From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Mar 9 21:26:43 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 VAA06688 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:26:42 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id VAA17163 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:23:11 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:23:11 -0600 Message-Id: <199903100323.VAA17163@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 #1140 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, March 9 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1140 In this digest: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict IN> Bright lilim colour schemes. Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict RE: IN> Lilim and Marc Re: IN> Bright lilim colour schemes. IN> FLUFF! (Re: Bright lilim colour schemes.) RE: IN> Lilim and Marc Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Lilim and Marc IN> glad you are well RE: IN> glad you are well Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> glad you are well Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> glad you are well Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 13:19:31 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, EDG wrote: > To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break > into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing > him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is > caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got > stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. Does > Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? Yes, because the Geas is not inherently impossible, only temporarily impossible. If the store went bankrupt, then Ed would stop taking damage from the Geas (after taking only last round of damage as the Geas became impossible.) Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 14:32:09 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict At 12:41 PM -0600 3/9/99, Elizabeth Bartley wrote: >On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> So if you want to kill someone with Geases soundlessly, you Geas one >> guy to booby-trap the tree, and another to chop it down (and have >> it land on him). > >Wouldn't it be simpler to just Geas person A to shoot person B? I >wouldn't expect that to cause noise since ordering a Soldier to shoot >another human doesn't. Well, yes, that would work too. But falling trees are so much more, um, unique? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 14:35:11 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict At 2:11 PM -0500 3/9/99, EDG wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> I'd say yes. >On the other hand, it's still supernaturally-inflicted damage. Bingo. >Another interesting question: If a Geas is _effectively_ impossible to >fulfill, does the Geas continue to do damage? > >To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break >into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing >him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is >caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got >stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. Does >Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and threw the key down the toilet. Only if that store burns down or it somehow becomes *actually* impossible to fulfill it, will Ed get the Geas lifted. (If a GM wants to be kind, then they can let "Effectively Impossible" work, but it'll cause other problems down the line as PCs willingly make things effectively impossible for themselves.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 13:38:30 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Well, yes, that would work too. But falling trees are so much more, > um, unique? And if you handle it carefully the booby-trapper might never realize he helped kill someone. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 14:43:47 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and > threw the key down the toilet. Only if that store burns down or it > somehow becomes *actually* impossible to fulfill it, will Ed get > the Geas lifted. > (If a GM wants to be kind, then they can let "Effectively Impossible" > work, but it'll cause other problems down the line as PCs willingly > make things effectively impossible for themselves.) My point here, though, is that it's not willing. The argument rests on the fact that this is involuntary imprisonment: He fully intended to fulfill his end of the bargain, but something beyond his control happened to prevent him from doing so. - -EDG who has a feeling he's arguing a moot point... - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu 159.28.165.120 "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 19:46:44 -0000 From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth McCoy >>To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break >>into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing >>him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is >>caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got >>stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. Does >>Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? > >He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and >threw the key down the toilet. Hang on. Surely the geas can only imply 'do your utmost to fulfil this' and he did. What if a Lilim geases somenoe to do something which they're just incapable of -- ie 'Take this exam for me and get top marks'? In this case, she geased an incompetent burglar. A geas can't make someone competent, and I don't think it should punish someone who was genuinely doing their best to fulfil it. jo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 14:35:54 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> I'd say yes. > >The objection that was aired last night when we were discussing this >(Ben, Perry, myself, and some other members of our gaming collective, >that is) was that if a human is taking damage from not fulfilling a >Geas, he's probably (barring intervention) doing it of his own free >will, which implies that he's choosing to inflict the damage upon >himself. > >On the other hand, it's still supernaturally-inflicted damage. > >Another interesting question: If a Geas is _effectively_ impossible to >fulfill, does the Geas continue to do damage? > >To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break >into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing >him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is >caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got >stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. Does >Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? > I say yes. Now, if he tries to get out (escape, plea bargain, lie, cheat, whatever) so that he can get back to that store and steal a hundred bucks worth of pez dispensors and gum, he's still actively attempting to fulfill the geas condition. And likely will be watched for psychiatric evaluation, since he seems fixated on getting out to steal pez dispensors and gum. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 22:51:15 +0300 From: "Tick Tock" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth McCoy A question, please (I confess confusion concerning Lilim): >He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and >threw the key down the toilet. Only if that store burns down or it >somehow becomes *actually* impossible to fulfill it, will Ed get >the Geas lifted. Would the geas level become greater in the example used now that poor Ed is in prison and must now escape to fulfill the geas? Would he continue to take damage if he is acting to effect his release by escaping? ... time waits for one man .... ... if he is willing to pay the price ... TickTock ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:04:12 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict >-----Original Message----- >From: Elizabeth McCoy >>>To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break >>>into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing >>>him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is >>>caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got >>>stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. Does >>>Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? >> >>He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and >>threw the key down the toilet. > >Hang on. Surely the geas can only imply 'do your utmost to fulfil this' and >he did. What if a Lilim geases somenoe to do something which they're just >incapable of -- ie 'Take this exam for me and get top marks'? > >In this case, she geased an incompetent burglar. A geas can't make someone >competent, and I don't think it should punish someone who was genuinely >doing their best to fulfil it. > Well, it *is* Hell. It doesn't have to be fair, merely equitable to the favor. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 14:27:33 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Just let me clarify one thing about geasa: you *do* take damage from a geas if you do absolutely everything within your power to fulfill it, and the opposition succeeds in thwarting you. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:41:52 -0500 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Bright lilim colour schemes. >Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 16:44:43 -0500 >From: Elizabeth McCoy >Subject: Re: IN> RE: in_nomine-digest V1 #1137 >>Oh Mighty Archangel. >>Bright lilim are sort of bright. >>They aren't green any more. >>Novalis washes them whiter than white. > And then there's Kanah's commentary on redemption For her stated objectives, Aron was wrong about Kanah, he and the other Malakim overreacted to having her in their power. End result No redemption and only the most minimal of benefit from having her around. That of course is a personal judgement after the fact based on the end results. >in Maya's Fiat Justitia game. And on being washed by Novalis. Along with a number of comments about damionique having lost her lovely green skin tone. >Not to mention that the Bright over in that game is tie-dye... That's wings, Bright lilim wings come in a range of colours agreed. Damioniques choice is not unexpected from a celestial involved in breeding socks. I was some what surprised she didn't choose Day-Glo colours. >(homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/fiat.html) I Know, I've only managed to read halfway through week 3 so far, the various film scripts and IN Sliders keep distracting me. And the CPG. It is however rare for me to spend so much time giggling at a transcript of a playing session I wasn't involved in. This many is very unusual. Adam Malakim of Creation, Angel of Philosophical Weapons ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:42:04 -0500 From: Adam Canning Subject: Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? >Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 15:53:40 -0500 (EST) >From: Emily Dresner >> (Of course, that does assume that Lilim psychology is simply *so* biased >> towards fulfilling Geases that their brains just turn off. Though a >> Bright has more to lose from dissonance than a dark one -- she can, >> after all, Fall again.) >I've always played it that way, more or less. The Lilim gets a geased >called in, and it submurges her consciousness. Depending on how big the >geas is is how much of her is actually in control. A small, level-1 geas >will put a small dent in the Lilim's psyche, a level-6 will make her into >an automaton. >If you want to play this with points or stats, you can say that the >Lilim's will is submurged by (Level of Geas x 2) points - a 10 will Lilim >under a 1 geas will have an effective will of 8, under a 2 would have a >will of 6, etc. To resist the geas (and thus pick up dissonance), it >might be a will roll. Basically, any Lilim under a 5 or a 6 would be a >robot, carrying out the will of the geas. That would explain Mira Klien's actions but not Blandine's confidence she will do the right thing when Malphas asks for his geas. Adam Malakim of Creation, Angel of Philosophical Weapons ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:41:58 -0500 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink > Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:17:53 -0500 >From: David Edelstein > If the angels use any sense at all, they'll send someone who >doesn't have anything that will be a telltale give-away (like dissonance, or >coming straight from San Francisco, or being a Malakite radiating a Need to >Kill Demons) One of the better uses of Bright Lilim. Finding out which favours not to accept from strange demons. Also of course finding out whether the new malakite in the party is an obsessive demon hunter or a cosmic repair person. Adam Malakim of Creation, Angel of Philosophical Weapons ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 20:47:01 -0000 From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict What if the person who geased you deliberately sabotages you? (See how quickly it could get twinkish?) jo - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Bartley To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: 09 March 1999 20:39 Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict > >Just let me clarify one thing about geasa: you *do* take damage from a >geas if you do absolutely everything within your power to fulfill it, and >the opposition succeeds in thwarting you. > > Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 15:55:17 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Jo Hart wrote: > What if the person who geased you deliberately sabotages you? (See how > quickly it could get twinkish?) Hee hee... Geas someone to rob a specific store, then Geas the owner of the store into closing said store... Geas two humans you don't like into blowing the same thing up, without letting either know you're asking the other... *grins* Watch out, Perry... *evil laugh* - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu 159.28.165.120 "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:00:49 -0500 From: Adam Canning Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc >Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:20:41 +0100 (CET) >From: Anders Gabrielsson >But Destiny isn't Marc's province. He wants to promote Trade. A used >bookstore might be a suitable place for that, though I would rather think >he puts a human servitor to run it. Having an angel sitting around >fiddling with old books doesn't seem like an optimal use of resources. >OTOH, if the store is a Tether things are quite different. :) Good Omen's P13 Aziraphale (An Angel, and part time rare-book dealer) Adam Malakim of Creation, Angel of Philosophical Weapons ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:05:31 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Bright lilim colour schemes. > Along with a number of comments about damionique having lost > her lovely green skin tone. Yeah, well, Daimonique thinks she's transparent, now. She's entirely the wrong color, and her skin tone doesn't match her ties. This is, as they say, a problem, and a bit on the disturbing side. Clearly, the only solution is to buy new ties. > >Not to mention that the Bright over in that game is tie-dye... > > That's wings, Bright lilim wings come in a range of colours agreed. > Damioniques choice is not unexpected from a celestial involved in > breeding socks. I was some what surprised she didn't choose Day-Glo > colours. > Breeding socks... not during game time! And that wasn't my fault! I was... was... was possessed by a Shedite! Yeah! YEAH! That's it! Ahem. I'm more surprised she didn't choose plaid, considering my prediliction for dressing in exceedingly poor taste and owning more than a few pairs of plaid pants. But then she might be confused with Michael's with the tartan colors and all. Or some sort of garish 70's flower print so that she could be the Lilim from SHAFT. "Whose the private Lilim who gets all the chicks?" And for a while, the @desc on Daimon was this bright yellow polyester leisure suit. But apparently Cherubim protect you from everyone: including yourself. It was changed in the interests of Public Decency. So tie-dye it was. At least it's hard to miss. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:18:35 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> FLUFF! (Re: Bright lilim colour schemes.) At 3:41 PM -0500 3/9/99, Adam Canning wrote: >>From: Elizabeth McCoy >>>Oh Mighty Archangel. >>>Bright lilim are sort of bright. >>>They aren't green any more. >>>Novalis washes them whiter than white. > >> And then there's Kanah's commentary on redemption > >For her stated objectives, Aron was wrong about Kanah, he and the >other Malakim overreacted to having her in their power. End result > No redemption and only the most minimal of benefit from having her around. Heh... Kanah's not redemption material, really -- though she, of course, feels very ill-used by the angels. O;> But then, she expects that sort of thing from Malakim. That's why she thought it was Funny to be caught by them. Her. Kanah, who has died as many times as they. In their power, and needing to survive. (Kanah shows up later, of course, in, hm, week 3 -- you noticed that, right?) >>(homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/fiat.html) > >I Know, I've only managed to read halfway through week 3 so far, >the various film scripts and IN Sliders keep distracting me. (You, too, shall be subject to... The Fiat Addiction!) >And the CPG. It is however rare for me to spend so much time giggling >at a transcript of a playing session I wasn't involved in. >This many is very unusual. It's a very fun game. The GM and PCs are very talented. I hope that some of the guest NPCs are as well. O;> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 22:38:36 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Adam Canning wrote: > >Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:20:41 +0100 (CET) > >From: Anders Gabrielsson > >But Destiny isn't Marc's province. He wants to promote Trade. A used > >bookstore might be a suitable place for that, though I would rather think > >he puts a human servitor to run it. Having an angel sitting around > >fiddling with old books doesn't seem like an optimal use of resources. > >OTOH, if the store is a Tether things are quite different. :) > > Good Omen's P13 > Aziraphale (An Angel, and part time rare-book dealer) Well, Good Omen =/= IN. :) 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 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 09:07:18 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Kevin Walsh wrote: > I keep thinking that if I were an angel trying this sort of stunt I would > consider wearing sunglasses to get away from sneaking Lilim. Of course > that might draw other attention, depending on the weather. In an airport with 10,000 people per hour, it would be a simple matter to keep your eyes down and not make direct eye contact with people. The only people you *would* have to make eye contact with are the Customs people, if you are coming in from over seas. Even then you could probably attribute not making eye contact with them to jet lag. The next biggest problem (I have) with FotM is Archangel David. In his expanded write-up, he is protrayed as compassionate, caring of his servitors, but favouring a hard-love, no-visible-emotion approach. In the FotM adventure, his IQ suddenly drops to below that of Saminga. Only the dumbest Archangel would *not* be aware of one of their Malakite's dissonance conditions, and would place them in direct violation of those conditions, with strict orders to deal with it. David would have *known* that Max was going to rake up Dissonance fast, and then develop Discord after Discord. Sure this could be punishment for a very short period, but not the length of time that David left Max there. Unless he forgot about Max, which increases the stupidity of this Archangel. If FotM was actually played IMG, David would be the next big trial of Heaven, accused by Donminic of "Willful stupidity and Treason, attempting to add to the forces of the enemy by causing your own servants to Fall." And this time I don't think God would intervene. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:47:07 -0800 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> Lilim and Marc Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > OTOH, I'm not sure how pleased Marc would be with his angels running used > book stores... I think there should be more important things for them to > do, like fighting the War. You are forgetting that the War can be infinitely -subtle-. Running a used book store might be a -very- good thing for a few angels to do. How many people have been inspired by a book to change their lives? How delightful a place to sit and -observe- things without having to maintain a demanding Role, yet have access to the entire community. Have reading and discussion groups to 'feel out' potential Soldiers and propogate Heaven's ideals through the masses. All these things can further the cause, it's not all flaming swords and espionage, after all. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 13:59:04 PST From: "Martin Arnold" Subject: IN> glad you are well Martin Rameesh writes: "Is the Resonance of the Lilim anymore inherently selfish than Marc's Word of Trade? Now, now don't get me into trouble; I wanna go upstairs when I snuffs it! ~l~ Seriously, the resonance of Lilim is selfish there's no two ways abut it, IMG anyway! To do something expecting something in return (which is how they operate and how they function, else their resonance would be bloody useless!) is selfish. There endeth the parable. Maybe Marc's word is selfish, but perhaps he oversees 'the give and take of daily life' in a more -accountant-like fashion; so long as the books are balanced it doesn't matter. But either way, how can a Lilim redeem ad keep her resonance? Kevin Walsh: "The difference between many geasa and agreed upon trades is a rather large one. One is a compulsion, and the other isn't." Also the victim likely has no idea that they are dealing with hellspawn. Secondly it's forced on them, thirdly Marc's word inspires, as he's selfless (!), openness in that all parties concerned are fully aware of what they are getting into, regardless of what that is. That is Marc's word. Beth: "The explanation is, simply, that anyone with a trace of dissonance can be picked up by a Gamester with Sense of Betrayal." Cheers me dears for explaining that one, like. Although it sounds like Munchkins on Day Release to the Airport! ~g~ "Imposing Geases can be selfish, or it can be selfless -- such as a Lilim making a scumbag businessman give to charity (Lilim of Gabriel, anyone?) or forcing a demon to keep its word (Lilim of the Sword, perhaps?)." For my money, geas are selfish, period. Seeing needs isn't but the minute they use their power to make the person pay them back, even in a 'nice' way (pass the collection plate) they are knock-knock-knocking on Hells' door. Maybe Bright Lilim should have a new power instead to go with their seeing needs (as obviously this aint enough on it's own). The reason is that you are forcing someone to do something because you have done something for them. "Also check out the "agreed-upon-Geases" (in the Infernal Player's Guide, sophisticated use of resonance) and Trade's Divine Contract Servitor Attunement." Well, even if both parties are aware surely it's till selfish…isn't it? Maybe? You are still entering the deal because you want something in return. (Hmmm, I am aware of where this is going!) I don't want to sound like I'm preaching something, but given the nature of the subject matter, I think its an appropriate point, even if it does ruin the game! ~l~ In the end the act of doing someone a favour simply to get something out of it in the end, which is, as I understand it, how Lilim resonance works (bright or dark), is selfish. Rameesh: "Ahh... I see, because you *have* to pay the Lilim back it's obviously evil. But if you were able to walk away from the bargain, like a normal deal it'd be okay." And because the L:ilim is only doing you a favour because she wants something in return. Maybe the Brights are a little different, but the resonance is the same IIRC, ruleswise. Wade (hello Wade!): "Easy. Geas someone into doing something for their own good, or the greater good. Geas the druggie into checking himself into rehab…The list goes on..." However, forcing the poor sod into rehab is selfish. The Lilim, I'm assuming, is thinking 'hey, ill help you do such-and-such, but only if you get help now y'hear!' Again the Lilim is only acting out of personal motivation, that is hardly selfless! Maybe the outcome is helpful (maybe not, the junkie is obviously not ready for rehab and therefor may end up doing more harm than good!). This raises another question; does the Bright resonance allow the to detect what would be the best use of their geas. For example, instead of just slapping a well-intentioned Geas on the junkie, could the Lilim on a successful roll or whatever know how best to lay that geas (maybe rehab's not the best place right no, but I know how best to help you). I guess tat would tie n with the victim's Destiny! "I don't think so. Lilim aren't just copies of Lilith." No but it is implied that Lilith, more than any other DP, invests more of herself in the creation of Lilim. Hence their nickname. What I'm getting at is the fact that the Lilim resonance, also, is born of Lilith. Anders: "I'd actually recommend the movie Michael for seeing how a Bright might work." But it's got john Travolta in! ~l~ Kim (hi Kim): "I try to do this. I've also been playing with the idea that Lilim that serve a Word tend to get needs that cater to thier word. Lust Lilm get more sexual/lust needs, Media cravings for attentions/stardom, that sort of thing. What do people think of that idea?" That is a good idea, and one that should be adopted for all resonances/words. I had a similar idea after looking through LCastellorum. I wondered if superiors had a bigger impact on their tethers, for instance, can Valefor steal tethers? Ben: "I have a question, if the damage from a Geas kills a human does it make noise?" I would say so. Martin "Do you believe in life after love………." Ah that amuses me! Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 14:05:04 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> glad you are well Quoth Martin Arnold: > I had a similar idea after looking through > LCastellorum. I wondered if superiors had a bigger impact on their > tethers, for instance, can Valefor steal tethers? Should have bought it and read the whole thing: Liber Castellorum, p. 107. steve ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:21:22 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Leath Sheales wrote: > If FotM was actually played IMG, David would be the next big trial of > Heaven, accused by Donminic of "Willful stupidity and Treason, > attempting to add to the forces of the enemy by causing your own > servants to Fall." And this time I don't think God would intervene. I'm not sure whether it would cause a trial in my campaign; it's so uncharactistic of David that Dominic might declare him temporarily insane and remand him to Novalis's custody in her capacity as the healer of Heaven. (Of course, what with the chilly relations between Novalis and David that's a punishment in its own right....) And either having failed to intervene when Max had racked up more than 30 points of Discord or being unaware that Max had racked up more than 30 points of Discord would be considered prima facia evidence that David was guilty of Willful Stupidity. Even if Dominic files charges I'm not sure it would be handled as a trial. David might be willing to plead guilty to stupidity, and he and Dominic and Laurence would quietly conspire to come to a just solution which weakens Heaven as little as possible and delights Malphas a little as possible. (Malphas being David's worst enemy.) Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:07:30 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Okay IN List-ers, The riddle belwo was sent to me by a friend trying to work it out. I haven't had any success so far, and the first two lines made me think to send it here. If anyone knows the answer, e-mail me and let me know. What is greater than God More evil than the devil, The poor have it, The rich need it, And if you eat it you die? Anyway, any thoughts????? Leath (Habbalite of Kobal, Punishing himself). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:00:56 -0800 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle Leath Sheales wrote: > > Okay IN List-ers, > > The riddle belwo was sent to me by a friend trying to work it out. I > haven't had any success so far, and the first two lines made me think > to send it here. If anyone knows the answer, e-mail me and let me > know. > > What is greater than God > More evil than the devil, > The poor have it, > The rich need it, > And if you eat it you die? Nothing. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 19:40:13 -0500 (EST) From: jadasc@ma.ultranet.com (Jason Schneiderman) Subject: Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle At 11:07 AM 3/10/99, Leath Sheales wrote: >What is greater than God >More evil than the devil, >The poor have it, >The rich need it, >And if you eat it you die? The answer is "nothing." You owe me a cocktail of my choice. - - J - --- 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: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 01:00:49 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> glad you are well Martin Arnold writes: >Rameesh writes: Oh BTW Martin my name has 1 e, it's Ramesh. Okay Martin, would you agree that a Bright that saw a need and fulfilled it solely because she saw someone had a need was being Selfless. IIRC new Brights are descibed as acting like that (I think it's in IPG, I can't be bothered to check since it's 1:00 and I have a stats exam in the morning), because now they are angels they love the Symphony (like all good angels do) they *like* fulfilling *needs* just for the hell of it, erm I mean because they like doing it. Right, now if you as a Bright Lilim have racked up dozens of Geas Hooks in this manner and one of the people who you have a hook in can help you in a mission, surely calling in a favour (in the Name of furthuring the cause of Heaven, not in the name of benefitting oneself) isn't evil. Ramesh aka Demon of Fiddling, Balseraph of ???? "First you must learn Fiddling, then you must forget Fiddling. Must you remember to breath for breathing to occur? No. It is the same with Fiddling" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 17:11:49 -0800 From: "Kelly St.Clair" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Jo Hart wrote: > What if the person who geased you deliberately sabotages you? (See how > quickly it could get twinkish?) Then there's the more direct route: get a big enough Need off them, then Geas them to commit suicide. Either way, they die eventually. Literally a no-win situation. (I'm only passingly familiar with the IN rules - are suicidal Geases allowed? I know that killing other people is okay...) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 20:20:38 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict "Kelly St.Clair" wrote: > (I'm only passingly familiar with the IN rules - are suicidal Geases > allowed? I know that killing other people is okay...) I'm not sure on this part. The write-up in the main book states that a level 6 Geas may be life-threatening... but I'm not sure whether you could literally tell someone to kill herself. - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 20:58:27 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> glad you are well At 1:00 AM +0000 3/10/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >Right, now if you as a Bright Lilim have racked up dozens of Geas Hooks in >this manner and one of the people who you have a hook in can help you in a >mission, surely calling in a favour (in the Name of furthuring the cause of >Heaven, not in the name of benefitting oneself) isn't evil. And a Lilim can choose whether or not she even *keeps* a Geas-hook, not to mention if she every uses it... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:00:29 -0500 From: eswhanu@juno.com Subject: Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle What is "nothing" Brian Ward On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:07:30 GMT+10 "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> writes: >Okay IN List-ers, > >The riddle belwo was sent to me by a friend trying to work it out. I > >haven't had any success so far, and the first two lines made me think > >to send it here. If anyone knows the answer, e-mail me and let me >know. > >What is greater than God >More evil than the devil, >The poor have it, >The rich need it, >And if you eat it you die? > >Anyway, any thoughts????? > >Leath (Habbalite of Kobal, Punishing himself). > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 02:14:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Richard Drysdale Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > Another interesting question: If a Geas is _effectively_ impossible to > > fulfill, does the Geas continue to do damage? > > > > To give an example: Joan the Lilim asks Ed the shoe salesman to break > > into a store and steal at least $100 worth of merchandise, after doing > > him an equivalent favor. Ed manages to break into the store but is > > caught and imprisoned. He has not fulfilled the Geas - nothing got > > stolen - but is imprisoned, and so is unable to fulfill the Geas. > > Does Ed take damage from the Geas while he's in prison? > > He dies from the Geas -- just as if he handcuffed himself to the bed and > threw the key down the toilet. Only if that store burns down or it > somehow becomes *actually* impossible to fulfill it, will Ed get > the Geas lifted. > This brings up a point that I've been wondering about. If a Geas causes enough dmage to a mortal to kill them then it does cause a disturbance, doesn't it? - - Richard Drysdale (rdd@dcs.st-and.ac.uk) Balseraph of Fate, Vassal of Archives ("I can explain! Honest, boss!") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:46:18 +1100 From: Brent McCartney Subject: Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle The answer is "Nothing" >Okay IN List-ers, > >The riddle belwo was sent to me by a friend trying to work it out. I >haven't had any success so far, and the first two lines made me think >to send it here. If anyone knows the answer, e-mail me and let me >know. > >What is greater than God >More evil than the devil, >The poor have it, >The rich need it, >And if you eat it you die? > >Anyway, any thoughts????? > >Leath (Habbalite of Kobal, Punishing himself). > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:35:51 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> [Slightly Off Topic] A riddle At 9:00 PM -0500 3/9/99, eswhanu@juno.com wrote: >What is "nothing" > >Brian Ward > The Mercurian of Eli looks up, and shakes his head. "Like... that is *so* *deep,* man..." - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 22:18:22 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 12:41 PM -0600 3/9/99, Elizabeth Bartley wrote: > >On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > > >> So if you want to kill someone with Geases soundlessly, you Geas one > >> guy to booby-trap the tree, and another to chop it down (and have > >> it land on him). > > > >Wouldn't it be simpler to just Geas person A to shoot person B? I > >wouldn't expect that to cause noise since ordering a Soldier to shoot > >another human doesn't. > > Well, yes, that would work too. But falling trees are so much more, > um, unique? Not to mention, I'd assume it'd take a much smaller geas to get someone to booby trap a tree than to get them to kill someone in cold blood. - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! ::: Thinking about a Tampa Bay Devival in the future - email me! ::: Or go to http://www.cris.com/~pkitty (hell, go there anyways!) ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1140 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.