an "evil" way > (such as members of militant groups who seek to ppurify the world of an > ethnic group {ie the KKK, the black panthers, oor the crusasders}) who > would gain their destiny through doing what they believe to be right. > but others wrong. Or do you think that every single one of the crusaders > is damned? > Considering that most of the Crusaders were brain-damaged, looting, thugs....well yes, I'd figure most of them are nice and toasty. The reason the Crusades were so popular was that the church offered total and instant forgiveness for all sins ever committed by someone willing to go and kill funny-looking strangers. A selfish motive AND evil deeds. Not a good combination. As for the "racial crusaders"...well, I fail to see how motives of fear and ignorance could possibly aid someone in fulfilling his destiny. Matthew Rice ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 02:02:42 -0500 From: Matthew Rice Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > Okay, that's another objection to add to my list of four. The > answer, if I may venture to speak for Neel, is that he isn't > (we aren't) saying that celestials should dive into trauma carelessly, > to the endangerment of mission, but that in fact the mission is much > MORE important than trauma. A celestial takes great care not to die > if dying is going to screw up plans, but if dying can be of USE, > then a celestial is going to be much more willing to die than a > real mortal. Goes without saying, since a celestial can get away with it. Knowing when to die is very important, but it's something that should be done with forethought, and without a cavalier ("Oh, well, it's only a week or two of Trauma.") attitude. Unless the character in question is a Malakite, in which case dying is part of the job. Matthew Rice ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 01:33:40 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? >Ben Aldred wrote: > >> Also in terms of angel invading one must remember this is >>esentially a >> cold war. If the US wanted we could have sent thousands of troops to >> invade the Soviet Union during the 50s but that would have started a war >> that nobody was sure they could win. That is the same case with the Angels >> in Los Angeles. They could invade and probably win but at what price. Just >> my two cents > >Actually, the cold war analogy makes exactly the opposite point. Did the US >invade with thousands of troops? No. But they were constantly sending >one and >two individuals at a time into the Soviet Union, beyond the "official" >spies that >worked in the embassy. And I am *absolutely* willing to bet they didn't book those spies First Class on a flight with "spy" printed on their passports. Nor did they have them hopping the Berlin Wall. I'm sure Dominic et al are sending a good number of "quiet" Angels in to keep an eye on the City named after them, but they've got to do it intelligently. Kyriotates moving in slowly with innocuous hosts, hopping from host to host where they can do so without disturbing things until they're in a position to watch carefully comes to mind. (That might be one of the few areas Jordi pitches in on the human front of the war effort). Besides, they don't have to catch every angel trying to slip in. They just have to catch a few. And tear apart their vessels and drag their celestial forms to Hell where they are imprisoned and tortured, their forces slowly torn from their forms and their knowledge painfully extracted from them until there is nothing but a quiet sob in the Symphony where they used to be. The message will quickly be heard -- it's too *risky* to try to come in through the airports. (I'd even jack it up a little, in my campaign. Say, make International Customs a Tether of the Game. It sure seems that way to me sometimes....) >The simple fact about Fall of the Malakim is that it is completely and utterly >implausible on a number of fronts. You can either jump in and make sure >you don't >think about the yawning plot holes, or, like me, you throw up your hands in >disgust and hope that the next set of products avoids these kinds of problems. > Mm. Them's fightin' words. Now, a good Elohite doesn't let anger sway his rhetorical style. Just remember that we have an inner Habbalah begging to punish the wicked.... But today I maintain my objectivity. I very very very much like the style of the adventures in the Revelations Cycle, for it seems precisely the same reason you don't. When running games, I prefer to be freeform -- to know a general outline of where I'm heading, and then letting the players go where they like and using those actions to further my outline. I prefer that very much to adventures where the players must do A, then B, then C to accomplish D. In a freeform outline form, I can give the players the illusion of free will while accomplishing my predestined plans in seren-- Mason, ignore the end of that paragraph. Fall of the Malakim presented an adventure location, peopled it with interesting characters and gave them motivations. It also elaborated on the way the Princes play their games in the Corporeal World by example. Such as Asmodeus keeping a watch on ports of entry into a city that's Demonically controlled. And far more. And at the end, it presented the outline of an adventure. (These events happen before the PCs get involved. These are the goals the Princes -- or these Princes, at least -- are shooting for. This is where we'd like to be at the end.) It doesn't try to fill in the gaps between, but instead lets my players fill those plot holes in. I have channel markers, but they choose the path. I don't bring this up to start an argument -- I bring it up because this is the one game system I've seen that can come up with interesting supplements, backgrounds and adventures and *still* make the game entirely mine to run, and I very much want the Powers That Be to know I appreciate it. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 02:16:01 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) >Matthew Rice wrote: > >> The most important objection that has been made, IMHO, is that >> whatever plans you had in the material realm have probably been >> wrecked by your corporeal death, and the plans that other celestials >> (and Superiors!) might have had that involved you are ALSO messed up. > >Okay, that's another objection to add to my list of four. The >answer, if I may venture to speak for Neel, is that he isn't >(we aren't) saying that celestials should dive into trauma carelessly, >to the endangerment of mission, but that in fact the mission is much >MORE important than trauma. A celestial takes great care not to die >if dying is going to screw up plans, but if dying can be of USE, >then a celestial is going to be much more willing to die than a >real mortal. > Absolutely agreed. And while a Superior is likely to be annoyed, it would be far less so on their part if the servitor's vessel got lost to further the objective. Resources are to be expended as *needed.* But need is very important. However, it remains (very very much) a *last* resort -- because if you don't *succeed* at your objective with your sacrifice, your opposition will still have that much more ability to operate. (Success is relative, too. Most of the time, I could see three NPC Demons happily sacrificing themselves corporeally to take out one PC Angel corporeally... but I could also see one Angel sacrificing himself to take out three demons. Perspective is everything in a war of attrition.) - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 02:41:49 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil >>>I guess what I'm really asking is, in your version of the world, is it >>>personal belief or some higher power which decides good, and if the >>>second, how can I join the Rebellion? >> >>Habbalah think they serve God too, remember... > > I know, but is there any case in your world for people who are acting >out of unselfish motives but in what the world considers an "evil" way Hm. I call this "grey area." I think a truly unselfish person doing something unselfishly that the world would find selfish would either A) be right (and the world just didn't know it) and therefore would achieve his destiny, or B) be misguided and end up in the cosmic recycling bin to try again. I'd be very unlikely to declare such a person Damned. But it's a "your milage may very question." [Yves looked distant for a second. "You know, child... the ends don't justify the means, but neither do the ends vilify the means. One can make the correct decision at the point of cusp and still have it turn out wrong. Destiny is patient, sometimes."] > Or do you think that every single one of the crusaders >is damned? > I fall back on C.L. Lewis for the answer to *that* one. The Chronicles of Narnia, which I don't have with me (I'm at a con right at the moment so I can't quote directly). However, one of the soldiers who fought against Aslan in the Last Battle is brought by Aslan to Paradise along with the rest, because whenever he did a good deed in the name of the Adversary, it was truly done in Aslan's name. I think the leaders of the Crusades (the Popes, Richard the "Lionhearted," the Byzantines who started it all, etc.) would be damned for selfishness. I think the poor wretched soldier who walked thousands of miles in armor, endured massive heat, then massive rainstorms, then massive hunger, then being besiged for days on end but continued on because he was serving something he believed with all his heart was right and good would be declared "unselfish" even by Khalid. >Yes, Habblah believe they serve God, and I've always found that very >%$#&*^ked up personally. I've always found the whole Elohim, Habblah >thing very stupid, but that's another story. > I *love* the Elohim/Habbalah duality -- of all the bright/dark versions, it's one of the two that *truly* resonates for me. (The other is Cherub/Djinn.) Elohite -- Objective. Strives to see all viewpoints and eliminate personal (selfish) feelings in lieu of finding the true and proper (selfless) course of action. Habbalite -- Subjective. *Only* sees and believes his own viewpoint, and is enraged when others disagree with it. Selfishly imposes his own emotional reactions onto others to force them to agree with him. Monomaniacally inflicts punishment on "wrongdoers" (meaning people who disagree with him). For a Habbalite to believe his subjective point of view is utterly correct, he has to believe it was ordained. This is the crucial difference between the Habbalah and the Balseraphs -- the Balseraphs know they're demons, but have forced their worldview to affirm that they're right and God/the angels are wrong. Habbalah believe that they're right and God *must* know it, and everyone else is hateful and jealous. (The duality that I have the most trouble with is Calabim/Ofanim -- I just don't see how desperate motion Falls into desperate destruction. The latter doesn't seem like selfish motion to me.) >>a person >>with good intentions who does evil will also go to Hell. > >why if they truly believe it was right? And does this mean that every >leader who ever ordered an execution is damned? > > In IN terms, I always fall back on Selfless/Selfish and Destiny/Fate. A leader who executes a man may do it for his own political neck (selfish) or because he feels its the only way for his people to find justice (selfless), but it's not particularly likely that execution will be his Destiny or Fate. (Though it's *possible.*) Now, a leader like Stalin who executes millions in purges designed to maintain his own insane and twisted hold on power... Fate City. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 03:48:54 PST From: "Martin Arnold" Subject: IN> Are you player enough? Hangin' with the Superiors Yeah? Well in MY game I, the GM (that's God-Munchkin) have a hitpoint rating and experience level of my own, just in readiness for those moments when the players become superiors! ~lol~ Martin ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 03:49:31 PST From: "Martin Arnold" Subject: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink ">IN Nomine: Vurt anyone? Ooh. I like. :) - - - J" I think this would be Novalis and Eli's very idea of Heaven. Imagine all those crossbreeds, the Grigori and their offspring would be right among them I think. God of course would be Miss Hobart (IIRC - it's been a while since I read it!). john Barleycorn would be an ethereal spirit. But those feathers! The possibilities are mind-numbingly surreal! ;-) On the subject of FotM and it's many errors… Beth: "Bingo -- the Sense for Betrayal attunement (Heaven & Hell, p. 24) detects dissonance in *anyone*, combined with... Shedim (can't possess celestials), Habbalah (limited emotion-sense like Elohim), Lilim (Need-readers), as well as some mundane background checks on suspicious folks..." Can you explain this in the context of the question (the airport Q); I don't understand… Actually while you're at it, could you explain Bright Lilim! :-) For my money, Lilim resonance is inherently selfish; how can it be used for good? Also, if they are made from Lilith's own family recipe (it's been with us for generations) then again they are inherently selfish. Can that which is the essence of evil be good? (that's suitably dramatic ;-), but without something to balance out the light how can there be light? Can Lucifer ever redeem - would God let him? Hmm how did I get onto this? Ah who gives a…) Martin "While you are away, my heart comes undone Slowly unravels, in a ball of yarn The devil collects it, with a grin He'll never return it So when you come back, we'll have to make new love…" PS I'm kind of curious so I hope no one minds me asking this question, but just how well is IN selling/has sold? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 08:16:31 EST From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Getting a cherub's attention >1) Malakite of War goes to the home of a Soldier attuned to his >co-worker, a Cherub of War, to warn her that she might be stalked. >Unknown to the Malakite, the Cherub has already warned the Soldier, so >when the Malakite sneaks up to the house, the Soldier assumes he is the >stalker and threatens him with a pistol. While the Malakite is trying >to explain the true situation, the GM tells the Cherub's player that he >has a strong feeling that the Soldier is in danger. (I, playing the >Malakite, explain to the GM that the Soldier *isn't* in danger of >anything except having the gun taken away from her by force if she >really tries to shoot me with it. The GM thinks this still counts.) This wouldn't work anyway, Michael's Cherubs know if there attunement will be destroyed within 24 hours BARRING the quote "intervenion of Celestial Forces". David Angel of Hippies, Servitor of Novalis ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:15:12 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Besides, they don't have to catch every angel trying to slip in. They just > have to catch a few. And tear apart their vessels and drag their celestial > forms to Hell Obviously that's not actually possible, unless there were any McGuffin^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H special artifacts in FoTM that I missed. But the point is good. In any case, the demons don't have to resonate on everyone coming through - - just like real-life customs they can just make enough random checks that it isn't worth risking, so angels can only arrive in coach-loads, not plane-loads. :-) > (I'd even jack it up a little, in my campaign. Say, make International > Customs a Tether of the Game. It sure seems that way to me sometimes....) That's a very good idea - can we assume that the Seneschal of a thether automatically knows when a celestial walks into it? So if customs, or even better the taxi rank, is a tether, it gets a whole lot easier to spot 'visitors'. > >Ben Aldred wrote: > >don't think about the yawning plot holes, > Fall of the Malakim presented an adventure location, peopled it with > interesting characters and gave them motivations... It doesn't try > to fill in the gaps between, but instead lets my players fill those plot > holes in. Different kind of plot holes. The adventure seed / player shoehorn device in FoTM is widely thought to have sucked not because of lack of plot detail (it had plot 'spaces' - not a problem) but because the events described were in many ways inconsistent with the IN rules, the personalities of various superiors and NPCs, the details given in the book, the principle of causality, and sheer common sense (in some people's opinions). i.e, it had plot 'holes'. As an example, I think the biggest single complaint was that Dominic could possibly ever cast out an innocent group of angels based on his refusal to believe their story - that's either way dissonant or way stupid. It turned out it was necessary for (and explained in?) the next book, which I havn't read. This is all list history. The authors and Beth did a good job of explaining why it *could* all work, but this required a lot more wordage than was available in the book, and still didn't convince everyone. Steve. - ------ I am Homer of Borg. Prepare to be.... oooooh, doughnuts. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 09:25:53 -0500 (EST) From: jadasc@ma.ultranet.com (Jason Schneiderman) Subject: Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil At 2:41 AM 3/6/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >(The duality that I have the most trouble with is Calabim/Ofanim -- I just >don't see how desperate motion Falls into desperate destruction. The >latter doesn't seem like selfish motion to me.) Not so much *selfish* motion as *frustrated* motion. Okay. Try this. A Seraph tells the truth. A Balseraph has people believe him. A Mercurian loves humanity. An Impudite gets people to adore him. An Ofanite moves swiftly. A Calabite _gets_obstacles_out_of_his_way_. - - Jason - --- jadasc@ma.ultranet.com (life) werther@hilander.com (play) "But, except in dreams, you're never really free and don't the sun look angry at me?" _Desperadoes_Under_The_Eaves_, Warren Zevon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:28:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Matthew Rice wrote: > Goes without saying, since a celestial can get away with it. Knowing > when to die is very important, but it's something that should be done > with forethought, and without a cavalier ("Oh, well, it's only a week or > two of Trauma.") attitude. Very much depends on the flavour of your campaign. For thigh-slpping, leather-trousered heroes of Heaven, it may well be a case of 'Death? Only a flesh wound my dear chap! Last one back to his Heart is a rotten egg!' For IN meets Kult, it might well be more along the lines of 'Death? Meep!' Somewhere in the middle, celestials accept death as a viable sacrifice, but avoid it where possible. Pretending Trauma isn't all that bad might help some (non-Seraph) types brace themselves. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 10:24:02 -0500 (EST) From: jadasc@ma.ultranet.com (Jason Schneiderman) Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) At 2:28 PM 3/6/99, Steve Jessop wrote: >Somewhere in the middle, celestials accept death as a viable sacrifice, >but avoid it where possible. Pretending Trauma isn't all that bad might >help some (non-Seraph) types brace themselves. Ooh. Sick thought. Imagine, if you will, an Ofanite - a Wind servitor, perhaps - who's been sent up the river to a maximum-security prison by the Game, and has to choose between slowly racking point after point of Dissonance or taking a "quick" exit, and risking Trauma in the process. - - Jason - --- jadasc@ma.ultranet.com (life) werther@hilander.com (play) "But, except in dreams, you're never really free and don't the sun look angry at me?" _Desperadoes_Under_The_Eaves_, Warren Zevon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:32:13 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Nature of evil >At 2:41 AM 3/6/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >>(The duality that I have the most trouble with is Calabim/Ofanim -- I just >>don't see how desperate motion Falls into desperate destruction. The >>latter doesn't seem like selfish motion to me.) > >Not so much *selfish* motion as *frustrated* motion. > >Okay. Try this. >A Seraph tells the truth. A Balseraph has people believe him. >A Mercurian loves humanity. An Impudite gets people to adore him. >An Ofanite moves swiftly. A Calabite _gets_obstacles_out_of_his_way_. > Hm. Selfless figuring out of the swiftest path versus selfish knocking things in your way into their component atoms? Maybe. ;) It makes some sense to me, at least. I still don't find the fit to be perfect, but neither do I have to. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:56:39 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) >On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Matthew Rice wrote: > >> Goes without saying, since a celestial can get away with it. Knowing >> when to die is very important, but it's something that should be done >> with forethought, and without a cavalier ("Oh, well, it's only a week or >> two of Trauma.") attitude. > >Very much depends on the flavour of your campaign. For me, it would go... a little something like this... When an Angel's vessel is killed, the Angel is torn, violently, from the Corporeal realm. In so happening, he is also torn away from the Symphony and thrown into another part of it. For a brief second, he is utterly, totally and completely *alone* in a way he would never thought possible. For that brief second, he can *understand* Mortality. He can even understand what it is like to Fall, as his own notes, as hurt as they are, are the only ones he can hear. Imagine being forced into sensory deprivation for six months. Imagine being plunged into sensory overload for six months. Both happen to an Angel in that split second of Corporeal Death, and it is *hideous.* And then, the song of the Angel's Heart calls to him, and he finds it. And the Heart sings to him, echoing the symphony, and pushing the pain away, and the Angel grabs hold of that song and the Symphony it seems he had lost forever, and *clings* to it, terrified, like a child clinging to a stuffed animal in the face of his parents dying. He rocks with it and sobs and refuses to let go for a long long time, letting the horror slowly filter out of the music of his celestial form, letting him slowly return to himself entirely. Malakim hate this as much as anyone else does, but they endure it -- over and over and over again -- until finally, they let go of parts of themself. In a way, they stop letting themselves love their connections to the Symphony, to sensation, so that the shock of that Corporeal death is no longer a shock, but an inevitability. Perhaps this is a part of why they can't Fall -- when you have let that part of yourself die, it cannot be turned in on itself to stare inward into its own personal Hellish Symphony. When a Demon's vessel is killed, on the other hand... something infinitely worse happens. The Symphony of the world, that terrible, wonderful tapestry which the Demon has blinded himself to, focusing on his own personal Symphony, intrudes *physically* on the Demon and shatters his connection to the Corporeal. For that same split second, the Demon is thrown into the same deprivation/overload fugue that an Angel is, but for the Demon it's his own selfish personal Symphony he can't hear, while he is exposed, naked, to the sheer power of the Symphony -- the glory that he can no longer access. He is reminded of *everything* that he has lost, and for that eternal instant all the self-deception is gone and the horror of what he has become *hits* him. And then the driving, pounding beat of the Demon's Heart pulls on him, dragging him back to it. Letting him focus on its infernal, selfish rhythm. Letting it lull him and drive back everything -- letting him forget the Symphony, forget what he's lost. Letting him focus on that beat, that music that is his, *just* his, and letting him exclude the entire universe. And slowly, the Demon lets himself drain away his self-perspective, and the deceptions the Demon has made into his existence take over, and he comes back to 'reality.' Under this interpretation, Lilim must hate Trauma more than any other Celestial, since they'd never heard the Symphony in the first place, so they're confronted with the Other Side in such a gut wrenching way that they have to purge themselves of it. (Though it wouldn't surprise me if Bright Lilim had to die at least once corporeally in order for that other side to begin to creep inside of them). And under this interpretation, an Outcast or Renegade without a Heart must *really* hate Death. Not just because of the time it takes... but because he has to come back from the hideous, horrible endurance of that death without a guide. He is *alone* for it, and only the utter nothingness of Limbo makes it possible for him to do it at all... so perhaps that Outcast/Renegade *drives* himself to Limbo, since there he can overcome the Trauma of what has happened... of what perspective he has gained... and slowly sooth himself back into being. So, I guess I'm one of those people for whom Death is Not Good for Celestials, eh? ;) - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:28:12 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? >On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Different kind of plot holes. The adventure seed / player shoehorn device >in FoTM is widely thought to have sucked not because of lack of plot >detail (it had plot 'spaces' - not a problem) but because the events >described were in many ways inconsistent with the IN rules, the >personalities of various superiors and NPCs, the details given in the >book, the principle of causality, and sheer common sense (in some people's >opinions). Player Shoehorn Device... there's a Relic writeup in there somewhere... ObAdmission: I had no intention to get more of the Revelations books than I felt I needed for specific rules. IE -- I felt I needed the Marches so I'd have extended writeups of the Marches. I wanted the new Superior descs, and the extended writeups of Superior Classic, but the adventures didn't mean much to me. So, originally FotM and Night Music were *very* low on my list of gets, because I didn't feel like I needed 'settings' very much. To make a long story short, I discovered on a multihour day trip to my nearest gaming store that they had marked down FotM (it was a return), and would give me a major discount because I was buying a lot of In Nomine stuff that day. So, heady with said discount, I bought... well, everything they had. Fleurity has a servitor working for him with the Word of Role Playing Supplements, I'm just sure. And, as I've reported before, I was *very* much surprised at how much I liked in those books. Some may have had adventure seeds I didn't much care about (Night Music comes to mind.) Others fascinated me -- and Fall of the Malakim was one of those. Perhaps its my willingness to depart from the text in order to fit it into my world view (so I may have 'accepted' a lot of things others wouldn't in the adventure part). Perhaps my brain pan is soft and needs a fluid upgrade, but I really liked the supplement. I also liked the formation of Los Angeles as the East Berlin of In Nomine. Especially with San Francisco a few hours away as the West Berlin. Yes, I think there are a number of 'hidden spies' in each city (and who knows how many Soldiers), but mass invasions would trigger things no one wanted to trigger just yet.... Anyway, it's all my Opinion, and by gum I'm proud of it. >This is all list history. The authors and Beth did a good job of >explaining why it *could* all work, but this required a lot more wordage >than was available in the book, and still didn't convince everyone. > I only went so far back in my reading of the digests. I guess I should bite the bullet and reinfect my office machine with the User Friendly Productivity Virus one of these days (mutated into In Nomine form), and go back and read the lot. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 20:19:53 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Corproeal Death (was FoTM) On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Under this interpretation, Lilim must hate Trauma more than any other > Celestial, since they'd never heard the Symphony in the first place, so > they're confronted with the Other Side in such a gut wrenching way that > they have to purge themselves of it. (Though it wouldn't surprise me if > Bright Lilim had to die at least once corporeally in order for that other > side to begin to creep inside of them). It would be the same for any demon made in Hell, I suppose. Very nice explanation. I've saved it for possible future games. ;) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! A discordian is anyone willing to look at the windmills and concede that they might be giants. - Principia Discordia ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1135 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.