From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Sep 18 16:43:06 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 QAA25447 for ; Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:43:06 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id QAA12334 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:34:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:34:33 -0500 Message-Id: <199909182134.QAA12334@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 #1333 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Saturday, September 18 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1333 In this digest: Re: IN> Primordial Angels IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> A Word... Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Primordial Angels IN> Exchange of forces Re: IN> Exchange of forces Re: IN> Exchange of forces Re: IN> A Word... Lucifer's Power level...(was Re: IN> Primordial Angels) Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... Re: IN> Exchange of forces IN> In Nomine: The Wild West ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:06:38 +0100 From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 12:49:29PM -0400, Chris Bergstresser wrote: > > Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the rest of the Superiors > > representing inorganic elements. Apparently he got his Word through > > creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing Celestials to manifest as > > wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit younger than the Earth. > > That doesn't make him younger -- it just means that he received his word > later. You're right. It doesn't mean he's younger. He is younger. I believe he is referred to at one point in the APG as "Another later creation", although that could be Jordi. Nonetheless, it is quite explicit that he was not one of the first angels; even one of the first 10 angels. He certainly seems to fit in with Gabriel, David, and Oannes -- all > strong, primordial archangels, with very direct ideas on how to influence > creation. I think it would be better if he was, but for whatever reason that isn't the canon history. (Though as to who would be oldest, I'm not sure Wind can exist without Fire.) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "These roleplayers wouldn't know a convincing society if it hanged them under an obscure section of its legal code." Martin Lloyd. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:20:30 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Primordial Angels >>>That doesn't make him younger -- it just means that he received his word later. He certainly seems to fit in with Gabriel, David, and Oannes -- all strong, primordial archangels, with very direct ideas on how to influence creation. If I had to ballpark the order they were created in, I'd peg Gabriel as the youngest. Oannes and Janus are probably the elders; the Bible starts with the presence of God as wind upon the face of the water.<<< Nope. Gabriel was one of the first seven created Archangels (the youngest of the seven). Oannes and Janus were both created long after the creation of the Earth, which makes Gabriel eons older than them. This is in the upcoming Gamemaster's Guide. - -David (GMG author) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:29:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Wade Trupke Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) >Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the rest of the Superiors >representing inorganic elements. Apparently he got his Word through >creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing Celestials to manifest as >wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit younger than the Earth. Are you sure about that? I could swear that, in the Janus write-up in the main IN book (which I don't have with me), one of the first things they say is that Janus is one of the oldest Archangels. Wade (not the Demon of Telemarketers) _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:18:06 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals At 7:18 PM -0400 9/16/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >1) If an ethereal does damage to a human (or whatever), it makes noise >in the Symphony. Right? Yes. (But probably not if they damage a celestial. Hee.) >2) Someone remind me what happens when an Ethereal's vessel is killed? The ethereal goes into Trauma, in its "home" in the Marches (either its Domain, or a spot near where it was first created, or whatever the GM rules). The rest of this is in the errata for the main book, IIRC, since _The Marches_ changed the mechanics of it. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 20:21:19 +0100 From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 11:29:58AM -0700, Wade Trupke wrote: > Are you sure about that? I could swear that, in > the Janus write-up in the main IN book (which I > don't have with me), one of the first things > they say is that Janus is one of the oldest > Archangels. > Completely sure. I have my information from the Angelic Player's Guide, and it was something I looked out for because the character I have played most often in In Nomine (and indeed, every other system) is a Seraph of the Wind. As to his age, he's certainly older than Laurence, almost certainly older than Marc and Dominic, and reasonably likely to be older than Novalis, Jean, Jordi and the many 'minor' Archangels. He was a Superior pre-Fall, but isn't part of the Really Old Guard. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "These roleplayers wouldn't know a convincing society if it hanged them under an obscure section of its legal code." Martin Lloyd. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:41:10 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 12:10 PM -0400 9/17/99, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 21:51 -0400 9/16/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >Absolutely. However, I see more of the 'motivating and promoting' > >force of evolution of knowledge being Jean's end, while more of the > >collecting, categorizing and disseminating of knowledge already found > >is Yves's. > >Actually, the way I view it, Jean is responsible for all knowledge-seeking >pertaining to the physical corporeal universe, Raphael was responsible for >that pertaining to human behavior, and Yves is responsible for the >promotion of knowledge and understanding as a way for all beings to reach >their Destiny, under the theory that perfect knowledge = God, and those >who seek knowledge are working to move closer to Him. You could >maybe divide them up as Corporeal Knowledge (Jean), Ethereal Knowledge >(Raphael), and Celestial Knowledge (Yves). Oh, I *like* that. Hm. First we have the Purity Crusade, slaughtering the Ethereals. Then, the remaining Ethereals flood over to Belath's side (for the most part). Then the Archangel of Knowledge, the Ethereal third of the triad, is destroyed fighting Legion.... I love patterns. Honestly. >With Rafe's death, I would expect her duties and servitors got divided >between Jean and Yves, with the lion's share going to Yves. Whereas I've always assumed the lion's share went to Jean, though I'm leaning towards your viewpoint for Canon (if not necessarily for my campaign world -- but my milage may vary, of course). > >Note this can support the idea of Yves as Patron of Philosophy very > >easily. However, I think it supports the idea of Jean as the Patron > >of Evolution of Methods of Thinking as well. > >Possibly, though don't forget that many Words are fuzzy enough to fit >under several Superiors. Quite possibly it would have wound up with >whoever had a servitor who best promoted the concept, first. As always. >Yes, pretty much. Anything that studies human behavior or culture, >as opposed to the physical universe. I'm not sure where I'd put pure >mathematics, since it really falls under neither. Given its stronger >association with "hard" science, I'd tend to put it under Jean. > True. On the other hand, the Elohite Archangel of Mathematics may have come up from Raphael herself and can't imagine *why* anyone would assume it (he or she is a meaningless binary concept, naturally) would associate with either of the remaining major superiors, since Mathematics is pure in and of itself, relating to the world only where the world chooses to relate to it.... > >Linguistics, on the other hand, is clearly the science of language. > >It's concerned with the ways language breaks down, the way > >information is conveyed, the way the human mind creates patterns that > >can be replicated for the transfer of information. All right, Jean > >is clearly the Patron of Linguistics. > >I could argue either Jean or Rafe for this one -- I don't think it's >that clear-cut. Linguistics, by and large, is primarily related to >how humans think, which in my model would have put it more under Raphael. >Those places where it crosses with neurology, computer languages, >artificial intelligence, and communication with alien races would have >a strong coupling to Jean, though. Oh, it would have been Raphael initially. But I feel Literary Criticism would have been Raphael initially too. This is more addressing where these things went in the Post-Raphaelite period. And linguistics is pretty hardcore science in a lot of ways. I have an aquaintance (with the utterly fortunate name of Doctor M. Harm, Brain Scientist) who built a neural net, managed the remarkable feat of getting it to do basic learning and language processing, and then proceeded to happily disable pathways to simulate aphasia. Doctor Harm would get along well with Vapula, but I digress. Linguistics isn't usually about behavior or psychology nearly so much as it is about cognitive processing, with the fuzzy area falling in evolution of language. So it's *very* Jean oriented. > >So. Who's in charge of Linguistic Critical Theory? > >Personally, I'd put any sort of literary criticism firmly on the >demonic side, probably under Malphas.... Heh. I've actually got a Shedite who has the Word of Deconstructionism in my campaign, and an Impudite of Post-Modernism over the Shedite (though not for long, if the Shedite has anything to say about it, and he does -- you can't get a Deconstructionist to shut *up* if your life depended on it....) But then, that was my field for a *long* time and as a dedicated old school New Critic.... Which is a digression. While there's definite factionalism in modern criticism, Literary Criticism has been around for a long time and has been a deep part of the evolution of philosophical and literary thought. I could see Malphas using modern critical theory (itself a higher word than Literary Criticism per se) as a divider, but I could make a strong case for Critical Theory on the Angelic side going under Creation, Knowledge, Lightning (but I'm in the minority, clearly) or Judgement. >But I'm an engineer, and you're way out of anything in my experience. So >my personal viewpoint is decidedly subjective. > Itself an admission that puts you into a relatively Modernist camp, as a Post-Modernist would assert that subjectivity's validity. Elohim are discomforted by Post-Modern thought, as they like it's stripping away of preconceptions and its embracing of all sides of an issue, but they dislike the sheer subjectivity of the matter. > >But science and technology as a seperate discipline is a relatively > >recent thing. > >In human terms, yes, but not necessarily by angelic evolution. I believe >Jean is stated in one or more of the history pieces to have always been >in charge of the physical forces of the universe. Then, when humans >evolved, he also apparently acquired oversight over their evolution >of understanding of those forces. How *humans* at various times have >categorized things is largely irrelevant from the celestial viewpoint. Hm. Interesting. I would assume that "Lightning" came as a word for him sometime after he got that oversight role, then. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:42:38 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels At 6:06 PM +0100 9/17/99, Kevin Walsh wrote: >On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 12:49:29PM -0400, Chris Bergstresser wrote: > > > Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the rest of the Superiors > > > representing inorganic elements. Apparently he got his Word through > > > creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing Celestials to manifest as > > > wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit younger than the Earth. > > > > That doesn't make him younger -- it just means that he received his word > > later. > >You're right. It doesn't mean he's younger. He is younger. I believe he is >referred to at one point in the APG as "Another later creation", although >that could be Jordi. Nonetheless, it is quite explicit that he was not one >of the first angels; even one of the first 10 angels. There are *how* many hundreds of thousands of Angels again? I'd think that if he were in the top 100, we could probably get away with calling him one of the oldest. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:55:12 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels At 11:29 AM -0700 9/17/99, Wade Trupke wrote: >From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) > >>Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the >rest of the Superiors >>representing inorganic elements. Apparently he >got his Word through >>creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing >Celestials to manifest as >>wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit >younger than the Earth. > >Are you sure about that? I could swear that, in >the Janus write-up in the main IN book (which I >don't have with me), one of the first things >they say is that Janus is one of the oldest >Archangels. Yeah, it says that. OTOH, the APG says he's "a later creation." Hmm. Maybe I should errata the main book to "older" or something. *sigh* The GMG, which Will Be Definitive, places his creation around 100 million BC, and his Word and title around then as well. Of course, "around 100 million BC" has a lot of wiggle room. (The order is: Yves, Michael, Lucifer, Baal, David, Eli, Uriel, Gabriel. (In that order.) Metatron (who may or may not be an actual being discreet from God) Asmodeus, Beleth, Blandine, Dominic, Jean, Kobal, Malphas, and Raphael (in alphabetical order, not order of creation) Belial, Andrealphus, Janus, Jordi, and Oannes. (Perhaps roughly in that order.) Saminga. Marc gets his Word. (Clearly he was created sometime earlier.) Novalis, Angel of Flowers, gets her first mention in the timeline. Eden Experiment. (Lilith, Adam, Eve.) ) And then it starts going down to the more "modern" lot. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:13:12 -0700 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels At 11:29 AM 9/17/99 -0700, you wrote: >Are you sure about that? I could swear that, in >the Janus write-up in the main IN book (which I >don't have with me), one of the first things >they say is that Janus is one of the oldest >Archangels. Remember that Kevin said "most of the Superiors representing inorganic elements". The fact that Gabriel, David, and Oannes are older than he is doesn't necessarily mean that he's younger than, say, Jean or Novalis. (He's actually probabably older than both of them; I don't remember the GMG well enough to say.) Remember also that there are a lot of minor Archangels that aren't listed in the main book. - -EDG - --- EDG, Mercurian of Lightning ist Archives, Angel of Information Dissemination edg@gamingoutpost.com The Gaming Outpost - www.gamingoutpost.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:18:01 -0600 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels > >Yves, Michael, Lucifer, Baal, David, Eli, Uriel, Gabriel. (In that order.) >Metatron (who may or may not be an actual being discreet from God) >Asmodeus, Beleth, Blandine, Dominic, Jean, Kobal, Malphas, and Raphael (in > alphabetical order, not order of creation) >Belial, Andrealphus, Janus, Jordi, and Oannes. (Perhaps roughly in that >order.) >Saminga. >Marc gets his Word. (Clearly he was created sometime earlier.) >Novalis, Angel of Flowers, gets her first mention in the timeline. >Eden Experiment. (Lilith, Adam, Eve.) ) > >And then it starts going down to the more "modern" lot. The order helps, but it brings up my main complant about In-nomine canon, Lucifer not being before Michael (not to mention in his write up as an Archangel Michael is called the most powerful celestial body and mind). I mean Lucifer acts a lot like an older sibling resenting treatment of a younger sibling, beyond that he had one of the Words closest to God, which is also a very wide word. In addition to this if Michael was that much better than him he probably would have ripped Lucifer appart during their fight (which Lucifer lost most likely because he doesn't seem combative and I'd imagine Falling would distract one during a fight). Lucifer has to be more powerful than Michael in many regards at least post Fall (considering he has done things that no Archangel can do, and let's face it if he goes down Hell is in a lot of trouble because he's the only one who can definetly give out Words, not to mention the fact that it is very likely that all demonic symphonies are part of his personal one and that without that the demons may have lots to worry about). That's just my opinion (in my campeign he was "First and most beloved"), but everytime I see it it bothers me. Timothy, "Angel" of Rambling If you have a hankering for waffles or chicken i know the place for you: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 20:10:59 -0400 From: "Yves Dorval" Subject: IN> Exchange of forces Here is some food for thought What would happen if 2 madly in love celestials from different choirs/bands managed to convince a Superior to *exchange* 1 or more forces between them??? Jason would be angel of cookies (Role Baker: Level 3, Status 2) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:50:49 -0600 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: IN> Exchange of forces >What would happen if 2 madly in love celestials from different choirs/bands >managed to convince a Superior to *exchange* 1 or more forces between >them??? > > Hmmm, I would imagine it depends what force type(s) involved. A corporeal one would indicate they may resemble eachother more when they manifest physicly, their attribute distribution may even shift slightly so their closer. Ethereal forces would blend their aquired personalities, memories and the like. Celestial ones would be the kicker, they would carry bits of core personality, stemming from their choir/band. They would still be the same individual, modified slightly (like taking a force from a human). If enough of their forces were blended they'd confuse who they were. I'm not sure madly in love celestials would do this. Maybe they'd ask to be linked in someway, or given the nature of the celestial realm maybe this link would form automaticly. Timothy, "Angel" of Rambling If you have a hankering for waffles or chicken i know the place for you: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 22:57:54 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Exchange of forces At 20:10 -0400 9/17/99, Yves Dorval wrote: >What would happen if 2 madly in love celestials from different choirs/bands >managed to convince a Superior to *exchange* 1 or more forces between >them??? In my campaign, they are much more likely to mingle Forces to produce a reliever, rather than want to homogenize themselves together. Generally, I'd say swapping Forces would move them toward similarity; they'd develop a "family resemblance". If they were different Choirs, they might take one mild aspects of the other's Choir nature, sort of like a very mild Discord, or a weak form of the influence of their Superior's Word. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:43:48 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 15:41 -0400 9/17/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: ]>True. On the other hand, the Elohite Archangel of Mathematics may >have come up from Raphael herself and can't imagine *why* anyone >would assume it (he or she is a meaningless binary concept, >naturally) would associate with either of the remaining major >superiors, since Mathematics is pure in and of itself, relating to >the world only where the world chooses to relate to it.... Maybe anyone with the Word of Mathematics automatically ascends to the higher Heavens.... Hmmm... maybe Mathematics was originally a Word under Purity.... >And linguistics is pretty hardcore science in a lot of ways. I have >an aquaintance (with the utterly fortunate name of Doctor M. Harm, >Brain Scientist) who built a neural net, managed the remarkable feat >of getting it to do basic learning and language processing, and then >proceeded to happily disable pathways to simulate aphasia. Doctor >Harm would get along well with Vapula, but I digress. Linguistics >isn't usually about behavior or psychology nearly so much as it is >about cognitive processing, with the fuzzy area falling in evolution >of language. So it's *very* Jean oriented. I'd still put cognitive processing more in Rafe's area than Jean's, except for the underlying "hardware" aspects of neural networks. Basically, we're talking about an emergent property of neural networks and physiology here. Frankly, I'm not at all convinced that linguistics isn't simply a very humano-centric discipline that's totally biased by having only a sample of one kind of hardware to look at. Looking at the vast differences between Von Neumann computer hardware and neural networks, and the way they represent and process data, I think linguistics based on understanding *human* language processing is roughly like trying to base an understanding of quantum mechanics on the basis of only knowing of the element carbon. >>But I'm an engineer, and you're way out of anything in my experience. So >>my personal viewpoint is decidedly subjective. > >Itself an admission that puts you into a relatively Modernist camp, >as a Post-Modernist would assert that subjectivity's validity. I suppose that makes all engineers Modernists then. I don't worry about subjective reality -- the physical universe is far too bizarre to be the subjective invention of my brain, unless I'm a *lot* smarter than I give myself credit for.... >>In human terms, yes, but not necessarily by angelic evolution. I believe >>Jean is stated in one or more of the history pieces to have always been >>in charge of the physical forces of the universe. Then, when humans >>evolved, he also apparently acquired oversight over their evolution >>of understanding of those forces. How *humans* at various times have >>categorized things is largely irrelevant from the celestial viewpoint. > >Hm. Interesting. I would assume that "Lightning" came as a word for >him sometime after he got that oversight role, then. Actually, I've assumed that "Lightning" is really the celestial term for "physical forces", or maybe "the electro-magnetic force", which pretty much dominates the corporeal realm at the Earth's scale, with gravity a close runner-up. In my campaign, the more symbolic aspects of Lightning as "scientific inspiration" date to the human discovery of the uses of fire (from a lightning-initiated blaze). Like Novalis, this may be a reflection of the personal nature of the Word-holder, influencing the evolution of their Word in the self-aware aspects of the Symphony. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:04:40 -0500 From: "Ben Chism" Subject: Lucifer's Power level...(was Re: IN> Primordial Angels) I view Lucifer post-Fall as something different than he was pre-Fall...even moreso than just the Angel/Demon switch. As he was the first of the Fallen, he became not only a demon...but almost an opposite to God. Not as powerful, except perhaps in Hell(not quite as powerful...even there), not as far reaching for sure...but more than a regular demon..or other Superior. By virtue(or perhaps misfortune!!) of being the first to fall he gained in power...(I really like the part about his personal symphony being over all the other demons!)...If that is true, then it's only because he THINKS he can do things that no other Superiors can do that makes him able to do them. If Hell is carved out of Lucifers own symphony then it would make him really powerful there(almost supremly so...it's only the fact that Hell is still a part of the True Symphony that lets God hold all power there, as he does in the rest of the Symphony)...maybe thats why Lucifer doesn't try and storm the Gates of Heaven..out of Hell his power is diminished by the True Symphony...He's biding his time until he finds a way to be as powerful out of Hell as he is in Hell.... Ben Chism ooohhhh....you definately got me thinking on this on!! Thanks Timothy!! > Lucifer has to be more powerful than Michael in many regards at least post Fall (considering >he has done things that no Archangel can do, and let's face it if he goes down Hell is in a lot of trouble >because he's the only one who can definetly give out Words, not to mention the fact that it is very likely that all >demonic symphonies are part of his personal one and that without that the demons may have lots to worry >about). > >Timothy, "Angel" of Rambling > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 00:06:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Benjamin Acosta Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force From: Whistling in the Dark > > At 1:32 AM -0400 9/17/99, JadePsion@aol.com wrote: > >....and who decides what good and evil is. > > I do. > > I called dibs. Ok, that's fair. But I get to decide what cool and lame is. And I also call shotgun. I originally was going to call dibs on who lives and who dies, but I believe that's the line editor's perogative. Ben, Elohite of Eli Angel of Neat Ideas ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:13:24 EDT From: JadePsion@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... In a message dated 9/17/99 6:46:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, earlw@mc.com writes: > Have you brought any aliens into the mix yet? I know Traveller has > plenty of them. Well, there are two "cats" (Aslan/Kzinti-types) in our group, which has been really fun for me. Imagine a Malakite of Gabriel discussing the nature of honor with a Kzin... We've been finding alien artifacts and hints at other aliens, but haven't had actual contact yet. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 07:44:00 -0700 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> Exchange of forces Yves Dorval wrote: > Here is some food for thought > > What would happen if 2 madly in love celestials from different choirs/bands > managed to convince a Superior to *exchange* 1 or more forces between > them??? > You mean before or after the Inquisition hauled them in for questioning? If angels look upon wanting to 'buck the order' by creating a new Celestial as somewhat aberrant (okay, -many- angels, we all know about Novalis), how do you think they'd react to -that- request? I can see a lot of questions along the lines of 'So the Forces you were created with aren't quite right?' and 'Why this sudden overwhelming urge to focus on just -this- Celestial...that's a human trait, isn't it?' or 'Isn't that what doomed the Grigori, that kind of narrow focus?' But according to most of what I've read, it seems that IN's view of the Celestial heirarchies does have them a bit more orderly (but not stagnant) than the Infernal. I'd think that such a bizarre request would be looked upon with a very jaundiced eye. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:33:50 -0500 (CDT) From: paranial@creighton.edu Subject: IN> In Nomine: The Wild West After being away in Hawai'i ofr the summer. I am finally back in school in Omaha NE (Ugh). To hearld my return I will post some possable ideas for an Old West Campaign: An Ofanite of War Gunfighter is unbeatable. If a Sheirif of a town is a Celestial nine times out of ten he is a Severtor of Judgment. A furthur nine times out of ten he is a Seraph. All servitors of the Sword are Cavalry Officers. Comments sugestions ridicule, Bradley Paranial, Mercutian Vassal of War Exposer of B'harni. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1333 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.