From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Mar 15 18:41:53 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 SAA07099 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:41:52 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id SAA26017 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:43:07 -0600 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:43:07 -0600 Message-Id: <199903160043.SAA26017@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 #1154 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 Monday, March 15 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1154 In this digest: IN> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 09:42:47 PST Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks IN> Tsayadim? Re: IN> Servitors of Purity IN> Lilith a Human? IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks Re: IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Corporeal forces RE: IN> Re: IN- Servitors of Purity Re: IN> Re: Re: IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Dark Humor Re: IN> Dark Humor RE: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict Re: IN> Outcasts Re: IN> Marc Goes in for subcontracting IN> Moral Compulsion (was Re: Lilim again (longish)) IN> FLUFF (Re: The deal that keeps on giving: Would this work?) Re: IN> FLUFF (Re: The deal that keeps on giving: Would this work?) Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks Re: IN> Lilith a Human? Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks IN> ADMIN: Hotmail Bouncing IN> FLUFF (Re: Lilith a Human?) Re: IN> FLUFF (Re: Lilith a Human?) Re: IN> ADMIN: Hotmail Bouncing IN> Word-Bound Attitudes ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 11:48:12 -0600 From: "Adam Campbell" Subject: IN> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 09:42:47 PST Who are the Tsayadim? Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:47:07 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 05:19:19PM +0000, Steve Jessop wrote: > Lilim A has a Geas/2 on Lilim B. B knows that A is likely to invoke it. So > Lilim B Geas/6 's herself "not to do anything Lilim A tells her until the > Geas is invoked". > Until which geas is invoked? If it's A's geas, then the wording of B's geas doesn't prevent A's geas. > Lilim A invokes the Geas/2 to tell Lilim B to carry her shopping for her. > Unfortunately, since the Geas is guaranteed to cause dissonance to Lilim > B, a Geas/2 doesn't cover it. So the Geas fizzles and is wasted. Lilim A > has no idea why. > > Is that right? > More generally, if you assume that a Geas forms an intent, then surely the geas you've placed on yourself disappears when you're geased to do the thing, as you've just lost the intent. Or you can deal with it by assuming social consequences. If a non-Lilim is annoyed enough at the prospect of doing something to get another Lilim to geas them not to do it, then it should be difficult to geas them to do it (and if it's managed, then they're under geas conflict). And how much did you pay for having that geas put on you, and did you ensure a privacy clause? Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "I have said that the Elohim are perilous. I have not said that they desire hurt to any life, or to the Earth. But in their own tales they are portrayed as the bastion of the last truth, and that truth they preserve in ways which baffle all that behold them." The One Tree, by Stephen Donaldson. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 12:51:49 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: IN> Tsayadim? On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Adam Campbell wrote: > Who are the Tsayadim? I believe the word means "the hunters", but don't quote me on that. Anyway, they are all of the Servitors of Purity who chose not to serve another Archangel when Uriel was recalled. Instead, they went into the Marches and continued the Purification Crusade. There aren't many, and I think most (but not all) are the Malakim of Purity. Richard "Mr. Uriel" Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:02:07 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Servitors of Purity On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > >However, an > >ex-Servitor of Purity would have to consciously reject the Word of Purity > >to Fall. They have to Jump, in other words. > > By "Jump" I guess you mean conciously Rebel against Heaven like Lucifer > did. Yep. IMHO, it's a little more dramatic than just racking up dissonance. It's the conscious, deliberate decision to rebel. [snippity-do-dah] > . . .would the Word of Purity protect them, or > would they count as Jumping because essentially they were Rebelling - but > they just don't admit it to themselves. IMHO, that's just racking up dissonance. Something like Lucifer's deliberate decision to rebel would be required, and even then it's not easy. It takes a lot more work to jump into the abyss than it does to accidentally fall (whether the abyss is metaphorical or actual). The process is rather like becoming a Dark Malakim (from David's "this isn't canon but should be because it's really a good idea" article). The would-be Jumper has to rack up so much dissonance and discord that his Forces fracture. Then, freed from any association with the Word he served (in addition to his original Celestial nature), he can Fall. Unless he is destroyed by his own discord first. > >(Incidentally, this hints at how Malakim *could* Fall, something I'm using > >in my revision of FotM when I get around to running it.) > > You gonna put that on your page? Eventually. I can send you the raw notes if you want. Richard "Mr. Uriel" Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:35:52 -0800 (PST) From: Stacy Stroud Subject: IN> Lilith a Human? Jo Hart wrote: >I know the game has real problems with Lilith not being human (come ON! >humans don't have green skin, aren't immortal, don't lay geases, don't live >in Hell -- there is no definition by which she is human. I know the book >says so but IMO that was a really bad design flaw which has continued to >haunt the game again and again and again.) or not being evil, but the game >gets so much smoother if you can bring yourself to swallow those parts ;) Remember that Lilith is the sole remaining pre-Fall human. Even in the IN cosmology, she and Adam were unique: specially created rather than evolved. Who's to say they weren't green? And since IN borrowed Adam and Eve from Genesis, it's not completely unreasonable to assume that they were immortal before the Fall -- in which case, Lilith would have been, too. According to one tale of her origins, Lilith used a record of celestial secrets given to Adam (a copy of Raziel's book? I forget) to evade the angels hunting her by calling upon the names of God. So giving her nifty powers that may not be original factory equipment, and may very well be unique to her, doesn't seem too far out of the ballpark either. As for living in Hell, she explicitly doesn't keep a Principality there, so she may well spend much of her time on Earth, only popping Downstairs periodically to monitor the goings-on. Stacy Stroud sstroud@uky.campuscwix.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:44:43 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> Corporeal forces In the normal course of celestial life, what are corporeal forces for? We are told that celestials have no natural place on the corporeal plane. That's why they cause disturbance there. Vessels are no more natural to celestials than cars are to humans -- Jordi invented them, in cosmically recent history. Yet the only function for corporeal forces that I can recall is to infuse strength and agility into vessels and control the power-level of some songs, most or all of which work only on the corporeal plane. So what does a celestial need corporeal forces *for*, in its own internal economy? They all have to have at least one. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 19:21:48 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Kevin Walsh wrote: > > Lilim A has a Geas/2 on Lilim B. B knows that A is likely to invoke it. So > > Lilim B Geas/6 's herself "not to do anything Lilim A tells her until the > > Geas is invoked". > > > Until which geas is invoked? If it's A's geas, then the wording of B's > geas doesn't prevent A's geas. D'oh! Lilim B tries again next time. "Until Lilim A's Geas is fulfilled, cancelled, or otherwise ended." > More generally, if you assume that a Geas forms an intent, then surely the > geas you've placed on yourself disappears when you're geased to do the > thing, as you've just lost the intent. Fair enough. So if B makes a deal with C, and Geas/6 es herself as a result, she can go to A and offer A a Geas/3 in return for A using *her* Geas/2 to nullify the Geas/6. Sweet, as the fat kid says: Lilim A gets a Geas/3 in return for a Geas/2 Lilim B gets rid of a self-Geas/6 but ups an owed Geas from 2 to 3. Lilim C loses whatever the Geas/6 was, but has to be a bit careful about revenge because A and B have her outnumbered. It's also possible that C never finds out what happened. In practice, it goes like this: A (to C): "And I promise to crack Laurence's heart tomorrow." [a Geas/6, see FoTM :-)] ... A (To B): I'll give you a Geas/3 if you use your Geas/2 on me to keep me busy all day tomorrow." B (to A): "Why?" A (to B): "Trust me, you're better off not knowing..." ... (next day) A (to C): "Sorry, it must have become impossible some time yesterday. Better luck next time." > Or you can deal with it by assuming social consequences. Agreed, there are dangers, but a Geas/6 can make a Lilim do things she'd probably be willing to make an enemy to avoid. In particular, if A looks under B's glasses and gets a good roll, she'll detect a need/6 to wriggle out of the self-Geas/6, and B is pretty much back to square one. Steve. - ------ When you're having a bad day and it seems like people are trying to piss you off, remember, it takes 42 muscles to frown and only 4 to pull the trigger of a decent sniper's rifle. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 19:29:55 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > In the normal course of celestial life, what are corporeal forces for? > They all have to have at least one. Do they? Maybe only earth-duty celestials need them, if you weasel-word the rules. For instance, I can't remember what happens when a celestial loses their corp-forces in combat. If they can survive that, they can survive never having them in the first place. Maybe you even get celestials without ethereal forces (like Saminga and David). No, I mean they would have celestial presence, and souls, but no individual personality or bias - good for Elohim and Malakim, bad for Seraphim and Mercurians. (They also wouldn't be able to use guns, of course, and we all know what David's dissonance condition is. Maybe he doesn't let his servitors use ranged weapons because he is just too plain stupid to do so himself :-) Steve. - ------ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:32:24 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > In the normal course of celestial life, what are corporeal forces for? > > We are told that celestials have no natural place on the corporeal > plane. That's why they cause disturbance there. Vessels are no > more natural to celestials than cars are to humans -- Jordi invented > them, in cosmically recent history. Yet the only function for > corporeal forces that I can recall is to infuse strength and agility > into vessels and control the power-level of some songs, most or all > of which work only on the corporeal plane. So what does a celestial > need corporeal forces *for*, in its own internal economy? They all > have to have at least one. Do all Celestials need at least one Corporeal Force, or do all _PC_ celestials need one? If the latter, then it's easily explainable; celestials need Corporeal Forces to interact on the corporeal plane, and the vast majority of In Nomine campaigns take place there, at least partially. It doesn't make sense to leave a player out because he has no Corporeal Forces and the rest of the group wants to go to Earth. If the former, then it's just a good idea in general. After Vessels were invented, a lot of celestials looked at them and said "Hey, neat, I want one of those!", and petitioned for a CorpForce so they could use them. Many others simply thought that if the need arose for them to have a Vessel, they wouldn't have to screw around getting the prerequisites for _using_ the damn thing before they could go on the mission they had to. And Archangels now create every new celestial with at least one CorpForce so that they can go on Earthly missions if they have to. - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:51:24 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces Steve Jessop wrote: > Do they? Maybe only earth-duty celestials need them, if you weasel- > word the rules. EDG wrote: > Do all Celestials need at least one Corporeal Force, or do all _PC_ > celestials need one? I thought the rules said you need one of each kind to have a sentient being, though I can't be sure, not having the book with me here at work. On the other hand, I don't recall tha losing all your corporeal forces costs you your sentience, though being created and being damaged are not necessarily symmetrical opposites. The differences between mortals and celestials show up here, in that, for mortals, corporeal forces is directly related to the physical design of the body, while the relation between forces and vessel is zilch for a celestial. Idea: A mortal's body IS its corporeal forces; inanimate and vegetable matter is nothing BUT corporeal force. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 15:23:31 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: RE: IN> Re: IN- Servitors of Purity At 12:23 PM -0500 3/15/99, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: >Searching http://www.incyclopedia.org/byname.html for both "uriel" and >"purity" yields the following: > >Orifiel >Calabite >Page reference: Angelic Player's Guide, p. 34 >Notes: Fell when Uriel was recalled. > >Vaphoron >Impudite >Page reference: Infernal Player's Guide, p. 60 >Notes: One of the handful of former Servitors of Purity in Hell. > >So at least one Ofanite and one Mercurian of Purity are burning. > Good -- my Cherub/Djinn will fit in nicely then. Danke! - -- Eric Alfred Burns |"It was then I felt my heart break like a sabre@annotations.com | fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com | Reality -- and it's been broken ever since." http://www.roundrobin.org | --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 15:41:17 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: At 12:31 PM -0500 3/15/99, Emily Dresner wrote: >Asking a Bright to lay a geas is asking the Bright to go looking for >another job. This is a two way street: the wise Archangel knows that the >way of the geas is the way to dissonance, and Falling. The Bright wants >no truck with it - in her mind it's a tool of Hell to keep people bound >into service. Geasa in and of themselves are not evil but the Bright's >association with them certainly are. They will geas themselves to bind >themselves in new and interesting ways, but the Bright will not lay a geas >on another. > Em, you remain an amazing person. Right when I figured that there wasn't an argument that would sway me on this, boom -- here's an argument that sways me on this. This makes rational sense to me -- but also underscores the reason *why* Brights still have their resonance. It's a temptation to them. A weapon they can use that can bite them, hard. But sometimes it's the only way to accomplish their need and a good, selfless angel would need to put the concerns of others ahead of her own, so she does, but then there's a chance it would be resisted and dissonance follows.... Subtle, and very understandable. I can certainly see Brights not using hooks any more than they must with this. And I can see Brights *using* them when the good of the many warrants it. Good RP opportunities here.... > ************************************************** > >Okay, I know the argument here against this is "The Drug Addict". So >here's the junky in a nutshell: > >The Lilim of Fire (Gabriel) decides she doesn't like the fact that Johnny >is on junk, and all sorts of junk, and all junk. She thinks it would help >him if she geased him to stay off it to clean him out. > Actually, my use of this example wasn't "stay off the junk." It was "go into Rehab until clean and sober." It's a shot at another chance, not a cureall. With the power of a Geas (coupled with Heroin addicts not being the strongest willed on the pike), the Angel can fulfill a disproportionately powerful need and then require a full treatment course to clean the addict out. Yes, that cleaning out is horrid, and no, it's not pleasant. And it sure as heck can't be done in a week. It would need to be strong enough to get Johnny off of both heroin and then all the derivatives. Johnny finishes up in, say, a year's time. He is clean, no more withdrawal, no more drugs. That's when the Angel's work *really* begins. Giving Johnny something to build his life into that doesn't involve heroin, that doesn't throw him right back down. Building him up towards his destiny. It's not a simple or fast project -- it might be one of many she does. *All* she can give him is the chance he wasn't able to give himself before. But before she can give him the help he needs to make a life up, she has to get him off the Heroin with something as powerful as an addiction that is hideous. And yes, she has to take a risk -- take a risk he'll resist it and she'll take dissonance. Take a risk that she'll go through the whole thing with him and then at the end he'll end up right back on the streets. But a Bright would take those risks, I think. And the committment of time needed *after* the Geas is over. Which again puts the lie to the reasonance/geas as *selfish.* It simply is, neither selfish nor selfless. >Ah, psychological addiction. You think a geas is gonna cure a heroin >addiction? If so, it's completely untrue. Even if it was a year long >geas, Johnny will probably be back on the junk once its over --- as soon >as his life starts to suck, he'll return to it. > >An angel's job is simply _not that simple_. The geas won't cure anything, >really. It'll just put it off for a while. > I completely agree. But such are Angelic quests and IN subplots made of -- and it makes the Brights *interesting* in so many ways.... - -- Eric Alfred Burns |"It was then I felt my heart break like a sabre@annotations.com | fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com | Reality -- and it's been broken ever since." http://www.roundrobin.org | --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:44:02 -0600 From: Seth Buntain Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces >In the normal course of celestial life, what are corporeal forces for? > >We are told that celestials have no natural place on the corporeal >plane. That's why they cause disturbance there. Vessels are no >more natural to celestials than cars are to humans -- Jordi invented >them, in cosmically recent history. Yet the only function for >corporeal forces that I can recall is to infuse strength and agility >into vessels and control the power-level of some songs, most or all >of which work only on the corporeal plane. So what does a celestial >need corporeal forces *for*, in its own internal economy? They all >have to have at least one. > >Earl In one of the books, one of Michaels servitors is punished by Dominic by stripping all of her corporeal forces for x years, and they would be returned so she could go hunt down the half-demon kid that she had with a shedite. So that strongly implies that you only need corp forces if you go to earth. Angelic player guide maybe? - -- Seth Buntain Northwestern University enthar@nwu.edu "Magic is always the best solution, especially reliable magic." - -from the program 'fortune'. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 15:51:41 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces At 2:51 PM -0500 3/15/99, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Steve Jessop wrote: > >> Do they? Maybe only earth-duty celestials need them, if you weasel- >> word the rules. > >EDG wrote: > >> Do all Celestials need at least one Corporeal Force, or do all _PC_ >> celestials need one? > >I thought the rules said you need one of each kind to have a sentient >being, though I can't be sure, not having the book with me here at >work. Here is how I see it: Celestial Forces are the Soul, the Essence (if you will) of the being -- without Celestial Forces, the being is little more than an artificial intelligence or a Remnant. Sad and pathetic and doomed to true Death. Ethereal Forces are the Mind, the Imagination of the being -- without Ethereal Forces, the being has no true creativity. No true thought. It is an echo of life, motive and even loving but without any true intelligence. Rather like most Cocker Spaniels. Corporeal Forces are the Cohesiveness, the Substance of the being -- without Corporeal Forces, the being has no Fortitude, no Solidity. It is like a house built without a foundation -- it may be beautiful and show great ingenuity, but come the winter and the first frost heave it's split in twain. Each of these Forces have a Realm associated with them. One must possess at least one Force of that Realm to enter it -- with the Corporeal Realm, it may seem like that's all Corporeal Forces are good for. However, on the Ethereal or Celestial Realms, beings without Corporeal Forces would seem Ephemeral, and flighty, and... for lack of a better word... artificial. Unreal. Like a sock puppet of an angel instead of the Angel himself. As much a Remnant as those wandering the Corporeal Realm, and probably as avoided. - -- Eric Alfred Burns |"It was then I felt my heart break like a sabre@annotations.com | fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com | Reality -- and it's been broken ever since." http://www.roundrobin.org | --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:22:55 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Dark Humor At 11:03 PM -0500 3/12/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Mmm... my read of FotM and other extended writeups of Lilith disagree. >They specifically mention her being pleased with the fall of the Berlin >Wall, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, etc., with the strong >implication that while Lilith is essentially selfish, she doesn't let >herself get pigeonholed *entirely* by the Demonic side. That's certainly the approach SJ said he approved of . . . (When you are relatively weak, you want power from *anything*, nih?) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:06:35 -0800 (PST) From: Wade Trupke Subject: Re: IN> Dark Humor - ---"Hart, Joanna" wrote: > I know the game has real problems with Lilith not being human (come ON! > humans don't have green skin, aren't immortal, don't lay geases, don't live > in Hell -- there is no definition by which she is human. I know the book > says so but IMO that was a really bad design flaw which has continued to > haunt the game again and again and again.) or not being evil, but the game > gets so much smoother if you can bring yourself to swallow those parts ;) > Hmmm... That just inspired an interesting (to me, at least) thought. What if Lilith is what humans were supposed to be like, originally were like. But when Adam and Eve partook of the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (which I'm fairly certain is a mistranslation), it messed with their metaphysiology, and turned them into what we are today. Or God did it as punishment for their disobedience. Not exactly earth-shattering, but it might clear up the problems with the 'Lilith is a Human' idea. Wade (never trust snakes bearing fruit baskets) _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:47:26 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: RE: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict At 4:01 PM -0500 3/13/99, Sheep Boy wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> And Geases are nasty. You'll collect dissonance in Trauma... > >Yanked this out of the allegedly dead thread, but it brought up >another question. I know you can't do much of anything, but can you >accumulate dissonance while in Limbo? If the GM thinks it's appropriate, sure. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:50:08 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Outcasts At 4:10 PM -0500 3/13/99, Sheep Boy wrote: >This is the first in a probably series of questions to iron out the >canon of certain situations in a probably vain attempt to actually get >my game together. :) So, with the best of intentions, here we go: > >Okay, so Outcasts cannot attain Celestial form Errata -- they can go celestial just as easily as a Heartless Renegade. >nor ascend to Heaven. To be pedantic, they can't use their Heart as a beacon. They could still ascend via a Tether, or following someone else to *their* Heart. However, unless the Outcast intends to throw himself at his Archangel's feet and beg forgiveness then and there, going to Heaven is a *bad* idea. It's also a bit presumptuious in some situations. >Also, as a matter of clarification, does a Heartless celestial have no >hope of reaching the celestial plane except through a tether? Or am I >missing something... I'm speaking in solitary instances, of course, I >know they could follow someone else... Bingo. It's a Tether or following or a False Heart (Liber Reliquarum.) (Yes, all that's with my LE hat on. Watch out if I sneeze!) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:12:23 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Marc Goes in for subcontracting At 7:43 AM -0500 3/15/99, Adam Canning wrote: >I spotted this some what worrying advert: > >REAL ANGELS >angels for personal transformation >CHAKRA ATTUNEMENT ANGEL >PEACE & RELAXATION ANGEL [...] >REAL ANGELS ARE PURCHASED BY CALLING 510-525-5562. >On http://www.inergy.com/Angelwork/ > >Or is this just one of KK's fronts. Actually, it might be Keebah's, from the Liber Servitorum... (Telemarketing sales Habbalite of Gluttony with some schemes to make it big and transfer to some place she'd be better appreciated. Like Dark Humor or the Media.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:12:26 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Moral Compulsion (was Re: Lilim again (longish)) At 3:26 PM +0000 3/15/99, Kevin Walsh wrote: >If compulsion can be moral, then the question is >when compulsion is moral. As a note, the book _Lilith_, by George MacDonald, has some themes precisely along these lines. It's also on the web, at http://ccel.wheaton.edu/macdonald/lilith/Lilith.html . It's an interesting book, but there is a scene in it which is definitely compelled morality, which -- probably for personal reasons relating to my own life -- *REALLY* squicked me. And despite the title, it's only indirectly about Lilith. (She's the primary antagonist.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:12:17 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> FLUFF (Re: The deal that keeps on giving: Would this work?) At 4:57 PM +0000 3/14/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >>>>Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of Wind >> >> Now I think you're one of Valefor's lost little sheep. Especially >>since the Demon Princess of Nitpicking said it should be: 'of the Wind'. > > >D'oh! Damn Vapusoft, I thought I corrected that!!! >Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of The Wind The 'the' should be lower-cased. - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:24:04 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> FLUFF (Re: The deal that keeps on giving: Would this work?) >The 'the' should be lower-cased. > > > >--Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking >http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html *bows before the great and mighty Demon Princes of Nitpicking* "We're not worthy! We're not worthy!" Ahem, I tried warning him that the 'the' was lower-cased. . . *evil grin* Remember folks, play nice with the Demon Princess. If you're -real- good maybe she'll leave you alone for a while. . . *evil grin* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Granduer * http://www.best.com/~lyceum/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:19:55 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks At 5:19 PM +0000 3/15/99, Steve Jessop wrote: >Lilim A has a Geas/2 on Lilim B. B knows that A is likely to invoke it. So >Lilim B Geas/6 's herself "not to do anything Lilim A tells her until the >Geas is invoked". I'm not sure you have the wording right for what you seem to be asking below... >Lilim A invokes the Geas/2 to tell Lilim B to carry her shopping for her. >Unfortunately, since the Geas is guaranteed to cause dissonance to Lilim >B, a Geas/2 doesn't cover it. No, the Geas/2 doesn't get resisted. It's an invoked Geas, and the Geas/6 self-Geas has just been satisfied and vanishes. A *hook* that could be invoked to a Geas/2... wouldn't fizzle, because if it "took," (i.e., wasn't resisted with Will), it would be an invoked Geas and the conditions of the Geas/6 would be satisfied. And if it got resisted, then it'd be resisted anyway. Mind, most Lilim don't deal in hooks among each other. They deal in promises, sworn Geases to be invoked later. >So the Geas fizzles and is wasted. Lilim A has no idea why. Even if you figure that Lilim B has figured out some way to make a Geas/2 break, the Lilim instinct will kick in and Lilim A, just before she musters up her INTENTION to invoke the Geas, will realize that it won't be enough. She has that instinct. (Why? Because while there's got to be a way to keep her from abusing Geases, likewise the GM shouldn't be abusing Lilim who went through heck to *get* those Geases.) So she'll probably ask her sister what's up. And if she finds out, then she tells other sisters about it, and then no one will come to bargain with Lilim B again, unless she promises them Geas/6s. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:26:48 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilith a Human? At 10:35 AM -0800 3/15/99, Stacy Stroud wrote: >Jo Hart wrote: > >>I know the game has real problems with Lilith not being human (come ON! >>humans don't have green skin, aren't immortal, don't lay geases, don't live >>in Hell -- there is no definition by which she is human. [...] > >Remember that Lilith is the sole remaining pre-Fall human. Even in the IN >cosmology, she and Adam were unique: specially created rather than evolved. >Who's to say they weren't green? As a notion, IIRC, *Lilith* isn't green, though some non-canon sources have portrayed her as such, and she could probably use celestial body paint if she wanted. *Lilim* are green, and celestials, but that doesn't say anything except that Lilith, for some reason, creates green Lilim celestials. I mean, who knows? If she got together with Eli and got really drunk, maybe she'd make a plaid one. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:41:32 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Even more stupid Lilim tricks (Ah, the joys of a ton of email and not spotting this till one reply was sent off. Okay...) At 7:21 PM +0000 3/15/99, Steve Jessop wrote: >On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Kevin Walsh wrote: > >> > Lilim A has a Geas/2 on Lilim B. B knows that A is likely to invoke it. So >> > Lilim B Geas/6 's herself "not to do anything Lilim A tells her until the >> > Geas is invoked". >> > >> Until which geas is invoked? If it's A's geas, then the wording of B's >> geas doesn't prevent A's geas. > >D'oh! Lilim B tries again next time. "Until Lilim A's Geas is fulfilled, >cancelled, or otherwise ended." I think I'd rule that she just *knowingly* put herself into Geas-conflict, and if you get into Geas-conflict, them's the breaks. (Why? Because God doesn't like a rules-lawyer, that's why.) Or, more to the point, this Geas is very likely going to be above the abilities of even a Geas/6. Why? Okay, go to the handy-dandy Geas table in FotM. This "don't do what Lilim A says until the Geas is lifted by her" needs a duration. Call it a month, or level 4. This is a negative Geas -- a "don't do" -- so that's a +1. This is a Geas that's going to put her into Geas-conflict with the one she's already wearing around her pretty green wrist. (She promised her sister she'd do a day's worth of work, right?) That's a level 5, right there, 'cause it WILL cause dissonance if they're invoked together. This gets you 5 + 4 + 1 -1 = 9. There are no Geas/9s. If she does self-Geas herself to something like this, she gets dissonance from one or the other, 'cause they're both sworn Geases that *SHE* pledged herself. Stupidity hath no limits. >In practice, it goes like this: >A (to C): "And I promise to crack Laurence's heart tomorrow." [a Geas/6, >see FoTM :-)] >... >A (To B): I'll give you a Geas/3 if you use your >Geas/2 on me to keep me busy all day tomorrow." >B (to A): "Why?" >A (to B): "Trust me, you're better off not knowing..." >... (next day) >A (to C): "Sorry, it must have become impossible some time yesterday. >Better luck next time." Here, the Geas/2 *does* fail -- because there's already an active, invoked Geas/6 that is going to cause her dissonance if she gets stuck doing something else. Even if they both go into effect at the same time (such as Lilim A self-geasing herself to something stupid; stupidity is always allowed), Lilim A is getting dissonance from not fulfilling the Geas/6. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:47:12 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> ADMIN: Hotmail Bouncing >Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:54:53 -0600 >From: Mail Delivery Subsystem >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Subject: Returned mail: Service unavailable >Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) > >The original message was received at Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:36:30 -0600 >from majordom@localhost > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- >pandakhan@hotmail.com > (expanded from: :include: /usr/local/majordomo/lists/in_nomine-l) >dgtingey@hotmail.com > (expanded from: :include: /usr/local/majordomo/lists/in_nomine-l) >drakemagi@hotmail.com > (expanded from: :include: /usr/local/majordomo/lists/in_nomine-l) >esp_horsepie@hotmail.com > (expanded from: :include: /usr/local/majordomo/lists/in_nomine-l) >leathals@hotmail.com > (expanded from: :include: /usr/local/majordomo/lists/in_nomine-l) Hotmail has been bouncing things intermittantly from the list. Please, y'all, find out what's up so I don't have to desub you! - --Beth, List Admin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:51:58 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: IN> FLUFF (Re: Lilith a Human?) >I mean, who knows? If she got together with Eli and got really >drunk, maybe she'd make a plaid one. This might explain Daimonique. . . Em? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller? Beuller? Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Granduer * http://www.best.com/~lyceum/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:21:58 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: Re: IN> FLUFF (Re: Lilith a Human?) > >I mean, who knows? If she got together with Eli and got really > >drunk, maybe she'd make a plaid one. > > This might explain Daimonique. . . Em? Only in Holy War. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:39:11 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> ADMIN: Hotmail Bouncing At 5:47 PM -0500 3/15/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Hotmail has been bouncing things intermittantly from the list. >Please, y'all, find out what's up so I don't have to desub you! > > Putting on my Sysadmin hat for a sec -- Hotmail often goes through periods of cosmic clogging of the drains, which then causes a series of bounces. Makes us honest domain running types sad and frowny when we discover a thousand bouncing e-mails from our students trying to reach all their hotmail friends.... ...and it makes those students all sad and frowny when we read the bounce messages and learn what sort of inappropriate computer uses are going on over to the school. Ah, the joys of 14-18 years of age.... - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 19:37:44 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Word-Bound Attitudes >>>In my utterly arrogant opinion, that's nonsense. To say that the person who holds a Word doesn't *really* hold *all* of the Word devalues the very idea of having a Word. Especially if it's a Superior who holds it. If there's an aspect of your Word that you don't control, chances are it's because that aspect is someone else's Word, and they control all of *it*. [1]<<< That’s incorrect in canon, though. Otherwise, many Superiors must be very ambiguous beings, and so are most Word-bound celestials. There’s hardly any Word that’s absolutely good or evil (or selfless or selfish) by itself. >>>I don't see the need for there to be the Angel of Good 'X' and the Demon of Bad 'X'. There's just 'X', and whoever holds that Word gets to steer it.<<< Also incorrect in canon, but it’s an interesting way to run an alternate campaign. >>>Jordi holds sway over both the shark and the lamb.<<< Sharks aren’t evil, though, unless you consider all predators evil. A Demon of Animals (assuming he didn’t get eaten by Jordi) wouldn’t be protecting animals as part of God’s creation, he’d be trying to use them to subvert God’s creation -- turning animals evil, turning them against mankind, teaching them to be selfish (as selfish as possible given their limited intelligence), etc. >>>Fleurity's word encompasses both aspirin and cocaine.<<< Only inasmuch as aspirin can be abused. He couldn’t care less about using aspirin to relieve headaches. >>> Vapula is responsible for the polio vaccine and the Skinner box.<<< Nope -- if he was responsible for the polio vaccine, it’s only by accident (and one he’d kick himself for). >>>Nybbas offers us Edward R. Murrow and Geraldo Rivera in the same breath.<<< Nope -- good, ethical journalists are anathema to Nybbas. >>>It's already been shown that Archangels can encompass the destructive, amoral, violent aspects of their Words.<<< Only when "amoral" is a natural part of the Symphony -- elemental forces are amoral. There’s nothing evil or selfish about hurricanes and naturally-occurring forest fires, and they are a vital part of the Earth’s biosystem. >>>[P.S. As a vaguely related aside, I visited David's web page recently, and he's posted his description of IN New York. As a lifelong native, I'm very impressed - especially since he claims to have never visited the city before.<<< Actually, I’ve driven through once, but that’s it. Thanks for the complements. - -David (who really needs to update my web pages someday) ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1154 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.