From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu May 11 05:49:49 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 FAA11801 for ; Thu, 11 May 2000 05:49:49 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id FAA14752 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 11 May 2000 05:47:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 05:47:00 -0500 Message-Id: <200005111047.FAA14752@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 #1621 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, May 11 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1621 In this digest: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote (sociology rant - long) Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote IN> Celestial blue Re: IN> Celestial blue Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote (sociology rant - long) Re: IN> Jack Chick Re: IN> Chess IN> Whats in a name? IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1619 Re: IN> Chess Re: IN> Chess Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) IN> Re: Celestial blue IN> Error Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) IN> I just had to share... Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) Re: IN> I just had to share... Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) IN> Re: Dissent! Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue IN> New Angels Re: IN> New Angels RE: IN> New Angels IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? Re: IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine Re: IN> Re: Dissent! Re: IN> New Angels Re: IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? Re: IN> A friendly Hello, and various things of note... Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine Re: IN> Celestial blue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:00:27 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote (sociology rant - long) > Just my opinion, now, but wouldn't this be a lesser Word under the >Word of Envy? Only if you happen to be a Freudian. Hilary Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 19:58:17 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote At 10:29 10/05/00 -0400, you wrote: >I half-agree with you about point B. The point where I diverge is >that, from the histories, you can draw the conclusion that the >Inquisition was also driven by the voices in Torquemata's head (in the >beginning) and by profit motive (shortly thereafter). Consider (purely theoretically, naturally) Torquemada as a fallen Elohite of Dominic and you have the premise behind an interesting scenario... Hilary Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:09:01 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote >the Ashley portion of omentide would be willing to share his thoughts on an >Ethereal vicory in the War... BOTH of our portions use a whole load of Ethereal stuff. We've worked out an Ethereal ORIGIN of the whole INomineverse. May get it posted eventually, but that is for another day. Hilary Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 14:57:33 PDT From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Celestial blue This is SO BEAUTIFUL. This time I'm the one who's crying. But I have a few questions. Laurence, David, and the first Malakim didn't fledge, they *became* Malakim at the beginning of the War. So I'm not sure he has the first-hand experience you describe. And what about Malakim who are created whole, from forces, instead of working their way up as fledglings? Janet Anderson (Malakim are, as I've mentioned before, my favorite Choir) ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 14:58:49 -0700 From: "Sean McCarthy" Subject: Re: IN> Celestial blue Janet said: > This is SO BEAUTIFUL. This time I'm the one who's crying. > > But I have a few questions. Laurence, David, and the first Malakim didn't > fledge, they *became* Malakim at the beginning of the War. So I'm not sure > he has the first-hand experience you describe. And what about Malakim who > are created whole, from forces, instead of working their way up as > fledglings? > Laurence came into being post-Fall. It is one reason Michael considers him still very wet behind the ears. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 17:29:20 -0500 (EST) From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote (sociology rant - long) Jo Hart wrote: > Liam Astley wrote: > > Marc Bowden wrote: > > > Just my opinion, now, but wouldn't this be a lesser Word under the > > > Word of Envy? > > > >i dunno, sexism sounds like a big-ass word in and of itself to me > > > > I suspect Sexism might be quite a new word. For most of human > existence, the concept of it being bad to treat different genders > differently just didn't really exist. It just happened and was > accepted. While sex discrimination was (and outside the West still is) pervasive in history, I think it's reasonable to assume that most women have been perfectly capable of realizing they had gotten a bum deal. :) A few months ago, I read in the _Wall Street Journal_ about the death of one of the last speakers of a secret "women's language" in China. Apparently, women in one region of medieval China had invented their own language (including written script!), and had taught it friends and daughters. This tradition lasted for several centuries, until the Cultural Revolution, when the Communist Party decided that knowing the secret language was prima facie evidence of being a spy, and put hundreds of speakers to death, and burned whatever written works they could find. Historians and anthropologists are fairly desperate to get all the written works of the language translated before all the people who know it die of old age. There are apparently passionate condemnations of things like foot-binding, bad marriages, inability to own property; charms for safe childbirths; and so on. I thought it was pretty neat stuff -- hidden languages are the sort of thing more likely to turn up in fiction than in real life. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 17:09:54 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Jack Chick From: "Tim Groth" > > Hmm, I bet Jack Chick is really a demon. Probably with the word of "World > Wide Satanic Conspiracies" or "Psychotic Rantings about Totally Innocent > Things", definetly a servitor of Kobal. A Habbalite of Kobal. This has > possibilities (cue the evil laughter). I'd say Habbalite of Malphas, personally. ;;;) Prodigal Demon of Calling In to Tech Support Without the Product Nearby ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 17:12:46 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Chess From: "ben" > > > Pawns: Haagenti fits here oh so well... > > Nah. There'd be no undead as the pawns, no demons as the pawns. I disagree. Haagenti would be a PERFECT choice, considering how pawns get promoted. *g* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 23:27:03 +0100 From: "mink" Subject: IN> Whats in a name? Heres some stuff i've thrown together because of the lack of IN stuff that beth mentioned. Celestial Name Maker ok, heres what you do. 1) take the first three letters from any of the below specified list thingies (or the last three if you like) 2) use only three to five list thingy bits 3) add the three letters to each other in order from the words taken 4) hey presto, you got a celestial name (it works better for demonic names for some reason...) The list thingies. A) the name of your fav drink B) the name of your fav dish of food C) the name of your fav group/artist/band D) the name of your fav sport E) the name of your fav person F) the name of your fav friend G) the name fo your least fav friend H) the name of your least fav person I) the name of your least fav sport J) the name of your least fav group/artist/band K) the name of your least fav dish of food L) the name of your least fav drink M) the maiden name of your mother N) the first name of your mother O) the surname of your father P) the first name of your father Q) your fav colour R) your least fav colour S) your star sign T) your religion U) any nick name you have V) any nick name from a freind W) any object in sight X) the nearest city to you Z) whats on your mouse mat. i got COLGAROTHIALMES from A) COLa Z) GARfeild J) gOTH J) industrIAL H) ME then i added an S to make it even better. simple well thats me out of not really very useful stuff for now }:-) COLGAROTHIALMES, Demon of damnation, Shedite with web access (-:{ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 19:03:08 -0400 From: "Thorne" Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1619 Oh, I'm there for GURPS IN . . .I'll be using it in my Horror campaign ;) And the idea of an In Nomine chess set would ROCK!! But I'd settle for In Nomine Figs ;) Grayson ____________________________________________________ "Ti-i-i-ime is on my side . .yes it is . ." - Azazel, Fallen (Or the Rolling Stones . .which ever's your preference ;)) ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 2000 23:18:15 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Chess On Wed, 10 May 2000 11:33:27 -0400 Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [snip mouth-watering description] >What I wouldn't give for an In Nomine chess set. Mmmm, fun. one assumes each of the pieces would be in Celestial Form, neh? of course, one could market it with comments about how it's KC2 compatible ;) -=|horsefly|=- If I ever wanted to say 'gwrthwynebiad', I'd probably kill myself by choking on my own tongue. =) - --John Karakash ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 2000 23:23:36 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Chess On Wed, 10 May 2000 11:21:51 -0400 "A.Hamilton" wrote: > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "mink" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 11:02 AM >Subject: IN> Chess > > >> hmm.. once more i got to thinking about a good game of chess.... but i >wasnt >> happy with the peices. so i got out the play doh and made some special >> peices. >> the question is, who would you folks use for each peice. >> here is who/what i'd use > >Hmm. I'd suggest the following: [i like the angelic side; i'd vote Gabriel for queen.] >King: Kronos >Queen: Lilith >Bishop: Nybbis and Vapula (the new religion) that'd be Nybbas and Andrealphus, for the "new religion" thing. >Rook: Ba'al and Belial you mean "knight," don't you? >Castle: Asmodeus and Beleth. these are the rooks. considering this is a chess set, i'd forgo mirroring Kronos and Yves for the position of king and put Asmodeus on the demonic side of that equation. Kronos then would become a rook under this model. >Pawns: Zombies? or mummies, or vampires (uh... maybe not ). stick with zombies and imps, then. -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:02:42 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Cool Lilith Quote >Or, possibly >the Ashley portion of omentide would be willing to share his thoughts on an >Ethereal vicory in the War. I have been toying with this idea for some time. It is an interesting possibility. The problem is that the Ethereals do not work together enough to make this easy to acheive. In games I have run recently, which have Ethereals in them, Athena has managed to gain a power base in Athens and Aegina which is not that difficult, although the major (IN canon) tether of Asmodeus located near the Acropolis was an problem. It's amazing what a couple of archangels can do to even the odds, to help an Ethereal when it involved harming The Game at the same time More recently (also in a LARP), Osiris managed to return to Isis. Osiris is an interesting figure, but I'm deliberately keeping him fairly weak. Isis might lend him essence, her cult has been active in various forms through to the modern day. And I have touched on Gaea/Gaia. Mentioned in early Greek stuff, though I did use her mostly in a far more modern context, as a kind of Earth Mother figure. Most of the players in this game who realised what was going on interpreted the concept in a very modern way, thought nicey nicey gentle caring protective ethereal. They missed the character brief which also mentioned that with enough essence could cleanse the blight of cities from her flesh. I have put in some others as well, the Sidhe for a start. I have considered doing something with the Goddess Kali amongst others. Equally I have had soldiers of Odin. Easy enough since Iceland is still officially a pagan country, and the norse stuff is mentioned in canon. The problem for all of them is getting enough essence to deal with heaven and hell, and I do not mean dealing with Archangels and Demon Princes. In addition they would need to start working together which I consider unlikely. One idea I've thought about is to have a couple of the real powerful guys to go rebel from Heaven and Hell. Not to side with the Ethereals but to stand with Humanity. Humanity can create and has free will, so the obvious candidates are Eli and Lilith. Potentially they might have other supporters within Heaven and Hell, those who are most strongly opposed to Dominic spring to mind, especially Gabriel who is sufficiently mad to do just about anything. Of course this is all a long way from canon, but I do kind of feel that for an Ethereal/human victory in the war they would need major support. Ashley. Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 19:00:47 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) Pretty. . . Pretty. . . Pretty. . . http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/superiors3/img/cover_lg.jpg Makes me wanna go out and SMITE! SMITE! SMITE! Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:23:06 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: IN> Re: Celestial blue At 2:57 PM -0700 5/10/00, Janet Anderson wrote: >This is SO BEAUTIFUL. This time I'm the one who's crying. Thank you, very much. >But I have a few questions. Laurence, David, and the first Malakim >didn't fledge, they *became* Malakim at the beginning of the War. >So I'm not sure he has the first-hand experience you describe. And >what about Malakim who are created whole, from forces, instead of >working their way up as fledglings? Laurence wasn't around for the Fall. He fledged Malakite under Uriel. Now, it's certainly possible he was created whole instead of fledging, but I made the assumption he actually fledged from Reliever for these purposes. Not canon, of course, but a reasonable assumption. As for those created whole, my assumption would be they would either be created with their Oaths (and thus are bound into them upon creation, as the fledgling is bound on fledging), or swears them during the process *of* creation, perhaps before corporeal Forces are bound into the whole. I'm not entirely sure. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 18:40:25 PDT From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Error When I wrote "Laurence, Davi, and the first Malakim," I meant to write "Uriel, David, and the first Malakim." Janet Anderson ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:37:30 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/superiors3/img/cover_lg.jpg Ok... Kiara and I vote that this is the best piece of cover art for IN so far (not counting the main rulebook) The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 22:38:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: IN> I just had to share... As I sat here reading the list, I was paying my electric bill over the phone via credit card. The approval number came back 31 - 111 666 Right in the middle of one of the 'Chess' posts, oddly enough... so, what powerful force does '31' represent in the game, I wonder.... - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! Want to hold up a bank in Latin? "Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam." (I have a catapult. Give me all the money, or I will fling an enormous rock at your head." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 02:44:08 GMT From: "Erich S. Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) > > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/superiors3/img/cover_lg.jpg > > >Ok... Kiara and I vote that this is the best piece of cover art for IN so >far (not counting the main rulebook) > I did like it better than the two other Superior books. Color me crazy, but I like the Revelations Cycle books the best (with a toss up between The Marches & The Final Trumpet as the best of all) when it comes to cover art. - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Demon of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, Impudite of Kronos - ------------------------- Touched by an Impudite http://www.impudite.com Go Directly to the Blog http://www.impudite.com/abt-blog.asp ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 22:55:19 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> I just had to share... At 10:38 PM -0400 5/10/00, Rev. Pee Kitty wrote: >As I sat here reading the list, I was paying my electric bill over the >phone via credit card. The approval number came back > >31 - 111 666 > >Right in the middle of one of the 'Chess' posts, oddly enough... so, what >powerful force does '31' represent in the game, I wonder.... Go back to the chess posts. There are thirty-two chessmen on a board at the beginning of the game. The significant factor is the missing chessman, who represents both Destiny (the Angelic Intervention) and Fate (the Infernal one). The question is, which piece is missing, and who does that piece represent? - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 23:17:04 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) >> > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/superiors3/img/cover_lg.jpg Mmmm. Still, it is my dream that someday a cover will have _IN_ demons on it, instesd of "ugly suckers" demons. *sigh* - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap and no computer desk -- the keyboard shares the lap, and the trackball sits on a pile of GURPS books. I want the computer desk back! Moving is a hassle. (PS: may be typing with 1 hand, or even toe! Please forgive capitalization.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:51:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Re: Dissent! Okay, I've finally waded through all the comments about my little thought experiment, finally (_three_ digests at once, and I never got #1618, for some reason: had to look it up in the archive. Odd). First off: Thanks to everyone who commented, whether it was "I loved it" or "This had serious flaws, man". I appreciated both types of feedback, and I appreciate the courtesy that was shown in your replies. As for the specific opinions, well, I agreed with some of them, didn't agree with some of them, and don't have a clue whether I agreed or disagreed with others. I'll probably leave the whole thing alone for a week, reread the relevant posts, and decide what to do next. Of course, things that some readers liked, some hated, which should make the whole review a little convoluted, especially since I've got my own opinions on what's good, and what's bad, but that's what makes writing fun*. Whether you liked it or hated it, it seemed to provoke some thoughtful responses, and I liked that best of all. About time I returned the favor. Moe *I am pleased, however, that the new Dom/Novy dynamic got generally good reviews. I _liked_ that image. :) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 23:20:47 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Laurence wasn't around for the Fall. He fledged Malakite under Uriel. > Now, it's certainly possible he was created whole instead of > fledging, but I made the assumption he actually fledged from Reliever > for these purposes. Not canon, of course, but a reasonable assumption. While I don't think it's definitely stated, it's implied that Laurence was created whole. And as his author in S1, that's my personal view of him. Which does not invalidate your take, of course. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:51:05 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue At 11:20 PM -0500 5/10/00, David Edelstein wrote: >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > > Laurence wasn't around for the Fall. He fledged Malakite under Uriel. > > Now, it's certainly possible he was created whole instead of > > fledging, but I made the assumption he actually fledged from Reliever > > for these purposes. Not canon, of course, but a reasonable assumption. > >While I don't think it's definitely stated, it's implied that Laurence >was created whole. And as his author in S1, that's my personal view of >him. Which does not invalidate your take, of course. True enough, and I wouldn't presume to debate your credentials. Out of curiousity, why that assumption for him? I'm curious if there's something of the mythic "pure knight springing forth whole" in it. I was thinking Reliever in that much as Galahad was raised from a child into the most perfect Knight of all, and metaphorically, Laurence is the Galahad figure of In Nomine. Or so it seems to me. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:04:30 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Out of curiousity, why that assumption for him? I'm curious if > there's something of the mythic "pure knight springing forth whole" > in it. IIRC, there was a line somewhere about Uriel creating him AS a Malakite. And I just can't see Laurence having ever been a reliever, frankly. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:08:38 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue At 11:20 PM -0500 05/10/00, David Edelstein wrote: >While I don't think it's definitely stated, it's implied that Laurence >was created whole. Besides, Laurence isn't a Seraph: Laurence . o O (Lie? SURE! So long as I do it for the greater good! Tell the little Fledgling I too was once a Reliever, and he too will be willing to endure the forge. To become _my_ sword.) Laurence says, "Why yes my comrade. . ." You see where this is going. Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 22:24:51 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue >From: David Edelstein >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue >Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:04:30 -0500 > >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > > Out of curiousity, why that assumption for him? I'm curious if > > there's something of the mythic "pure knight springing forth whole" > > in it. > >IIRC, there was a line somewhere about Uriel creating him AS a Malakite. >And I just can't see Laurence having ever been a reliever, frankly. > I'd assume Uriel created most of his servitors whole, taking forces straight out of the Symphony. (These modern archangels, they've gotten slack and lazy ...) jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:25:19 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: IN> New Angels Question: Can Angels be newly created with more than 9 Forces? I think they can but can't think of where I read if they can. Also, is there an upper limit other than 18 Forces? How common would everyone think such angels would be? Come to think of it do we have any ideas as to the ratio of newly created angels to fledged relievers as they are being created now? It would vary by Superior but a poll of rough guesses? Just wondering... The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:15:40 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> New Angels At 12:25 AM -0500 05/11/00, David Rodemaker wrote: >Question: Can Angels be newly created with more than 9 Forces? I'd say yes. But it probably costs a LOT of Essence to begin with, so just isn't -done- all that often. >Also, is there an upper limit other than 18 Forces? You also have Word Forces to add to the mix, and then the only limit is the state change between HIGH powered Celestial, and Superior status. >How common would everyone think such angels would be? Your game, your numbers. (I believe the GMG has some stuff about the numbers of angels in a campaign. Yes, I NEED that book badly. . . I'm going on mostly the playtest info.) >Come to think of it do we have any ideas as to the ratio of newly created >angels to fledged relievers as they are being created now? Again, your campaign, your numbers. I suspect there would be more relievers due to the fact they cost less Essence to create (or they spontainously come into existance, who knows!). >It would vary by Superior but a poll of rough guesses? *shrug* You're guess is good as mine. Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 04:12:38 +1000 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: RE: IN> New Angels The Other David wrote: > Question: Can Angels be newly created with more than 9 Forces? I > think they > can but can't think of where I read if they can. Also, is there an upper > limit other than 18 Forces? How common would everyone think such angels > would be? Come to think of it do we have any ideas as to the > ratio of newly > created angels to fledged relievers as they are being created > now? It would > vary by Superior but a poll of rough guesses? As far as I can tell, there is no rule against creating angels up to and including 18 forces, but there are several reasons why no Archangel would do it: 1) It's tiring and expensive in terms of Essence and Forces. Archangels aren't infinite and taxing themselves like this would seriously weaken them. 2) The angel would lack experience. Experience is a lot of what makes a good servitor. An angel created 18 forces would be like a super-powered child, and would definitely suffer from sins such as pride. Superiors want useful, obedient servants. It is far better to create a reliever who works hard, develops a genuine love for your Word and eventually fledges into your service. 3) Other angels would resent it. After all their hard work, the boss simply makes a new angel better than them. Angels are supposed to be above such feelings of jealousy and resentment but they are fallible, and prone to such emotions. 4) Due to the reasons above, Judgement would probably seriously frown on high-powered infant angels. They lack the reasoning and experience to make the proper choices and would be prime targets for Outcasting and Falling. Dominic would not be happy on either account. So having said all that, if an Archangel had a specific purpose for such an angel and didn't want to use anyone else, they could make whomever they pleased. They had better be prepared to live with the consequences, though. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:40:28 -0500 From: Jonathan B Lotzer Subject: IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? I found a couple of things on the IN website that really sparked my interest. The IN LARP rules: Are these really in development, or is that old print copy? Jewelry: Does anyone have any comments, one way or the other? Several pieces look cool, but its a goodly amount of money to take a risk with. PS: The site /really/ needs to be updated. Have the stuff is rather duh..that came out months ago. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 02:08:48 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? At 1:40 AM -0500 05/11/00, Jonathan B Lotzer wrote: >The IN LARP rules: Are these really in development, or is that old print >copy? Yes, just like how the Rebma Sourcebook will be available real soon now! >Jewelry: Does anyone have any comments, one way or the other? GOOD stuff. I had the Seraph pin, and Infernal Cross (Pre-Band Pins, I tended to turn my Seraph upside down. . .) Though you may want to find some means to securing the Seraph pin. . . It had a habit of either popping off, or poking you because you hadda push the pin through the back of holder just to secure it! >Several pieces look cool, but its a goodly amount of money to take a risk >with. _Unfortunatley_ I've lost _both_ pins. Which sucks, because I bought them when the pins were at the $19.95 rate. Eventually I'll save up enough to make one big mass order: Seraph, Balseraph, Malakite & Infernal Cross pins! (Three of them so I can be the Balakite of Fate, and the Seraph pin 'cause it just so cool!) >PS: The site /really/ needs to be updated. Have the stuff is rather >duh..that came out months ago. Yeah, I know. Life has this habit of sneaking up on you and causing havoc on the maintenance department! (Both the INC and the main webpages need web-monkies to help keep things constantly updated. EDG, unfortunately, has a RL to contend with on top of everything else he does. See if he'll let you help him out? Or ask both him & Beth. I'm certain they know what steps need to be taken to get things sorted out.) Oh yeah, more thing. People should add reviews of the pins to rpg.net. Let's flood them with GOOD In Nomime vibes folks! Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:51:24 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine you forgot making all Archangels and Angels male. - -Dennis H. Groome V "Amo Nympham" ICQ: 11340261 "Our Fathers were the model for God. If Our Fathers failed, what does that tell you about God?" - -Tyler Durden, Fight Club ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 03:24:08 -0400 From: "Aaron Medwin" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Dissent! I seem to have not retained the Novalis-as-Malakite write-up. Could someone send it to me privately, please? - -Aaron Medwin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:38:08 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> New Angels >From: "David Rodemaker" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > >Come to think of it do we have any ideas as to the ratio of newly >created angels to fledged relievers as they are being created now? It would >vary by Superior but a poll of rough guesses? > (Standard non-canon disclaimer) There's been a creeping tendency to see relievers as 'baby angels'; ie. a kind of larval form who all inevitably fledge. I don't agree with that. I'd always thought that Archangels will tend to create such servitors as they need. If they need relievers, then they will create relievers. If they need angels then they will create angels. Certainly an Archangel can choose to 'upgrade' an existing reliever, but they won't usually do this unless the reliever has impressed one of their own servitors enough to win a personal recommendation. The more pragmatic types may promote relievers more often, because they need the numbers and it is less costly to recycle existing forces than pull 9 new ones from the Symphony. I also think that when a reliever fledges, it undergoes a kind of rebirth. Its pre-fledged existence blurs into a distant memory, and other angels greet it warmly, as if it was newly 'born'. Heaven preaches that one should be content with the position that God has granted -- relievers should not focus on fledging, but on serving God and their Archangel to the best of their current ability. Ambition is certainly not a bad thing, but envy (of more powerful celestials), pride et al are all to be avoided. Relievers don't fledge on their own -- in fact most celestials gain forces very, very slowly. PCs are the unusual, the elite, the ones who get the special missions and the possibility of progressing faster. Most other non-Worded, non-Distincted celestials rarely see their superiors; maybe once or twice in the celestial's entire lifetime. Anyway, I think relievers will outnumber fledged angels by quite a large number. There are many, many jobs that they can do in Heaven which don't require more forces. Hell is slightly different; I'd wondered if familiars could fledge on their own, but might need to devour/ ritually slay an existing fledged demon in order to do it. (This makes being a 7 force demon quite a dangerous proposition). jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 02:52:50 -0500 From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: IN> Oh Wow! 'New' IN Products? > Oh yeah, more thing. People should add reviews of the pins to rpg.net. >Let's flood them with GOOD In Nomine vibes folks! Or someone could always submit a few reviews of In Nomine to graveyard@gamingoutpost.com--I hear the new editor is a nice guy who could always use a few good reviews ;-) Graveyard Greg _____________________________________________ NetZero - Defenders of the Free World Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 10:37:34 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> A friendly Hello, and various things of note... <<< It's called "Practice"... *pause* Unless, of course, you want to enter a 'negotiation' with the Demon of Artistic Success, a Lilim of Kronos, who'll be -more- than willing to help sponsor your art lessons for a reasonable price... (Philip) >>> That reminds me of a movie I saw some time ago. I can't remember the title or even the actors, but you guys probably do... The story is about this piano student who's meant to become one of the greatest players in the world. He's obsessed with practice and his only friend is his mentor who pushes him to work harder all the time. Until the day he meets this girl and starts neglecting his practice. The mentor first tries to scare the girl away with his powers (that's when you find out he's a demon). But the girl stays, so the mentor chooses to attack his student by removing all of his piano skill, hoping this will change his mind. But it still doesn't work, so the demon gets really pissed off and starts smiting the lovers. Anybody remember this movie? Anyway, it could be a good adventure seed with the Demon of Artistic Success playing around in a... hem... how do you call it? Art University??? I don't know, maybe the Principal ensuring a constant production of geniuses at the cheap price of their social lives (a demon of Factions, then?). Or just feeding on the essence students spend during their practice, using it for his/her own growth or trading it in Hell (definitly an Impudite). Or maybe even building a Tether, or something like that... would it make sense? Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 05:22:34 -0500 From: "Ben Chism" Subject: Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine What's scary about this whole thing is I know people who think that way.....Especially since I attend the Church of Christ...lots of them take the whole Fanatical view that "Only we are right, and if you do it different than us you are going to hell". I know my preacher thinks that "The only true Christians are members of the Church(and only the Church of Christ is the Church to him). Me I think Malphas(forget minor servitors *G*) has gotten hold of them and is having a great time pissing others off with them. Jack is probably what has been mentioned....Habbalite of Malphas, I'd think....What's even scarier...The Church of Christ has millions of members......and a good portion of them hold the same views as my preacher. Me I don't even mention RPG's around people...Cause they freak if somebody even reads the NIV version of the bible(I kid you not). They hold all angels are male, The Bible is perfect, inerrent, and the only way to Heaven is Christ(Oh, and you have to follow their interpretation of how to get to Christ..i.e. if You aren't immersed for baptism you ain't done it right). I once made the mistake of speaking up against censorship and thought I would never hear the end of it. For the IN views....just picture millions of people tricked by Malphas into thinking they are the only ones saved, and going out to try to convince the rest of the world of the same. A nice little coup for Hell could ensue if they got their way. A world convinced of their views would be headed straight to Hell...... Ben Chism (man I scare myself sometimes) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 03:32:58 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Jack Chick In Nomine >From: "Ben Chism" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >For the IN views....just picture >millions of people tricked by Malphas into thinking they are the only ones >saved, and going out to try to convince the rest of the world of the same. >A nice little coup for Hell could ensue if they got their way. A world >convinced of their views would be headed straight to Hell...... > But what if they're right? :) jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 03:46:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "O. S. Kerr" Subject: Re: IN> Celestial blue > This is SO BEAUTIFUL. I agree. I'm stealing this, as a whole, for my next game... Plagerism, of course, is the sincerest form of flattery... :) O. ===== ** Lead Playtester for Storyteller: The Colon ** ** I minored in behavioral psychology. Tragic irony and human suffering are just hobbies. ** __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1621 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.