From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Apr 8 17:09:11 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 RAA25988 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:09:10 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id RAA13546 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:07:06 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:07:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199904082207.RAA13546@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 #1194 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Thursday, April 8 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1194 In this digest: IN> Re: Christain Heresies Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Re: Christain Heresies Re: IN> Celestial views on human sexuality Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? IN> Dante Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> CDaU Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? Re: IN> Dante IN> Legion IN> Legion Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Legion Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Dante Re: IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Humans and attunements Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel IN> IN list acronyms Re: IN> Humans and attunements IN> Metatron ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 20:06:03 PDT From: "Hydrax 59" Subject: IN> Re: Christain Heresies >Hi, > >I've been reading too much Philip K. Dick and now I have this bug in >my hat to run a Dickian IN game -- namely, a game that has the feel of >a paranoid-psychotic drug hallucination laced with Gnostic imagery. > >However, I am not all that up on my knowledge of the mysticism and >heresies common among the Jews and Christians of that era, which is >clearly vital for a game like this. > >So -- can any of you people out there recommend good books on the >subject? How are the Jesuits and the Marist brothers (I think) similar? They were both created to combat heresy: the Jesuits to fight the Albagian heresy, the Marist brothers to combat the Anglican heresy. What's the difference between the Jesuits and the Marist brothers? Have you ever met an Albagian? Seriously, I don't have any books on it, but you could check out teh Albagians, the East-West schism (Orthodox), the heresy which Luther proposed that I forget the name of, the Anglican schism, and lots of others. If you're really desperate, you could always just check out some religion textbooks - probably for around year ten to eleven to twelve. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 23:46:24 EDT From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? In a message dated 4/7/99 3:59:40 PM, neel@cswv.com writes: >So -- can any of you people out there recommend good books on the >subject? _The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church_. Cross, F. L. and Livingstone, E. A., Eds. Oxford Press. I got this one for a wedding present(!) from my parish priest. Chock full o' oddball goodness. _New Testament Apocrypha_. Schneemelcher, Wilhelm, Ed. Wilson, R. McL., translator. Westminster/John Knox Press (US Publisher). Two Volumes. This one is really complete. It has literally hundreds of apocryphal texts, including Gnostic and Arch-heretical gospels. (The Gospel of Mani, founder of the Manichaens, for just one example...) _Pagans and Christians_ (further bibliographical information unavailable, I had to return it...) A comprehensive look at Near Eastern religious life between 50 AD and the final 'triumph' of Christianity with Constantine's conversion in the fourth century. Good stuff, but the author assumes a familiarity with various theories, and only mentions theories (s)he is refuting by the name of the originator of the theories. If you can wade through the appropriate chunks of these, you'll probably be set for life. Mark (Who is now going to dig through all his old stuff for new tidbits.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 00:11:59 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Humans and attunements >>>...an appropriate Initiation. It may be self initiation - for instance read from a sorcerous book - or a full blown dark ritual with 13 cowled, blackrobed sorcerers chanting your name in assyrian. This initiation servers as the process the sorcerer acquires the necessary attunement (see p.57) for sorcery to work for him.<<< The Sorcery attunement is a special case, and it still requires 6 Forces. But -- ACK! Elizabeth! -- errata alert! "Attunements can only be granted by Superiors." Not true, because Word-bound celestials may also have attunements which they might be able to grant to others. - -David (damn, I think the CPG has already gone to print) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 00:10:50 EDT From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Re: Christain Heresies In a message dated 4/7/99 7:09:10 PM, hydrax@hotmail.com writes: >How are the Jesuits and the Marist brothers (I think) similar? >They were both created to combat heresy: the Jesuits to fight the >Albagian heresy, the Marist brothers to combat the Anglican heresy. >What's the difference between the Jesuits and the Marist brothers? >Have you ever met an Albagian? > *sigh* NONONONONONONO! *whimper* Let's get one thing out here at the beginning, heresies are one of my interests. The Society of Jesus, founded by Ignatius Loyola et al. were intended to be the shock troops of the Counterreformation (S. J. founded c. 1540). And there are still *plenty* of Lutherans around. The Marists (Society of Mary) were founded in 1824 to be, evidently, Jesuits who campaign for Mary's place in all Christian worship. They did most of their early work in the South Pacific and Australia. The Albagians you refer to are either made up, or a truly bizarre corruption of Albegenses. To counter the Albegenses (they were also known as the Cathars), the Pope opened the Office of the Holy Inquisition. (c. 1250) This was *after* a Crusade had been declared against them (and failed...). Needless to say, the Dominicans assigned to the Inquisition developed their tactics here, which would be later used in Spain. All of this is much later than what I think Neel had in mind.... >Seriously, I don't have any books on it, but you could check out the >Albagians, the East-West schism (Orthodox), the heresy which Luther >proposed that I forget the name of, the Anglican schism, and lots of >others. If you're really desperate, you could always just check out >some religion textbooks -- probably for around year ten to eleven to >twelve. The Anglican Schism had little to do with Gnostic belief or practice, and the same is true of the Orthodox/Catholic split and Luther's protests. All three had to do more with Roman arrogance and triumphalism than anything else. Mark (Episcopalian Priest-in-training... Still a long way to go.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 00:06:55 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Celestial views on human sexuality At 8:11 PM -0400 4/7/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 4/7/99 3:45:46 PM Central Daylight Time, dmccart@intel.com >writes: > ><< "Love and sex are inextricably intertwined. Loveless sex is a > violation of God's will. Sex between two humans who are truly in love with > each other, and have first publicly declared their love through the ceremony > of marriage, is concordant with God's will. All other acts of sex are based > in lust rather than love, and are not concordant with God's will." >> > >I don't think gender has anything to do with it. But then I can't see any of >the Archangels getting into a hissy fit over whether or not they had a >ceremony. With lots of Seraphim and Elohim hanging around they're not about >to say, "Well, even though you SAY you love each other and out Seraph >confirms it, and our Elohite also can sense your love for each other, you >obviously CAN'T love each other because some guy who is legally ordained in >the state of California didn't perform a ten-minute ceremony in front of you. >You're obviously only lusting. You're both damned." That sounds more like the >Game's style. Besides, if that were the case, Eli's angels would be damning >someone every time they performed their sex rite. I suppose this is the point when I needlessly mention Belath and Blandine, held up eternally as the first beings to love one another and the archetype of true selflessness in love, perverted by Lucifer "didn't get a date in high school and now he's bitter" Morningstar. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 15:52:57 +0300 From: Yossi Gurvitz Subject: Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel At 05:09 08/04/99 , you wrote: >Asmodeus pops in, casually obliterates a few Malakim, looks around, Question: how easy is it for a superior to destroy a servitor? From a game-mechanics aspect, is it automatic? Is fleeing an enemy superior excusable on the grounds of "there was nothing I could do" (I am thinking of Malakim in service to Lawrance or Michael here.) Yours, Yossi ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 15:54:43 +0300 From: Yossi Gurvitz Subject: Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? At 02:46 08/04/99 , you wrote: >However, I am not all that up on my knowledge of the mysticism and >heresies common among the Jews and Christians of that era, which is >clearly vital for a game like this. That's a tough one. I suggest reading the roleplaying KULT, which has a Gnostic world view. Scholars are still cataloging the heresies of the second century... Yours, Yossi ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 09:07:24 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel >At 05:09 08/04/99 , you wrote: > > >Asmodeus pops in, casually obliterates a few Malakim, looks around, > Question: how easy is it for a superior to destroy a servitor? From a >game-mechanics aspect, is it automatic? Is fleeing an enemy superior >excusable on the grounds of "there was nothing I could do" (I am thinking >of Malakim in service to Lawrance or Michael here.) PCs should have a chance to flee, I'd think. And if they're resisting, let them make appropriate contest roles, purely to see if someone rolls an intervention. Otherwise (and especially if they're NPC Malakim), it's time for smouldering Vessels (new this fall!) - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 09:56:32 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > I've been reading too much Philip K. Dick and now I have this bug > in my hat to run a Dickian IN game -- namely, a game that has the > feel of a paranoid-psychotic drug hallucination laced with Gnostic > imagery. ... > So -- can any of you people out there recommend good books on the > subject? In addition to the titles just mentioned, look for stuff by Hans Jonas for Gnosticism. He didn't write at all recently -- in the '50s, I think -- but the more recent stuff I've read doesn't contradict him and often cites him. Look for him in college libraries, or through Amazon.com. So far as I know, Gnosticism *was* the big heresy issue of the first couple of centuries AD. After that, the big issues were Christological -- what, exactly, is the nature of Christ, especially as expressed in terms of the metaphysics of the day? Don't know if you want to get into that. As for Gnostic imagery, here's some bits I recall off the top of my head: Since Gnosticism generally identifies the creator of the material universe and the human body with Satan, and both with the God of the Old Testament, there's a certain amount of inverted imagery, especially around the Genesis story. The snake is a good guy, as is Cain sometimes. Adam and Eve are captured fragments of the true celestial fire, and the snake was only trying to help them escape from the ignorance in which the creator (often called Ialdabaoth) had imprisoned them. The seven planets of ancient astronomy/astrology are often identified with, or assigned to, evil "archons," subordinates of the evil world-creator. Sometimes the evil creator gets Saturn. (The seven planets are the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, in order from the Earth. Moon and Sun count as planets in this system.) Sometimes, the houses of the Zodiac are also the domains of evil archons. In general, the Gnostic looks up at the heavens, or out at the elements, and sees foes and prison wardens. Counter-poised to the evil archons of the lower, material world, you have the true, hidden, and ineffable Godhead out beyond the universe, and a set of emmanations from him, almost always eight in number, called the Ogdoad ("octet") or the Pleroma ("fullness"). The first and last emmanations are often feminine, one or the other or both being named "Sophia" ("wisdom"). The lowest emmanation, through an innocent accident, is usually the mother of Ialdabaoth, the evil creator, who frequently doesn't even know the Pleroma exists. Garnish liberally with oriental imagery using fire, bronze, swords, bulls, lions, wings, and eyes. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 11:00:39 -0500 (CDT) From: paranial@creighton.edu Subject: IN> Dante Well for my World Liturature Class we are Reading Dante's "Inferno". And IMHO, I have come to the Conclusion that every Celestial, Except Sevitor of Jordi (Could care less about "Human Stuff") and Saminga (They don't care, further proff that they make Beavis and Butthead look like Genuises) Has read it at least once, out of curiosity. Now how would you think Joe Blow Celstial would react to reading it. Bradley Paranial, Mecurian of War. Who is currenty Crossing the Styx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:33:54 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Dante >Well for my World Liturature Class we are Reading Dante's "Inferno". And >IMHO, I have come to the Conclusion that every Celestial, Except Sevitor >of Jordi (Could care less about "Human Stuff") and Saminga (They don't >care, further proff that they make Beavis and Butthead look like Genuises) >Has read it at least once, out of curiosity. Now how would you think Joe >Blow Celstial would react to reading it. Laugh it off as the political treatise it is? Azrael, Malakite of Death. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 12:37:45 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Dante James M. Zoshak wrote: > > Now how would you think Joe > > Blow Celstial would react to reading it. > Laugh it off as the political treatise it is? Well, it's certainly that, but it has a lot of other plot-threads running through it, too. And remember that the Inferno is only the first third of the whole Comedy. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:49:48 +0100 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> CDaU On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > I think IN has given too much area to Haagenti at the expense of > Mammon. In normal usage, "Gluttony" is excessive desire to consume > (food, in particular) and is a "fleshly" sin, like lust, while > "Greed," aka "Avarice," is the excessive desire to possess. Indeed. And that would be a problem, except that Haagenti has Kobal on his side, and Kobal has Lucifer on *his* side. I think it's fair to assume therefore that Mammon is being word-shouldered-aside, as Haagenti incorporates various parts of Greed into his own word. After all Greed is about getting things, and Gluttony about using them up. Today's economy isn't based on "Aquirer goods", it's based on "Consumer goods". Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 13:05:51 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Dante >Well, it's certainly that, but it has a lot of other plot-threads >running through it, too. And remember that the Inferno is only >the first third of the whole Comedy. Is the whole thing not as political as the Inferno? On a side note, what was Legion? I find all of these references to it, and I'm familiar with the biblical reference, but what was it in the In Nomine universe, and how did it kill so many archangels? Azrael, Malakite of Death. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 12:12:05 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Dante "James M. Zoshak" wrote: > On a side note, what was Legion? I find all of these references to it, and > I'm familiar with the biblical reference, but what was it in the In Nomine > universe, and how did it kill so many archangels? Legion, Demon Prince of Corruption. (APG, 11-12) The first (and, to Our knowledge, only) Shedite to learn how to control multiple bodies at once. Extremely powerful, to the point that even in dying it was able to destroy Raphael. > Azrael, Malakite of Death. - -EDG overly concise or necessarily terse? you decide. - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "Saints have been tempted by the devil." "You're not a saint." "Exactly. That's why I fell." - Milly and Wormold, "Our Man In Havana" ------------------------------ Date: 08 Apr 1999 12:10:59 -0500 From: jmcbray@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu (Jason F. McBrayer) Subject: Re: IN> [Request] Info about early Christian heresies..? >>>>> "NK" == Neel Krishnaswami writes: [request for Gnosticism info] The quickie pop-reference would be , the Gnostic Friends Network. I think they have pointers to more scholarly literature. I gave up on my Gnostic IN campaign a while back...too much going on in real life and now most of my potential players are in Central America. The upshot of this is that I've returned all my good Gnosticism references to the library and don't have the citations on hand. If you want a good read on Albigensianism (a later offshoot of Gnosticism), go for /Montaillou, Promised Land of Error/ by Ladurie. - -- +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Jason F. McBrayer jmcbray@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu | | The scalloped tatters of the King in Yellow must hide Yhtill | | forever. R.W. Chambers _The King in Yellow_ | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 13:18:07 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Dante At 1:05 PM -0400 4/8/99, James M. Zoshak wrote: > >Well, it's certainly that, but it has a lot of other plot-threads > >running through it, too. And remember that the Inferno is only > >the first third of the whole Comedy. > >Is the whole thing not as political as the Inferno? Yes, it is. It's just as you go through Purgatory and Paradise, you see all the examples of the people Dante actually likes instead of hates, or the families of the same. You also find yourself getting progressively more bored, which is a recurring problem Heaven has. >On a side note, what was Legion? I find all of these references to it, and >I'm familiar with the biblical reference, but what was it in the In Nomine >universe, and how did it kill so many archangels? > The whole story is in the Infernal Player's Guide, and possibly in the Angelic Player's Guide as well. Legion didn't kill 'so many' archangels, however -- he got several Demon Princes into trauma (which may be how Haagenti managed to eat a couple of them) and *did* tear Raphael into component forces, though. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 19:20:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: IN> Legion On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, James M. Zoshak wrote: > On a side note, what was Legion? I find all of these references to it, and > I'm familiar with the biblical reference, but what was it in the In Nomine > universe, and how did it kill so many archangels? Legion was a Shedite (DP, I believe) that somehow learned to possess multiple people, and even worse, how to assimilate their Forces. Heaven and Hell joined forces to destroy it. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! We don't get extra credit for how much suffering we endure. The only score worth keeping is how little suffering we inflict and how much we relieve. - Ghost ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:14:18 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: IN> Legion At 13:12 -0400 4/8/99, EDG wrote: >Legion, Demon Prince of Corruption. (APG, 11-12) The first (and, to Our >knowledge, only) Shedite to learn how to control multiple bodies at >once. Actually, the Shedite DPs can do this -- but not the way Legion did it. Legion somehow managed to *absorb* the Forces of its hosts, making it grow *very* rapidly in power. > Extremely powerful, to the point that even in dying it was able >to destroy Raphael. Not necessarily "destroy" -- there's a suggestion that Raphael was turned into a Remnant, not utterly destroyed. I don't believe this has been confirmed or denied in actual canon. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 14:22:19 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Legion Walter Milliken wrote: > Not necessarily "destroy" -- there's a suggestion that Raphael > was turned into a Remnant, not utterly destroyed. I don't > believe this has been confirmed or denied in actual canon. If I recall correctly, the suggestion was that Raphael's remnant was Michelangelo -- which never struck me as a likely choice, since a remnant, being devoid of celestial forces, would also presumably be devoid of will and perception, neither of which sound much like Michelangelo. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:35:08 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Legion At 15:22 -0400 4/8/99, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >If I recall correctly, the suggestion was that Raphael's remnant >was Michelangelo -- which never struck me as a likely choice, >since a remnant, being devoid of celestial forces, would also >presumably be devoid of will and perception, neither of which >sound much like Michelangelo. Quite true. I think there's likely to be more to this story someday.... Maybe if IN Historical gets done, there will be something on the whole Legion period. People seem to find it interesting. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:40:12 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements At 12:11 AM -0400 4/8/99, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>...an appropriate Initiation. It may be self initiation - for instance >read from a sorcerous book - or a full blown dark ritual with 13 cowled, >blackrobed sorcerers chanting your name in assyrian. >This initiation servers as the process the sorcerer acquires the necessary >attunement (see p.57) for sorcery to work for him.<<< > >The Sorcery attunement is a special case, and it still requires 6 Forces. (I'd been considering it more of an advantage, like Toughness... Drat, it's not listed that way. Ah, well, more errata. Funfunfun. Gods, but I hate trying to read things while sick.) >But -- ACK! Elizabeth! -- errata alert! > >"Attunements can only be granted by Superiors." > >Not true, because Word-bound celestials may also have attunements which >they might be able to grant to others. I thought you meant that lesser Word-bound couldn't bind their attunements to humans... Ah, well, I found Errata in my Liber Servitorum as well. (Chrubs, for one. Hee.) Should I make that "Only Superiors can grant Servitor and Band/Choir Attunements to humans" or "Only Word-bound celestials can grant Servitor Attunements to humans"? >-David (damn, I think the CPG has already gone to print) Yes, it has. *sigh* - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:40:11 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel At 3:52 PM +0300 4/8/99, Yossi Gurvitz wrote: >At 05:09 08/04/99 , you wrote: > >>Asmodeus pops in, casually obliterates a few Malakim, looks around, > Question: how easy is it for a superior to destroy a servitor? From a >game-mechanics aspect, is it automatic? If it's his own Servitor, and he holds his Servitor's Heart *and* said Servitor... The GM could plausibly make it automatic. Shatter your Hearts, Renegades. It's a bit munchkin otherwise -- the Servitor would probably have to be pretty much in the Superior's power, and doing it instantly might #1: take more Essence than is useful and #2 (good for Princes) not be much fun, compared to tormenting it for a while. >Is fleeing an enemy superior >excusable on the grounds of "there was nothing I could do" (I am thinking >of Malakim in service to Lawrance or Michael here.) I strongly suspect that Malakim are instructed not to attack Demon Princes unless they *really* think they could hurt said Prince. To try to do otherwise really wastes Malakim to no purpose, or, at a minimum, gets them vessel killed a lot and amuses the Prince. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:40:11 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Legion At 1:05 PM -0400 4/8/99, James M. Zoshak wrote: >On a side note, what was Legion? I find all of these references to it, and >I'm familiar with the biblical reference, but what was it in the In Nomine >universe, and how did it kill so many archangels? Angelic Player's Guide, pp. 11-12. Infernal Player's Guide, pp 14-15. Also a Pyramid article, by Derek Pearcy, which may be archived at the www.sjgames.com/pyramid website (you may need to subscribe ($15 a year) to access it, or it may be one of the public archives). I'd type in the details, but my fingers hurt. Basically, Raphael, Elohite AA of Knowledge, did a kamikaze strike and took out the Shedite Prince, etc. In the article, it's claimed that Raphael's Remnant was recovered and fostered by Art, the Angel of Art, whose Word is his name. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:54:21 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements At 14:40 -0400 4/8/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Should I make that "Only Superiors can grant Servitor and Band/Choir >Attunements to humans" or "Only Word-bound celestials can grant >Servitor Attunements to humans"? I believe close reading of the main book (in the Word-bound section up front) says that Word-bound can pass on their own personal attunements, and I think there's other canon (maybe in the IPG?) that glancingly refers to it also. So it should probably be the latter, though the human aspect clouds the issue a little. I think that if you can grant an attunement that isn't Choir/Band-related, it should be possible to give it to a human, whether from a Superior or lesser Word-bound -- there's nothing to suggest granting of Servitor attunements is any different. Only Superiors have Choir/Band attunements, so it make sense that only they can grant *those*.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 14:51:17 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Legion At 2:14 PM -0400 4/8/99, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 13:12 -0400 4/8/99, EDG wrote: > >Legion, Demon Prince of Corruption. (APG, 11-12) The first (and, to Our > >knowledge, only) Shedite to learn how to control multiple bodies at > >once. > >Actually, the Shedite DPs can do this -- but not the way Legion did it. >Legion somehow managed to *absorb* the Forces of its hosts, making it >grow *very* rapidly in power. The Infernal Player's Guide made a rather big deal about Legion being the first Shedite to be able to possess multiple hosts. Perhaps what is meant here is the first non-Prince, since he only became the Prince of Corruption after he pulled this trick off. Which in turn may have been when he gained the ability to assimilate host forces, in effect growing exponentially. > > Extremely powerful, to the point that even in dying it was able > >to destroy Raphael. > >Not necessarily "destroy" -- there's a suggestion that Raphael was turned >into a Remnant, not utterly destroyed. I don't believe this has been >confirmed or denied in actual canon. > Canon strongly implies she was destroyed. That being said, I *vastly* prefer the idea of Raphael wandering around out there, somewhere, remembering fragments of divine Knowledge and passing them on unconsciously... someday to be found and Celestial Forces added to begin the process of healing (even though she could never be who she was). - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:06:25 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Legion At 14:51 -0400 4/8/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Canon strongly implies she was destroyed. I think it implies that people *believe* that. The Remant bit is only in the Pyramid article, I think, so it's not official canon. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:39:57 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Dante >Legion, Demon Prince of Corruption. (APG, 11-12) The first (and, to Our How wierd is that -- without ever finding out through the books I figured that much out myself. >knowledge, only) Shedite to learn how to control multiple bodies at >once. Extremely powerful, to the point that even in dying it was able >to destroy Raphael. Figured he was Shedim, too, although I guess that was a given. :) Thanks! Az. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:40:47 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Legion >Legion was a Shedite (DP, I believe) that somehow learned to possess >multiple people, and even worse, how to assimilate their Forces. Heaven >and Hell joined forces to destroy it. Wow -- what book is he mentioned in? Az. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:41:45 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Dante >The whole story is in the Infernal Player's Guide, and possibly in >the Angelic Player's Guide as well. Legion didn't kill 'so many' >archangels, however -- he got several Demon Princes into trauma >(which may be how Haagenti managed to eat a couple of them) and *did* >tear Raphael into component forces, though. Ah -- thanks. Az. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 16:45:04 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Dante On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 paranial@creighton.edu wrote: > Well for my World Liturature Class we are Reading Dante's "Inferno". And > IMHO, I have come to the Conclusion that every Celestial, Except Sevitor > of Jordi (Could care less about "Human Stuff") and Saminga (They don't > care, further proff that they make Beavis and Butthead look like Genuises) > Has read it at least once, out of curiosity. Now how would you think Joe > Blow Celstial would react to reading it. Angels roll their eyes in disbelief. Demons laugh hysterically. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 16:47:17 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Dante On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > You also find yourself getting progressively more bored, which is a > recurring problem Heaven has. Actually, I think that's a recurring problem that mortal writers have with describing Heaven. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:44:15 -0400 From: "James M. Zoshak" Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements >>-David (damn, I think the CPG has already gone to print) Could someone give a rundown of common abbreviations used on this list? I'm recognizing about half of them, but CPG and CDaU continue to elude me. Az. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Azrael Darkangel, Angel of Death and Director of the Azrael Darkangel Institute for the Study of Min-Maxing. jzoshak@haverford.edu <-----------------------------------------------------------------> "I cannot envision a character with no powers. It hurts my mind to think of such things. A character with no powers or abilities is uninteresting and not worth creating." --The Central Doctrine of Munchkinism, given voice by Tristan \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 17:04:03 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, James M. Zoshak wrote: > Could someone give a rundown of common abbreviations used on this list? > I'm recognizing about half of them, but CPG and CDaU continue to elude me. Here's the ones I remember: CDaU - Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. Issues that will never recieve a concrete answer in official game material (such as whether or not Janus is Valefor, who Jesus is, whether or not free will exists, and so on). IN - In Nomine main book (rare) NM - Night Music TM - The Marches (theoretical; I don't know if I've ever seen it used) H&H - Heaven and Hell FotM - Fall of the Malakim FT - Final Trumpet APG - Angel Player's Guide IPG - Infernal Player's Guide CPG - Celestial Player's Guide (forthcoming) LR - Liber Reliquarium LC - Liber Cantecorium or Liber Castellorium (could be either; these are also hypothetical). I think that's it, but I won't swear to it. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 16:06:13 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements "James M. Zoshak" wrote: > Could someone give a rundown of common abbreviations used on this list? > I'm recognizing about half of them, but CPG and CDaU continue to elude me. Sorry, Az. :) CPG = Corporeal Player's Guide and CDaU = Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. I'm sure both have web pages you can go to - but I can't for the life of me remember what they are! - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "Saints have been tempted by the devil." "You're not a saint." "Exactly. That's why I fell." - Milly and Wormold, "Our Man In Havana" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 17:04:16 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Big Block o' Concrete Angel > > >Is fleeing an enemy superior > >excusable on the grounds of "there was nothing I could do" (I am thinking > >of Malakim in service to Lawrance or Michael here.) > > I strongly suspect that Malakim are instructed not to attack Demon Princes > unless they *really* think they could hurt said Prince. To try to do > otherwise really wastes Malakim to no purpose, or, at a minimum, gets > them vessel killed a lot and amuses the Prince. I agree with Beth, unless there is blatantly evident proof that the Malakim has a rodent's posterior's chance of harming a DP, then there is no dissonance. As to casually wiping out a few Malakim... ANY DP can do that, though it may cost them a lot of Essence. Some can do it much more easily (Baal, Saminga and Vapula spring to mind), I'm sure. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)388-2665(COOL) MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:24:03 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: IN> IN list acronyms At 16:44 -0400 4/8/99, James M. Zoshak wrote: >>>-David (damn, I think the CPG has already gone to print) > >Could someone give a rundown of common abbreviations used on this list? Besides the usual ones for net messages, we have the following: IN = In Nomine AA = Archangel DP = Demon Prince Canon = "official" material -- just the published books, but not articles, and sometimes not including vignettes in the books CDaU = "Canon Doubt and Uncertainty" (a Hitchiker's Guide allusion) = things that IN will never touch officially, as opposed to things that haven't yet been explained in canon, but might be someday NM = Night Music (Revelations Cycle Book I) (The Marches -- Revelations Cycle Book II, doesn't seem to have a common abbreviation.) HH or H&H = Heaven and Hell (Revelations Cycle Book III) FotM = Fall of the Malakim (Revelations Cycle Book IV) FT = Final Trumpet (Revelations Cycle Book V) LR or Relics = Liber Reliquarum LC or Songbook = Liber Canticorum Tetherbook = Liber Castellorum (Liber Servitorum will probably become LS, when it's out....) APG = Angelic Player's Guide IPG = Infernal Player's Guide CPG = Corporeal Player's Guide (not out yet, at the printer) GIN = GURPS In Nomine (which Elizabeth and I are writing, sometimes used by us) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:38:42 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Humans and attunements In a message dated 4/8/99 3:57:54 PM Central Daylight Time, jzoshak@haverford.edu writes: << Could someone give a rundown of common abbreviations used on this list? I'm recognizing about half of them, but CPG and CDaU continue to elude me. >> I think CPG is Corporeal Players Guide. CDaU is Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. Those rigidly defined areas where the writers just won't go. Brian A Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 17:44:26 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: IN> Metatron This is a slightly embarrassing question, considering how well I like to think I know the IN universe, but what was Metatron the Archangel of? I'd heard that he was the Voice of God, and I even heard him once described as the Archangel of Humanity, (which I don't like since wasn't he around WAY before humans existed?) Also how did he die? I might personally decide that he's still around, hidden, like Magog, and write up some stats for him, if I deem him Cool enough. Thanks, Brian A Rogers ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1194 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.