From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Oct 7 17:24:14 2000 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 RAA09899 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 17:24:13 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id RAA09086 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 17:22:53 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 17:22:53 -0500 Message-Id: <200010072222.RAA09086@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 #1842 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, October 7 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1842 In this digest: Re: IN> Malakite of Trade, IST Freedom IN> "Whaddya mean, I can't have monocrys?" Re: IN> Artifact Question Re: IN> Crusade (With all the connotations that it implies for a celestial) Re: IN> Ethereals and Divine Religions IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue Re: IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue Re: IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 22:16:14 GMT From: daiv@cruzio.com Subject: Re: IN> Malakite of Trade, IST Freedom > Laurent wrote: > > >> Not saying it's not possible, but if it was, > >> wouldn't that be the > >> cruelest thing one could do to a Malakite? > > >Just about. I never said it was Nice thing to do... But whoever called the AA's nice, has not been paying much attention. Or else is playing a much higer contrast than would be appropriate for this idea. > I wonder, could a Superior nip in at the > >moment of creation and make a non-standard Malakite > >with different starting oaths? > I thought of this idea, when i was writing it up. I recall that this question was asked before (I may even has asked it, to be honest) and it was decided that canon was, no, the two standard oaths are...standard. make of that what you will. But, as I pointed out in the write up, both of those oaths have the "when it is my choice" clause. So, Get someone to create the Malakite, and then to Order him to serve Lilith and her word as you would my own, and bobs your uncle. The malakite no longer has that choice. He may even quantify that as an Oath. Or not. But, as has been pointed out, this is a recipe for a seriously unhappy malakite. which is rather the point; to create an interesting character (interesting to me, at least, but I am wyrd (sic)) when doing coffee water just gets in the way go straight for the bean. - -Daiv ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 20:40:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> "Whaddya mean, I can't have monocrys?" Anybody out there with a expanded armor list? As much as it shames me to say it, I'm feeling too lazy to write up my own. :) Moe ===== In Nomine stuff: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Everything else (not that there is, right now): http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/main.html Last updated 9/5/00 (this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 00:33:21 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Artifact Question On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 5:53 PM +0000 10/5/00, Perry Lloyd wrote: > >>If someone wanted a celestial-only weapon for combat (which could be > >>kind of surprising to someone who assumed the character was unarmed), > >>I might charge a single point -- sort of like a corporeal artifact > >>costs a single point. > > > >Hrm... we currently have: > >One point/level for items that manifest on only one plane; > >Two points/level for those that manifest on two planes; > >Three points/lvl for those that manifest on three planes. > > > >Why not charge three points/level for a Corporeal Artifact that can be > >brought to the Celestial and Ethereal plane? > > Sure. Only then it's a relic, and not a Corporeal artifact! O;> (See > the contracts of Mammon, in S4...) It is, naturally, an artifact that > has no special niftykeen _powers_, save, of course, the power to come > along to the other planes... IMC, I have the following 'features' available: Can manifest on the Ethereal Plane (for Corporeal Artifacts) or on the Celestial Plane (for Talismans). +1 point Can manifest on the Ethereal and Celestial Planes (for Corporeal Artifacts). +2 points Always worked out fair. - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian, Q4B4L! Meow! "Ninety-nine percent of life is what you make of it, so if your life sucks, you suck." -- Mike Muir ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 00:48:43 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Crusade (With all the connotations that it implies for a celestial) On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Maurice Lane wrote: > "Enough is enough. By God Almighty, enough is enough." I do like it. It's a seed that's been touched on before, but the manifesto is wonderfully written. This seed would be wonderful combined with David's "Tyger, Tyger" seed about Gabriel falling. Gabriel is going mad, and a vast number of angels have decided that this is the way to fix things.... - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian, Q4B4L! Meow! Some people desperately want to be a a part of the crowd. Some people are special; they stand out in a crowd... And then there's the ME PHI ME - WE STAND ALONE. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 04:18:07 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals and Divine Religions In a message dated 10/6/00 2:22:05 PM Central Daylight Time, moelane_1999@yahoo.com writes: << >Of course, one could be a devout and sincere adherent >to a divine faith and be a Nephallim. (Nephalite?) Heh. I forget: do they make it into Heaven? >> As I recall, no Nephallite has ever shown up in Heaven. They are assumed to go straight to the Higher Heavens. Reverend Brian A. Rogers BillionSix@aol.com ICQ# 22544590 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:52:53 -0600 From: Tim Groth Subject: IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue Is it impossible to utter willful falsehoods in the Angelic Tongue or is it impossible to utter factually incorrect but believed statements? - -- Timothy, Angel of Rambling Ofanite of Creation ArchRival of Mathus If you have time to kill, why not kill it at http://ucsub.Colorado.edu/~grothtp/In.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 17:56:09 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue >Is it impossible to utter willful falsehoods in the Angelic Tongue or >is it impossible to utter factually incorrect but believed statements? Willful falsehoods. If the latter were true, angels could sit around in Heaven and do a sort of binary search for the Truth, even if they didn't know it. ;^) Hmm, I wonder if Vapula know yet about Jean's Local Symphonic Stabilizer. *clear throat* "Vapula knows about Jean's Symphonic St.. St..." Oh, good, I'll try again. "Vapula does not know about Jean's Local Symphonic Stabilizer by that name, or that Jean has successfully created such a device." Ah, that's a relief. Actually, it is even possible to utter factually incorrect statements that are *not* believed, if the purpose is not to deceive. For example, fictional stories can be told, but it is clear to all hearers that the story is fiction(or at least that the teller believes it to be such). So an angel in Heaven could recite the Bible all the way through, and not have gained any insight onto the truth of the stories and claims thus described. (Even a Seraph getting a CD of 6 while reading him would learn nothing new, unless somehow the angel reciting were involved in a Biblical event being discussed - which could be interesting if the angel were, say, reciting Revelations...) However, listening to two different angels with different opinions on the inerrancy of the Bible itself tell the same stories, one would hear the result in two different ways. >Timothy, Angel of Rambling >Ofanite of Creation >ArchRival of Mathus >If you have time to kill, why not kill it at >http://ucsub.Colorado.edu/~grothtp/In.html William ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 18:22:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Gant Subject: Re: IN> Lying and the Angelic Tongue On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Tim Groth wrote: > Is it impossible to utter willful falsehoods in the Angelic Tongue or > is it impossible to utter factually incorrect but believed statements? Willful falsehoods, I believe. You can't lie in the Angelic language, but telling what you believe the truth to be isn't a lie. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dunes/4656/ The Returners Final Fantasy Role-Playing Game Site: http://returners.simplenet.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1842 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.