From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Nov 1 14:35:53 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00496 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 14:35:49 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id OAA04382 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 14:34:48 -0600 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 14:34:48 -0600 Message-Id: <200011012034.OAA04382@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 #1896 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 Wednesday, November 1 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1896 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1893 Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Michael, the Peacemaker? Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker IN> Looking for a signature Re: IN> meaning of names Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> meaning of names Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth (deceased) -- History Re: IN> Grigori Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth (deceased) Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker IN> Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth Re: IN> Michael, the Peacemaker? IN> Evil Thought #4534/b4 (vii.) IN> Demon of Beleth Re: IN> What *are* Songs? IN> Fwd: I suppose you could call him a Sidekick, but not to his face. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 09:09:54 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1893 James Walker wrote: > >El-shaddai -- lit. "the breasted one;" applied to God as provider > Are you sure of that translation? I've come across it elsewhere as "Lord of> the Mountains". Yes, I don't know where he got "the breasted one." El-Shaddai means "God (El) of the Mountains". - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 09:15:16 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker Charles Glasgow wrote: > Doesn't know how to compromise... there, I don't agree. She said "doesn't believe in compromise," not "doesn't know how to compromise." I believe Michael is the strongest believer in "The ends justify the means" of any Archangel, except perhaps Jean. He'll "compromise" only if it will ultimately result in him getting his way. > The entity who > invented the particular Symphonic attunement for seeing exactly what will> bring peace between two people is not, in my mind, likely to think *only* in> terms of unconditional surrender. Seeing what will bring peace between two people doesn't necessarily mean being willing to do what it will take to bring that about. Only if it fits his goals. > And remember, Michael has spent over 99.99999% of his life (22,000 years out> of 4.6 billion plus) not killing anything. That's because over 99.99999% of his life occurred before the Fall, and before he became the Archangel of War. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:09:46 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Michael, the Peacemaker? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Krishnaswami, Neel" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 8:32 AM Subject: Re: IN> Michael, the Peacemaker? > Chuckg wrote: > > [...] You know, > > Novalis could *really* stand to have her own equivalent of the > > Mercurian of War attachment -- maybe all that idealism is actually > > getting *in* the way at times, as you can't judge the price of peace > > if you don't believe that peace actually has a price... > > IMC, this was intentional on the part of Michael and Novalis: it > required their servitors to cooperate whenever they were trying > to deal with a major human conflict, and thus prevented their > servitors from working at cross-purposes. (And the generalization > to all the other archangels was a nice explanation of why the > PC group had a random collection of angels in it.) *giggle* I just had a notion. Anybody remember that Seraph of Fire in Liber Servitorum who deliberately spent 70 years filing papers IST Yves just for a chance to earn Yves' Divine Logic attunement, because he'd seen how it could be enormously useful in his own work? I'm trying to imagine the poor Servitor of Flowers who's volunteered to do a 50-year tour of duty IST War, just so he can earn the Mercurian of War attunement and take it back home to Novalis' service with him... and what kind of ordeal he'll endure in the process of trying... (The Malakite of Flowers will probably have the easiest time, admitted. Or maybe the Seraph of Flowers who got assigned to Michael's all-Mercurian-of-War Crisis Negotiation Team...) - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:13:10 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maurice Lane" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 8:46 AM Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker > Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 00:52:13 -0800 > From: Kris Overstreet > Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker > > >Michael is -NOT- stupid. (David maybe, but not > >Michael.) > > I wouldn't go so far as to say that David's stupid... > just hot-blooded, bloodthirsty and prone towards > action before thought. > > That's why his (self-chosen, might I add) vows make > him never strike first, never use ranged weapons (it's > so much easier to kill someone when you don't have to > see, hear, _smell_ him dying), and never forget that > others might repent. If he didn't have tendencies in > the other direction, well, there's not much Honor in > vowing to do something you wanted to do anyway. > > YMMV. > > :) Actually, Superiors 1 agrees with you, Moe -- David swore his vows because the initial explosion of wrath that he cut loose with upon his first turning Malakite scared even him, and he felt the need to restrain his violent impulses lest he someday do something irrevocable. So he swore his Malakite Oaths specifically to *force* himself to restrain himself to only striking in defense of himself or another, never to initiate attack. However, while David isn't exactly stupid, I will contend that he's *slow*. Which is not surprising, given that he's Stone -- if you give him enough time to think, he'll arrive at the right answer... but by then, circumstances have often finished changing so much that he needs to go back to the beginning and start thinking *again*... - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 15:13:51 -0000 From: "Laurent" Subject: IN> Looking for a signature Hi everybody, Somebody on this list had a signature that explained how to hold up a bank in latin, but I can't remember who. Could anyone send it to me, please? Thanks a million, Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 10:17:34 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> meaning of names "Metatron" is Greek for "behind the throne" (of God). As far as I can make out, this means that Metatron was imagined as Heaven's grand vizier. This is more or less compatible with the IN role (taken from "Good Omens," by Gaiman and Pratchett, I think) of Metatron as God's mouthpiece. Ustaf Davidson's "Dictionary of Angels" says that the number of offices and functions ascribed to Metatron is huge, so you can basically do almost anything with him. "Lilith" probably has something to do with the Hebrew word for "night." Maybe something like "Night Lady." "Night," in Hebrew, is something like "layil." "-oth" is a feminine plural ending, sometimes used to indicate greatness, not plurality (as in the case of "behemoth," the "great beast"). I'm not at all sure that's what's happening here, though. The name may simply be borrowed from Akkadian into Hebrew and then mutated some. A connection with "night" is still a good bet, though. "Hayyoth" means "living creatures" and is the name for the four surreal cherubim in the visions of Ezekiel. They make a reappearance, with anatomies somewhat rearranged, in Revelation. I would guess, therefore, that "Hayyael" means "Living One of God" or even "Life of God." "Kyriotate" is just Greek for "Domination.". Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:29:30 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kris Overstreet" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 2:52 AM Subject: Re: IN> re: Michael the Peacemaker > At 08:33 AM 10/31/00 -0800, you wrote: > >I agree that the fact that Michael has his own Mercurian of War attunement > >makes a big difference in how he is portrayed *now*. But unless I am > >mistaken, Michael could not have "looked into Lucifer's eyes" and used this > >attunement when the War broke out in Heaven. Because Michael did not receive > >the Word of War until *after* he had defeated Lucifer. I wonder if maybe, if > >he had had the attunement before the War began, would things have gone > >differently? It's often easier to achieve a diplomatic solution before the > >violence starts than it is afterwards. > > > I disagree. > > Considering the Attunements of War were all essentially created by Michael > from the abilities conferred by his Word- which he himself helped to > define- I think we have to assume that Michael had these qualities before > the Fall. Plus, of course, there's his natural Seraphic resonance. SCENE -- the Mount of Revelation, on the day of the Fall... Michael -- "Must you do this, brother? Is there no other way?" Lucifer -- "None! I spit upon God and all his works, and will not rest until I have torn down his throne and stand triumphant among the ruins of Heaven!" Michael -- "Then if it must be, let it be War." - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 07:51:29 -0800 From: "Bevan Thomas" Subject: Re: IN> meaning of names Thank you. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Earl Wajenberg To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 7:17 AM Subject: Re: IN> meaning of names > "Metatron" is Greek for "behind the throne" (of God). > As far as I can make out, this means that Metatron was > imagined as Heaven's grand vizier. This is more or less > compatible with the IN role (taken from "Good Omens," by > Gaiman and Pratchett, I think) of Metatron as God's > mouthpiece. Ustaf Davidson's "Dictionary of Angels" says > that the number of offices and functions ascribed to > Metatron is huge, so you can basically do almost anything > with him. > > "Lilith" probably has something to do with the Hebrew word > for "night." Maybe something like "Night Lady." > "Night," in Hebrew, is something like "layil." "-oth" is > a feminine plural ending, sometimes used to indicate > greatness, not plurality (as in the case of "behemoth," > the "great beast"). I'm not at all sure that's what's > happening here, though. The name may simply be borrowed > from Akkadian into Hebrew and then mutated some. A > connection with "night" is still a good bet, though. > > "Hayyoth" means "living creatures" and is the name for the > four surreal cherubim in the visions of Ezekiel. They make > a reappearance, with anatomies somewhat rearranged, in > Revelation. > > I would guess, therefore, that "Hayyael" means "Living One > of God" or even "Life of God." > > "Kyriotate" is just Greek for "Domination.". > > Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 10:50:47 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth (deceased) -- History Very good. I particularly like the attention paid to the tension between being Sloth and being slothful. This is one of those problems with allegorical personifications (which is what Word-bound virtually are), not addressed often enough. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:06:51 EST From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Grigori In a message dated 10/29/00 10:05:57 AM, Benediktq@t-online.de writes: >Hy, > >I have some questions concerning the Grigori. > Unfortunately, I have no answers that are cannonical to In Nomine. But, if you're interested in the source text for the 'historical' Grigori, look online for The Book of Enoch, which has the entire story. Including the interesting note that the entire group swore to be held accountable as one, and to all indulge in the sins of the flesh. Their leader was named Phanuel, and that may be the name of the Archangel of Song. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:16:09 -0500 From: "Krishnaswami, Neel" Subject: Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth (deceased) Douglas Muir wrote: > > [Meserach's] exact appearance varied, but always included burning, > bloodshot eyes and a sneer; think of Asmodeus' younger brother, hung > over and sleepless after a long weekend in Shal-Mari. What an excellent image! - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 08:35:58 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? Date: 1 Nov 2000 08:03:04 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? >Moe, what did you think of the Kyriotate Angel of the >American Dream?). Well written. There's room in... HAH! Nearly got caught, there. I have no further comment at this time. Morgan (SAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of Meditating on the Mortal Cliche involving the Lifecycle of the Chickens and It's Unreliability. ===== 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!? From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. http://experts.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:57:09 -0500 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? - --On Wednesday, November 1, 2000 8:35 AM -0800 Maurice Lane wrote: > Date: 1 Nov 2000 08:03:04 -0000 > From: "-=|horsefly|=-" > Subject: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? > > >> Moe, what did you think of the Kyriotate Angel of the >> American Dream?). > > Well written. There's room in... > > HAH! Nearly got caught, there. I have no further > comment at this time. > "Superiors 4: Electric Boogaloo" Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Superiors XXVI - So Very Tired.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:53:46 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker - ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Walker" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 9:00 PM Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1893 > >With that particular Mercurian of War attunement cranking at Superior > >levels, Michael *knows* when peace is possible. [2] Even if he doesn't > >particularly *want* to know, even if he isn't interested in looking for it > >at all, he doesn't get a choice and he doesn't have to look -- the knowledge > >is shunted directly into his forebrain right at the start. > > You've pointed out some important stuff, but there is two important points > that you've missed: > 1)Choir clash: Michael is a Seraph; the Mercurian 'eh, it's lying, so what' > doesn't work. All too often Michael will know that he could avoid > unnecessary deaths if he lied. This is probably one reason why he's so > grumpy. And so good at keeping secrets. Several points: a) The Seraph in the party always has the option of just shutting up and let the Mercurian do all the talking... while privately whispering in the Mercurian's ear to tell him whatever his resonance/attunements are picking up that might be useful to the negotiations. ("Marc? I just ran into a situation..." "Oh, please, not *another* emergency negotiation team request! We're really busy over here, you know?!?" "Look, you're always complaining that my killing people and breaking things 'all the time' is too expensive for Heaven, and now you're griping when I'm...?" "OK, OK, I'll get somebody down there right away... *grumble*") Or one of his own Mercurians, of course. After all, he hires 'em for a *reason*... b) However, this doesn't often work in Seraphim Council meetings, admitted, which is probably why Michael *is* such a blunt and forceful fellow there. c) Except for servitors of Revelations, pretty much all Seraphs are good at learning when to keep their lips zipped. Look at Dominic, for example. *g* > 2) Michael knows the price of peace; this will give him insights into the > worst aspects of people he deals with. Consider throwing these at PC > Mercurians of War "you can avoid combat with him by helping him obliterate > the town/hospital/school", "by grovelling to him and saying he's the > greatest", "by helping him impress his gung-ho friends some other way", "by > not noticing the bodies around the corner", "by giving him something else > to hurt". Yup. Like I said, sometimes the answer you get re: the 'Price Of Peace Attunement' is "The price is simply more than you can ever hope to pay. This guy just doesn't want to be friends, period." > Finally, I don't think Michael would want to ignore this info; he he did > he'd change the attunement. The thing is, you fight a war to win it; deep > in his heart Michael wants every war won; every war over. Again, agreed and amen. Michael is not the Archangel of Needlessly Prolonging The Struggle So He Can Keep On Enjoying The Carnage... *that* guy is called Baal, along with his buddies Belial, Furfur, etc. I remember this line from a late-night WWII movie about the Battle of the Bulge (can't remember the name, though -- it's the one with a young Telly Savalas as the crazy Sherman tank driver, if that helps.) German sergeant, speaking to the Obsessed Panzer Colonel about his intention to keep fighting on even after continuing to fight would only lose more than it could possibly hope to gain -- "Yes, the war. Always, it is the war. You would murder me... you would murder my sons... you would murder my *country*. just so you could keep on wearing that uniform!" IMO, this is the absolute antithesis of Michael's attitude. Michael will never give up, true. But it's *what* he will never give up on that's the distinction between him and Baal. Michael has his objective -- and IMO, his objective isn't the fighting itself, it's what he hopes to gain *by* fighting. If the situation suddenly changed to where the War between Heaven and Hell was genuinely resolvable in Heaven's favor by entirely peaceful methods, I would see Michael as the first person to suggest that he put the axe away for an eon or two. Remember, this is the guy who's as quick to lecture his servants about the stupidity of picking fights that have no good reason as he is to lecture them about not having the guts to get out there and confront Lucifer's hordes man-to-man. > I can see Michael sitting back after armageddon with a beer, relaxing in Heaven, > swapping stories with Eli - not for long of course, just an eon or two..... Yup. The old soldier, finally able to retire and look back on a job well done. Of course, "What Comes After Armageddon" is a huge discussion all by itself -- maybe the whole universe will finally merge with the Name of God or something like that, making the whole point moot. Who knows? CDaU. Fnord. - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 18:00:36 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker >Yup. The old soldier, finally able to retire and look back on a job well >done. http://www.btinternet.com/~jhart/IN_cutscenes.html jo ;) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:13:08 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jo Hart" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 12:00 PM Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker > > > >Yup. The old soldier, finally able to retire and look back on a job well > >done. > > > http://www.btinternet.com/~jhart/IN_cutscenes.html > jo > > ;) I *said*, "... a job well done." That wasn't it. :) - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 22:20:00 -0800 From: "Glenn Brown" Subject: IN> Michael the Peacemaker I agree with you, Kris, when you say that Michael is in no way stupid. And I think I understand why you want Michael to be the sort of being you describe. It would shift In Nomine towards being a Brighter, Higher Contrast game, if Michael were the "Ultimate Pacifist". But I don't think your interpretation of Michael is supported by canon. If VICTORY was Michael's first priority, then wouldn't his Word be Victory? I think Michael would say, if asked if he were a pacifist, "I intend to put an end to "The War", which is Baal's Word, as soon as I can. And I certainly intend to be the Victor in "The War". But War, which is MY WORD, will continue long after the end of "The War". War will continue because it is a manifestation of the quest for TRUTH. Through War, we test whether our understanding of truth is correct or not. For example, everytime I fight and win, I prove my Truth over the body of my opponent. We fight to prove the Truth, and the proof is in the fighting. If I am defeated in War, then I will conclude that my opponent's position contained more Truth than I'd previously believed. So while I wish to see a just peace follow the completion of every individual war, I do not seek an end to the process of War itself." See Superiors 1, page 109, the Section labeled Michael's Word, for the source of the material I paraphrased above. As to the question of when Michael gained the Word of War, I agree it would be plausible that he had the Word before he fought Lucifer in Heaven. According to page 104, Superiors 1, "Michael bested Lucifer in hand to hand combat and personally kicked his red ass out Heaven's door. (The remaining rebels, damned by God, conceded the battle and found their own way out.) For this, God made Michael the Archangel of War." I'd thought it was accepted that this was when Michael got the Word of War, which was why I didn't think he could have used his Mercurian attunement of War on Lucifer during the first battle. But I suppose it's possible that Michael was the Angel of War before the Rebellion, and only became the Archangel of War after he'd defeated Lucifer. Could anyone tell me if this interpretation is supported by canon or not? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 13:14:47 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Superiors3--"Now We Remain"? At 11:57 AM -0500 11/1/00, Marc Bowden wrote: > > "Superiors 4: Electric Boogaloo" Well, that fits Vapula and Valefor.... - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:35:30 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Brown" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 12:20 AM Subject: IN> Michael the Peacemaker > I agree with you, Kris, when you say that Michael is in no way stupid. And I > think I understand why you want Michael to be the sort of being you > describe. It would shift In Nomine towards being a Brighter, Higher Contrast > game, if Michael were the "Ultimate Pacifist". But I don't think your > interpretation of Michael is supported by canon. Well, 'Ultimate Pacifist' is probably the wrong way to phrase it, yup. I'd phrase it more like 'Ultimate Resolver Of Conflicts'. When Michael gets his teeth into a dispute, he doesn't stop until it's *settled*. It might be settled by negotiation or it might be settled by rendering his opponent into his component atoms, but butting heads with Michael results in only one of three eventual outcomes: a) He's ordered to stop by God b) He's dead c) He's resolved the conflict to his satisfaction. If you're lucky or had enough sense to take it to the negotiating table *fast*, it can be to both your mutual satisfactions as well as just his... but if he's not satisfied with the result, he'll just keep on coming at you until he is satisfied. Fortunately, "resolving the conflict" doesn't *always* equate to "Crush your enemies, send them fleeing before you, and hear the lamentations of their women." > If VICTORY was Michael's first priority, then wouldn't his Word be Victory? > I think Michael would say, if asked if he were a pacifist, "I intend to put > an end to "The War", which is Baal's Word, as soon as I can. And I > certainly intend to be the Victor in "The War". But War, which is MY WORD, > will continue long after the end of "The War". War will continue because it > is a manifestation of the quest for TRUTH. Through War, we test whether our > understanding of truth is correct or not. For example, everytime I fight and > win, I prove my Truth over the body of my opponent. We fight to prove the > Truth, and the proof is in the fighting. If I am defeated in War, then I > will conclude that my opponent's position contained more Truth than I'd > previously believed. So while I wish to see a just peace follow the > completion of every individual war, I do not seek an end to the process of > War itself." See Superiors 1, page 109, the Section labeled Michael's Word, > for the source of the material I paraphrased above. Yup. Michael encompasses Strife, Battle, and Competition. Michael's Word is the process of any two conflicting forces having it out until the matter is finally settled -- one way or the other. But there are non-violent resolution options as well as violent ones... even if the recent few millennia have needed Michael to primarily focus on just the violent ones, that's only the recent few millennia. [snip] > But I suppose it's possible that Michael was the Angel of War > before the Rebellion, and only became the Archangel of War after he'd > defeated Lucifer. Could anyone tell me if this interpretation is supported > by canon or not? It does seem that Michael has been following his Word-nature ever since the day he first fledged... I guess if you define the *Angelic* Word of War as something that doesn't *necessarily* require actual violence (IOW, extending it out to cover pretty much all competition and conflict), then yes, Michael could have been the Angel of War ever since day 1. Or not. Who knows? Fnord. *shrug* He's always been the Firstborn and mightiest of the Host, that much we do know. And when you're that, does it really matter whether or not you started calling yourself an Archangel in 22,000 BC or 4.6 billion BC? *eg* - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 12:46:55 -0800 From: Kris Overstreet Subject: Re: IN> Michael the Peacemaker At 10:20 PM 10/31/00 -0800, you wrote: >I agree with you, Kris, when you say that Michael is in no way stupid. And I >think I understand why you want Michael to be the sort of being you >describe. It would shift In Nomine towards being a Brighter, Higher Contrast >game, if Michael were the "Ultimate Pacifist". On the contrary; I think it has very, very high potential for darkness in Heaven. Michael very much believes in ends justifying the means, you see... Redneck Kris Overstreet, aka Redneck Gaijin publisher, White Lightning Prod. - www.wlpcomics.com I ***LOATHE*** Microsoft Outlook. Please get Eudora. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:06:25 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 02:56:10 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: IN> Meserach, Demon Prince of Sloth (deceased) -- History >MESERACH >Demon Prince of Sloth I liked it. Nasty little bugger: I'm glad he's dead*. The added adventure seeds and MacGuffins were a nice touch. :) Moe *And, unlike Mariel, he's _staying_ dead in Oops. Unless, of course, he came out at the beginning of 'Genti's Renegadeship... ...no, that thought is simply too disgusting for words. ===== 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!? From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. http://experts.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 14:41:35 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Michael, the Peacemaker? At 9:45 PM -0600 10/31/00, Charles Glasgow wrote: > >No wonder he's Commander of the Host. Because in actuality, he's ListAdmin >Of The Seraphim Council -- the person who has to remain cool no matter what, >and who has the job of determining when a given conversation has Gone Too >Far And Just Plain Needs To Be Stopped, Finished Or Not. *veg* > By me, that... that _makes sense_. - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:52:48 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Evil Thought #4534/b4 (vii.) Vapula. Saminga. Eli. Steampunk. We'll just let that bubble and boil in everyone's head for a while, shall we? :) 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!? From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. http://experts.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 20:33:16 GMT From: "nick sands" Subject: IN> Demon of Beleth ok, i've been offline for a while and have been catching up on a few stray thoughts in my head, the first of which is a wonderful demon of beleth the secound stray thought is a story i have now written and i would like to post it in a day or two for your critique and nitpicking, and/or praise etc. But, on with the show as they say... Golder Shedite of 'Things that go Bump in the Night' Long ago, beleth was bored, her distant lover was busy inspiring the humans. She sought a way to ease her boredom, she stirred her essence in to the form of a kyriotate, but she mused that soemthing was wrong with it, it seemed, well, twisted and malformed, so she cast in to her most darkest place where fear dwelt, and all but forgot about it untill the early 16th century. The creature had no name to call is self, nor was there any others like it, in the darkness it stayed for a time, of time it knew not the concept so it stayed there, not quite thinking, but just dwelling until its creator summoned it forth from the dark place and gave it a task, which it still perfoms to this day and age. Nowadays the nameless one is known as Golder, and is of the band known as Shedim, but it is a little different from the rest, its celestial form is akin to the rest of its band but it is a little smaller, its limbs, when they form are twisted or half formed. He has also some time ago been given the word that roughly translates in to 'Things that Go Bump in the Night'. Corporeal Forces 5 - --Strength 8 - --Agility 12 Ethereal Forces 3 - --Intelligence 4 - --Precision 8 Celestial Forces 4 - --Will 7 - --Perception 9 Artistry 2 Dodge 2 Driving 1 Electronics 1 Engeneerng 3 Fighting 1 Languages - -Hispanic 1 - -French 1 Lockpicking 3 Move Silently 2 Throwing 2 Corporeal Songs Attraction 3 Dreams 2 Light 2 Motion 2 Ethereal Songs Tongues 4 Motion 2 Light 3 Form 2 Dreams 1 Entropy 2 Celestial Songs Dreams 2 Entropy 2 Motion 2 Sheilds 1 Servitor Attunements Waking Terror* Things that Go Bump in the Night** Band Attunements Shedim of Beleth Djinn of Beleth Shedim of Asmodeus *Waking Terror This acts similarly to the Terror attunement, however, With the expendature of 1 Essence the demon can force all the sleeping mortals in a range equals to his Celestial Forces X the check digit to wake up screaming in terror and unable to get any more sleep that night. **Things that go Bump in the Night The demon knows on sight, which part of the marches a sleeper is in. If they are in Blandines then the demon may spend 2 points of Essence and cause the sleeper to shift over to Beleths realm. If te sleeper has any angels in their dreamscape then they are forced out and the dreamer wakes up instantly thinking they heard a noise. If the demon spends a further 1 point of Essence the human gets a very poor nights sleep and is automatically put in to Beleths side of the Marches the next time they go sleep. Okies i hope that wasn't too bad. i had him knockng around for a short while, if any one can improve on the 'theme' of the demon of things that go bump in te night ten by all means, post it up. Also in my next mail i will post up part 1 of the story i have written. Bye for now. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 15:41:55 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> What *are* Songs? At 2:20 AM +0000 11/1/00, Kay Dekker wrote: >Beth wrote: >> At 4:27 AM +0000 10/30/00, Kay Dekker wrote: [...] >> It's in that book. O:> > >OK. > >1) *cry* >2) I shall quote you to that effect. Can we have >"You want the answers, you buy the group the book" >as Canon? ;) Well, if your group needs such a dictate... Sure. I don't mind my name being taken in vain. O:> (I can just imagine how many of you are going to start going "bethdammit!" or otherwise invoking me... Yes, Moe, I'm looking at you. And you, there, Whistling one.) >> I think you're analyzing it a little much -- > >*grin* In real life I'm a technical author >and editor - I get paid to scrutinise, >nitpick, and generally "What _exactly_ does >this mean?" at people. I'll try not to let it >spill in here overmuch. One of the mantras I have is KINS: Keep In Nomine Simple. Doesn't always get invoked as much as it should, but I try. (If you want more stuff nailed down, check out GURPS In Nomine -- same setting, more hard data...) Anyway, there's stuff where there really is no hard data because it's not really needed -- GMs who care can make up (and post to the list) their own answers, or ask for other opinions, etc. (Heck, if you don't like the "canon" answer, chuck it for your own, ask for other people's house rules, you get the picture...) >> all that stuff doesn't really mesh with their >> role in the game. If you have a player who asks, >> say it's ineffable and go from there. > >*chuckle* They'll ask all right, and I shall tell >them that it's Ineffable. O:D Good. >AofI: You must go to Earth. I have a mission for you. >U: Sure, boss. What is it? >AofI: Errrr... I can't tell you that. It's > Ineffable. >U: *looks puzzled* >AofI: Don't worry. You'll know it when you see it. Sounds like Yves, actually... But then, Ineffability is his middle name. Sometimes. Fnord. O:> >> (Though learning Songs in other ways than from Superiors >> is covered in the Liber Canticorum.) > >I'll definitely be getting it as soon as I >can. Um - anyone need a technical author and >editor? Will work for, oooh, freebie copies of >supplements... Hee! Luck. >> Would type more but have baby sleeping on my left hand. > >Aw, sweet. My latest nephew arrived last Friday. Congrats to his parents! It's a... trip. - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 15:39:01 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: I suppose you could call him a Sidekick, but not to his face. >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 22:12:32 -0600 >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\buns\w*b/i at line 5 >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:11:57 -0800 (PST) >From: Maurice Lane >Subject: I suppose you could call him a Sidekick, but not to his face. > >Deeply cliched, based on one too many Military SF >books (hey, we've all got our vices), and maybe a >little too kick-a**, but what the heck: the look on >your PC's faces when they meet a non-Superior >U n s toppable Force just might be worth it. > >If I've missed any cliches, feel free to let me know. >This guy isn't exactly meant for serious campaigns. >:) > >Moegiel >Kyriotate of Destiny in Service to the Sword >("Hulk No Smash this one. Ogiel not su-i-cid-al. >Hulk _Go_ Smash with this one, then drink beer. Ogiel >Smart.") > >Samuel >Cherub of Purity > >Corporeal Forces: 6 Strength: 12 Agility: 12 >Ethereal Forces: 6 Intelligence:12 Precision: 12 >Celestial Forces: 6 Will: 12 Perception: 12 > >Vessel: older, grizzled, wiry male/6, Charisma +3 > >Skills: Dancing/6, Dodge/6, Fighting/6, Large >Weapon/6, Ranged Weapon/6, Savoir-Faire/6, Small >Weapon/6, Tactics/6 > >Songs: Hint: if it involves doing, removing or >avoiding damage, Samuel knows it at level/6. There >are specialists for all the other stuff. > >Attunements: Cherub of Purity > >Relics: Please. If he needs something specific, >he'll borrow it from someone. Laurence would hand him >his current sword if Samuel asked for it, no questions >asked. > > >There are uncounted warriors of the Host. There are >many, many elite fighters. There are quite a few >Vassals of the Sword, a good many Friends of the >Lord's Troops, and a respectable number of Masters of >the Armies of God. There are some Majors, Colonels >and Generals, and a handful of Grand Masters. There >have even been three Supreme Commanders of the Host. > >There is, however, only one Sergeant Major. > >The skill system breaks down completely when trying to >map out someone of Samuel's experience and aptitude. >He is, simply, the best fighter on both sides who >isn't a Superior. If he wants you dead, you're dead. >If he wants you maimed, you're maimed. If he wants >you hanging off of a tree branch, vaguely wondering >where that annoying loud ringing noise is coming from, >by God you'll end up that way. It doesn't matter >who's better armed: Samuel, barehanded, is a better >weapon than you'll ever hope to own. Grim Lord of >Battles, it doesn't even matter if there isn't a tree >within ten miles. > >You will note that he has no Attunements or >Distinctions, other than his basic Choir Attunement to >Purity. He doesn't need them. You will also note >that his skills have no specialization noted. That's >because he's equally skilled in all of them. Samuel's >had 20,000 years of constant battle to refine his art, >and it shows. > >Actually, Samuel hasn't seen as much battle as he >might have hoped, lately. Being Sergeant Major under >Michael was easy enough: find demons, kill demons, >find more demons. When Michael stepped down and Uriel >took over, Samuel found his job expanded to include >training new angels how to fight. This wasn't a >particular problem, considering that the Archangel of >Purity considered life-fire exercises to be the only >proper way to learn. Every officer in the Host of a >certain age bracket has been taught by Samuel - >painfully - and they all remember the experience quite >vividly. > >This, incidentally, includes the Archangels of Faith >and the Sword. Granted, Laurence has only once been >defeated... in a sword fight. Even Samuel couldn't >force more than a draw, back when Laurence was merely >a Word-bound. Alas, the Word of the Sword does not >include the concept "defending yourself in a >bare-knuckle fight"... something that the young angel >discovered when he mouthed off one too many times. >Khalid, being a bit smarter, never needed quite so >much of an attitude adjustment, but he has his own, >slightly embarrassing, memories. > >It shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone that >Laurence and Samuel got along quite well, after the >bruises of the former faded: the clichÈ of "the >wet-behind-the-ears, painfully-young hotshot officer >matched up with the pragmatic, S.O.B., >grizzled-yet-starkly-dangerous career N.C.O." exists >for a reason. Uriel began using the Sar-Major to keep >an eye on his protÈgÈ, especially as the Purity >Crusade began to crank up into high gear. Samuel and >Laurence worked well together in that conflict: while >Laurence was a consummate soldier even then, having >someone you can absolutely trust to handle problems >without supervision is always a pearl beyond price. > >But the Crusade didn't last forever: it ended with >Uriel's... well, not "arrest". Very few entities ever >had the personal might to make the Archangel of Purity >do anything except what he blessed well pleased. >However, the full legion detailed to 'escort' Uriel to >the Council was enough to make Laurence and Khalid >reach for their swords... until they saw Samuel's >expression. The angel had been watching Uriel, and >seeing as Uriel had visibly decided not to start the >Second Revolt right then and there, it was clear that >his subordinates weren't to do anything stupid. The >Archangel of Purity watched this by-play in his cold >fashion, then nodded. > >"Good," Uriel finally intoned. "Keep them out of >trouble until I return." He turned without further >speech, and was marched off... although an outside >observer might not be blamed if he concluded that >Uriel was actually leading his 'captors'. > >Today, Samuel is still the Sergeant Major of the Host. > He knows the troops, knows what they can do and >can't, and oversees their training and day-to-day >operations. Don't let his lack of apparent rank fool >you: Samuel could be Grand Master of any Holy Order in >a nanosecond. He simply chooses not to seek rank. > >Besides, he already has the ear of Laurence, who >considers him an irreplaceable font of hard-earned >wisdom in war. Samuel, for his part, has a deep >respect for Laurence's superior skills in strategic >thought: the Sar-Major knows how to do things, but >he's beyond his depth when it comes to comprehending >the Big Picture, and he knows it. He's also on very >good terms with Michael and David: the three of them, >old soldiers to the core, understand each other in >ways that younger generations can't hope to duplicate. > > >With those advantages, formal rank is irrelevant. >Besides, Samuel has his orders, and they don't include >self-aggrandizement. > >After all, when Uriel comes back, he's going to expect >a full report... > > >===== >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!? >>From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. >http://experts.yahoo.com/ > ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1896 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.