From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue May 16 20:54:57 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 UAA19293 for ; Tue, 16 May 2000 20:54:56 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id UAA28509 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 16 May 2000 20:51:15 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:51:15 -0500 Message-Id: <200005170151.UAA28509@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 #1630 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 Tuesday, May 16 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1630 In this digest: Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death Re: IN> How do I know you're what you say you are? Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? Re: IN> How do I know you're what you say you are? Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? Re: IN> Sin and Damnation Re: IN> A few things Re: IN> New Angels IN> Re: Campaign Suggestions? Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? Re: IN> New Angels Re: IN> New Angels Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will IN> Re:Chess Pieces Re: IN> Re: Campaign Suggestions? IN> Re: idemon of SAR Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) IN> Check amongst yourselves... Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will IN> UGG! IN> Webpage Update: Solitaire Moves! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 05:41:24 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death At 7:32 PM -0400 5/15/00, EDG wrote: >>Scenario 1: character goes to trauma, leaves a corpse. >[...] Plus, I believe that >Cherubim and Djinn can still use it to attune to the character, though I'm >not sure on that point. I wouldn't let 'em, Well, _maybe_, IMC only, Djinn of Death... Now, Song of Affinity... - --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: Tue, 16 May 2000 05:41:37 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death At 9:02 PM +0100 5/15/00, Dave Taylor wrote: >Just a quickie question (if such an animal exists on the list)... > >What is peoples stance on celestial vessel death? Do you leave the vessel >behind and go into trauma (leaving a corpse), That's canon. Of course, see my habbie-disclAimer earlier. - --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: Tue, 16 May 2000 05:42:01 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> How do I know you're what you say you are? At 3:36 PM -0500 5/15/00, Kiara S. Legner wrote: >>It would seem that celestials run the very real risk of having someone from >>the other side pose as one of their own on earth. > >>>Yes -- this is, as it happens, deliberate. [...] O:><< > >Good. Then I'll just find a way to set my players up to deal with the >consequences of *not* being paranoid. And they can learn why my NPC's *are* >paranoid. Hee. (Our lot aren't _that_ paranoid -- but then, we've got a Seraph of Creation ist Destiny who got the attunement. (Not to mention that frabbishnabber Elohite, _not_ to mention various Boston Seneschals, and not to mention that yeah,there's a Lilim running around who would, yes, make inconvenient comments if she lucked out and caught a Need to fool the angels in there...) Lots of resonance use is also fun for any Malakim around. (I won't relate the story of the Free Lilim and the Malakite of War who passed like ships in the night because of a cruddy resonance roll on the Malakite's part. Success w/ CD1.)) >>>However, one of the ways around it is the "Mirror of Truth" relic [...]<< > >Hm... I have both books, but haven't really spent any time with LR, so I >missed this one. fix-the-plot device...> >Thanks! Welcome! - --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: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:17:02 +0100 From: Sam Kington Subject: Re: IN> Question - Vessels & death Dave Taylor wrote: > > Just a quickie question (if such an animal exists on the list)... > > What is peoples stance on celestial vessel death? Do you leave the > vessel behind and go into trauma (leaving a corpse), vessel vanishes > immediately, vessel decomposes supernaturally fast/supernaturally > slowly? Actually, IMG, I rule that the corpse stays around (probably decaying very slowly, although I haven't nailed that down yet) - until the Celestial comes out of Trauma. Trauma is all about getting over the loss of your Vessel, which is lying there dead and not moving; until you can give up your Vessel and let it go, you stay trapped, half of you in the Celestial Realm and half in the Corporeal. As such, the corpse stays around. As soon as a Celestial comes out of Trauma, though, they're back to being entirely in the Celestial realm, at which point the Vessel vanishes and goes to whereeever Vessels go to when you go Celestial. > What do you consider the pros and cons of each senario? Rather, let's consider the consequences of this system: * When you die, the corpse stays around - *unless* you're a Malakite. This makes it easier to bluff the police, although you then have to explain the body disappearing from the morgue. Malakim have to pay attention with dying in public, but are otherwise even scarier. * If you kill an enemy Celestial, you can tell whether they're still in Trauma by keeping the body around. (Or, potentially, keeping *part* of the body - useful either if you don't want the dead Celestial's friends to know you can track him, or if the Celestial's body was in bits to begin with.) Sam - -- Home page: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/ INWO Homebrew: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/inwo/ Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with something bigger and heavier - - Anon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:41:48 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? From: J. Michael Smith > I'm looking for some input here on where to take a campaign. To sum up > quickly: > The question is, who signs the contract? i'd pretty much agree with what others have said so far. novalis, marc, and blandine would be up for signing the contract. i don't think michael's dumb. if he honestly thought creation would be destroyed if the warring didn't end, and he didn't feel he could win at this time, he'd sign the contract. i think both jordi and gabriel would turn their noses up at it - "demons are demons". > The questions are all obviously much more complex than this. Servitors of > different superiors might disagree with their superiors. And what about by > choir? Obviously, the Malakim will be loathe to sign this thing-suffering > demons to live and all a related question would be whether malakim would see this treaty as surrendering to lucifer's forces, something specifically dissonant for them. even if it isn't, the hardliners may well refuse to go along with the treaty. it could be fun to have most of the remaining malakim split off from heaven and become outcasts, a la the tsayadim, and carry on with a guerilla battle against hell (maybe from the marches). i like the idea of malakim cutting deals with the battered ethereals, perhaps led by soldekai > > And also, what would you do and why? > bring in a load of new, but weak, superiors. if the serpah council does still function, i could imagine them trying to deal with the general chaos and disorganisation by "promoting" some of the more powerful and reliable wordbound (who haven't died fighting yet) to superior status. likewise, in hell the dearth of demon princes would leave a power vacuum some would be sure to snap up as for earth, it's presumably fairly battered from all the celestial combat (and corporeal combat this would have kicked off). didn't an island get sunk when oannes was killed? if this kind of energy release is standard for superior-death, the various deaths could have caused massive explosions. these could have been misinterpreted as nukes by the nations in which they took place - voila, world war three. mad max with angels? liam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 08:26:35 -0500 From: "Kiara S. Legner" Subject: Re: IN> How do I know you're what you say you are? >>Passphrases and countersigns are another standard bit of covert ops procedure that are likely used -- I expect David's lot, in particular, are big on those "secret handshakes" and the like.<< Pretty standard for David's crew in my game... >>New ways keep popping up, too -- I can see Jeanites (and Trade Servitors) being sent out with PalmPilots loaded with short-term crypto certificates, for example.<< I dropped a Palm Pilot on one of my PC's recently - he'd been driving his Trade contact buggy for info - an extremely old Seraph turned Malakite who hadn't been active on earth in quite awhile. The security wasn't just the fun part - it was watching a techy-savvy player have this old angel figuring out how to use a Palm Pilot... >>Demonstration of attunements can often at least verify Superior and Choir/Band, and often can be done without too much trouble.<< Now *this* is one I *hadn't* thought of. Nice. >>Of course, this isn't foolproof, but it's simple, and typically is secure enough in practice. More elaborate schemes would only be used if the stakes were really high (e.g., carrying radical new orders, or the like).<< True. Thanks for the input! Ki ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 09:57:14 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? Much depends on what Demon Princes survived. For instance, if Belial died, Gabriel no longer suffers Word-friction from him. Given that and the death of Dominic, and life looks a lot rosier for Gabriel, on the personal front. She might snap back to sanity or at least get a lot better. Going on about Gabriel, you've just fought Armageddon. Gabriel is the prophet among the Archangels. It seems very natural that she would have a few important messages from On High to deliver. These could include new mission statements for Heaven. Heck, given that Armageddon just happened, you REALLY expect God to be taking a lot of interest. I could well imagine a very high rate of dramatic Interventions. The "stalemate" result you describe could be read as the beginning of the Millenium mentioned in Revelation (the book at the end of the Bible, not the IN series). There's to be a thousand-year-long reign by Christ on Earth while Satan is held in check. Then, at the end, there's a final, FINAL confrontation, and the creation of a new Heaven and a new Earth. The usual assumption is that the Millenium will be a thousand years of utopia. You could play several twists with that: - The assumption is wrong. - The utopia is purely spiritual, and thus only apparent to the servants of Heaven (i.e., everyone is living like ascetic monks, but the good guys LIKE this, because Heaven is now working very closely with mortals, which makes up for a lot). - The situation is utopian *IF* you're on Heaven's good side. That is, Heaven's loyal followers on Earth have all the luck. - The situation will BECOME utopian real soon now, if only the PCs can bring this campaign to a successful conclusion. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:06:26 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Sin and Damnation mink wrote: > Slow and steady. Thats the way to do it. Very ... nice. I strongly recommend you read "The Screwtape Letters," by C. S. Lewis, mentioned in the bibliography of the main book. These are letters of advice from Screwtape, a senior devil, to his nephew Wormwood, on his first tour of temptation duty on Earth. (In IN terms, Screwtape would probably be a balseraph, and Wormwood a Shedite.) In one letter, Screwtape tells Wormwood something like this (running on in-head memory) -- No doubt, like all young tempters, you are anxious to report spectacular wickedness. ... But murder is no better than cards, if cards will do the trick. ... The surest road to Hell is the gradual descent, broad and easy, without milestones, without signposts. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:12:29 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> A few things Walter Milliken wrote: > Roughly correct, though it would also be appropriate to note that > early astrology/astronomy was primarily concerned with calendar- > keeping, and in that sense had a great deal of legitimate > predictive power. Which, I suspect, later got expanded beyond > the original solar/lunar calendar stuff into more dubious realms > by the various priesthoods involved (probably partly due to > customer demand...). Also due to the fact that they'd seen how to predict one thing -- the seasons -- so why not try to predict something else? Like the outcome of a war, say. After all, the same gods use the stars to signal the coming of the seasons, appoint the king, and determine the outcome of the war. That, I gather, is how astrology was first practiced in Babylon, where they also did not make a big distinction between the movements of the planets and omens read in the shapes of clouds. They were all equally just "up in the sky." And astrological prediction was for the king and the kingdom. Individual astrology was a much later development. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:34:02 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> New Angels Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > You'll also want to talk your GM into letting you buy extra characteristics > (3 points each, IIRC?), letting you add 3 to the characteristics in each > Force-grouping. (*)) 3 is correct. > > (* Something my "Nooo, if I get bigger I'll make more noise when I > change vessels or go celestial and they'll _hear_ me!" Renegade takes > advantage of...) Which reminds me, I've been kicking around idea for an (unofficial) Force shorthand for awhile. Would the following be intuitive enough? Corporeal/4 Ethereal/3.2 Celestial/2.3 The 'fractional' part indicates how many extra characteristic points short of a entire Force have been bought. For campaigns where buying characteristics never automatically grant a Force, the number after the 'dot' can go above 3. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:53:13 -0400 From: "J. Michael Smith" Subject: IN> Re: Campaign Suggestions? The problem with Michael is that he is now significantly weaker than before. He is certainly the weakest of the remaining archangels, and really can't call himself an archangel anymore. Jordi and Eli on the other hand are both still fairly strong. Eli simply didn't show up, and Jordi had a relatively easy time of it (ejecting shedim from human hosts, calming the masses of animals and humanity during armageddon). Marc is weak not from fighting, but from supplying significant resources. Ditto for Novallis. Gabriel is doing remarkably well considering her position in the battle-this is mostly because she was a bit busy and showed up late. The next question is the Demon Princes. Survivors include: Andre Asmodeus Beleth Belial Saminga Vapula Lilith Let me see on my first take: Asmodeus-This game has rules, and one of them is we fight until the bitter end. Beleth-I'm not really sure. I always like the idea of this one tormenting the ever hopeful Blandine in some way though. Belial-Probably itching for a rematch with Gabriel. Hey, these guys might work together JUST so that they could fight each other in peace. Saminga-He is for death. Vapula-Who cares, just so long as he gets to keep his lab. Lilith-skipped out on armageddon (successfully...unlike Kobal and Nybbas). Probably wouldn't want a second round, and most likely a part of the second rebellion. (The second rebellion is the loose nickname that I give to the various demons that pretty much admit to themselves that they would rebel against heaven or hell or whatever is left of the two as soon as they could get a fair chance. They include mostly impudites and lilim with a few confused habbalah.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:07:10 -0400 From: "Galen G. Silversmith" Subject: Re: IN> Campaign Suggestions? > Return-Path: jmsmith@hamilton.edu > The question is, who signs the contract? Is only one AA going to sign, on behalf of the host, or will each one choose? Michael is my choice, regardless, if he can be convinced that there would be no victor from continued conflict. As superior's 1 goes into, he is the AA not only of the conflict of war, but the peace afterwards. It would make a lot of sense for Michael to choose saving that which is God's over his pride/vainglory of trying to win a hopeless cause. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 08:25:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "O. S. Kerr" Subject: Re: IN> New Angels > Corporeal/4 > Ethereal/3.2 > Celestial/2.3 > > The 'fractional' part indicates how many extra > characteristic points short of a entire Force have been > bought. For campaigns where buying characteristics never > automatically grant a Force, the number after the 'dot' > can go above 3. Intuititive enough for me, anyway... This is a good idea, and one that helps me in the situation described. Any chance of it becoming canon soon? 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/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:12:05 -0500 From: Jonathan B Lotzer Subject: Re: IN> New Angels "O. S. Kerr" wrote: > > Corporeal/4 > > Ethereal/3.2 > > Celestial/2.3 > > > > The 'fractional' part indicates how many extra > > characteristic points short of a entire Force have been > > bought. For campaigns where buying characteristics never > > automatically grant a Force, the number after the 'dot' > > can go above 3. > Not sure if we're saying the same thing. I tend to set my system more up as: Corporeal: 4 (0) Ethereal: 3 (2) Celestial: 2 (3) Where the main part is the number of current full Forces. The number in ( ) is the number of points that have been put towards that Force. Sorry if this comes off as a minor sense of semantics. Another closely aligned system is one where some kind of hatchmarks rather than a number in ( )'s is used. I.e. Corporal: 4 ( )( )( )( ) Ethereal: 3 (x)(x)( )( ) Celestial: 2 (x)(x)(x)( ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:40:22 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will > This is all true, but while Laurence doesn't believe freedom is innately > good (it is a _diabolical_ Word, after all), note that "Laurence's Last > Lesson" did convince him that human free will is not be underestimated, > or disrespected. Give Laurence a break, too. He is a Malakite, and he doesn't have Michael's complete lack of doubt. Laurence *knows* that half of Heaven thinks he isn't quite the most qualified angel for the job -- heck, Michael, the oldest of the old, thinks he isn't qualified, but works with him because God told him to -- so Laurence knows doubt in ways Michael can never dream of. Sure, he will never disobey his boss, as per his oath, but he's also *empowered*. When he's given an order, it's up to him how to translate that order into action -- and his last order was, "Command My armies to victory against the forces of Hell." That leaves a LOT of room to personalize the command without disobeying the order. Raise your hand if you think Laurence doesn't resonate on himself frequently, just to make sure he's doing the right thing. Raise your hand if you think Laurence would blanche if his most honorable action in his short existence turned out NOT to be "Commanding the armies of Heaven." That's why I think Laurence loves good armies that act as a unit, but he also swore to take damned good care of those armies, which is why Baal is the one who would love Star War's Empire, and Laurence who would be horrified. > -David Oh, I agree with David, I replied to the wrong post. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:06:42 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will At 10:40 AM -0600 5/16/00, ben wrote: > > This is all true, but while Laurence doesn't believe freedom is innately > > good (it is a _diabolical_ Word, after all), note that "Laurence's Last > > Lesson" did convince him that human free will is not be underestimated, > > or disrespected. > >Give Laurence a break, too. He is a Malakite, and he doesn't have Michael's >complete lack of doubt. Laurence *knows* that half of Heaven thinks he >isn't quite the most qualified angel for the job -- heck, Michael, the >oldest of the old, thinks he isn't qualified, but works with him because God >told him to -- so Laurence knows doubt in ways Michael can never dream of. Not according to Superiors 1. God told Laurence to take this task up. Laurence would never doubt the will of God. It's dissonant for him to do so, by his oath. Other people doubt Laurence, but Laurence doesn't doubt that he is the one God wants heading the Armies of Heaven, and will not step down unless God himself tells him to. >Raise your hand if you think Laurence doesn't resonate on himself >frequently, just to make sure he's doing the right thing. Can Malakim (or any celestials, for that matter) self-resonate? >That's why I think Laurence loves good armies that act as a unit, but he >also swore to take damned good care of those armies, which is why Baal is >the one who would love Star War's Empire, and Laurence who would be >horrified. Laurence swore to keep good care of his *weapons.* Nothing in there implies being nice to his weapons or in seeing that his weapons have a good life. Merely that his weapons are always in premium condition to be used against the forces of Hell. Look, I don't see Laurence as dark. I *do* see him as ultimately militant. That's not innately bad, you know. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:14:14 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will ben wrote: > Raise your hand if you think Laurence doesn't resonate on himself > frequently, just to make sure he's doing the right thing. I don't think angels can resonate on themselves. > Raise your hand > if you think Laurence would blanche if his most honorable action in his > short existence turned out NOT to be "Commanding the armies of Heaven." Commanding the Armies of Heaven may be the most responsible, most important, most _obedient_ thing he's ever done, but as a Malakite, he would know that honor is an intimate and personal thing, and that the most honorable thing a person (or even an Archangel) has ever done may be an act that's insignificant in the greater scheme of things. The most honorable thing you do in your life is not necessarily the most _important_ thing you do in your life. > That's why I think Laurence loves good armies that act as a unit, but he > also swore to take damned good care of those armies, which is why Baal is > the one who would love Star War's Empire, and Laurence who would be > horrified. Both would approve of the Empire's discipline and absolute obedience to the will of their superiors, but for Laurence, intentions count. The fact that the Empire is evil would mean that everything they do is serving the wrong ends. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:25:04 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will - --On Tue, May 16, 2000 1:06 PM -0400 Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Can Malakim (or any celestials, for that matter) self-resonate? Wouldn't that be a mortal sin? Marc. Jus*BONK* Ow! Hey! Cut it out! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:37:25 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will > Not according to Superiors 1. :( Ok, ok, I conce... conc... conced... erk, I can't say it. You're ri... rig... argh. > Can Malakim (or any celestials, for that matter) self-resonate? Balseraphs can. Calabim can. Habballah can. It's implied that Seraphim can (when talking about Michael.) I didn't think there'd be any reason why other celestials could not... > Laurence swore to keep good care of his *weapons.* Nothing in there > implies being nice to his weapons or in seeing that his weapons have > a good life. Merely that his weapons are always in premium condition > to be used against the forces of Hell. Yah, but you'd think Laurence would understand that a little bit of niceness went a long way towards premium condition. Otherwise, Laurence would be just as excited by Hell's armies as he would be by Heaven's, which is a little funky to my line of thinking. > Look, I don't see Laurence as dark. I *do* see him as ultimately > militant. That's not innately bad, you know. Hrm. I see Baal as ultimately militant. I see Laurence as extremely militant, but also extremely honorable. That honor is why I agree with David in saying that intentions do count for Laurence. > Eric Alfred Burns Ben Ben Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:47:41 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will David Edelstein wrote: > > ben wrote: > > Raise your hand if you think Laurence doesn't resonate on himself > > frequently, just to make sure he's doing the right thing. > > I don't think angels can resonate on themselves. I think you're right, David. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:38:47 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will At 1:25 PM -0400 5/16/00, Marc Bowden wrote: >--On Tue, May 16, 2000 1:06 PM -0400 Whistling in the Dark > wrote: > > > Can Malakim (or any celestials, for that matter) self-resonate? > > Wouldn't that be a mortal sin? Think of the Seraphim. Why, that much self-truth can make you go blind. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:05:48 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will At 11:37 AM -0600 5/16/00, ben wrote: > > Not according to Superiors 1. > >:( > >Ok, ok, I conce... conc... conced... erk, I can't say it. You're >ri... rig... argh. Breath, Ben, *breathe!* It's not worth losing a vessel over! > > Can Malakim (or any celestials, for that matter) self-resonate? > >Balseraphs can. Calabim can. Habballah can. It's implied that >Seraphim can (when talking about Michael.) I didn't think there'd >be any reason why other celestials could not... Demons are focused inward on their own, selfish, private Symphony. Angels aren't. Agreed on Balseraphs, Calabim and Habbalah. I'm not sure where the Seraphim implication you're referencing is from, but you may be right. Still, I'd think there'd be demonic overtones to such focus on one's own Symphony.... > > Eric Alfred Burns > >Ben Ben Ben Is that like an Intervention of Ben? - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:28:46 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will > Demons are focused inward on their own, selfish, private Symphony. > Angels aren't. Agreed on Balseraphs, Calabim and Habbalah. I'm not > sure where the Seraphim implication you're referencing is from, but > you may be right. Yeah, I was starting to get a little worried that I had this nice long list of demons that can resonate on themselves. I even forgot the Lilim who can Gaes themselves. In fact, the only ones who CAN'T resonate on themselves are Djinn (what's the point, ooh, I can't hurt myself unless I want me to) and Impudites (too twisted to figure this one out.) That's why I fumbled for an angel... ...and I recalled that it was mentioned that Michael knew he was right with a Seraph's certainty. Of course, then a Superior (or any Seraph, for that matter) could resonate on himself and start saying stuff he believes to be true and find out that it's false. Erk. And then, would he become dissonant, or just minorly irritated? I've I concede many more points today I'm gonna end up blunt. > >Ben Ben Ben > > Is that like an Intervention of Ben? Depends on how Cthuloid you're feeling today. > Eric Alfred Burns Actually, I just had a thought about angels resonating on themselves. A Cherub could attune to his clothing and suddenly get a danger sense. Ooooh. And could a Seraph record his voice and resonate on the statements being made when its played back? Could a Malakite resonate on a picture of himself? There seems to be so many ways around it that it almost makes more sense to just let 'em resonate on themselves. On the other wingtip... Heck, what are the repurcussions of this? Seraphim can know if they are telling the truth, which isn't too useful since the dissonance smacks 'em right away, and if they are sure they are telling the truth anyway and their resonance says so and the other guy is contradicting them and also telling the truth, it starts to get subjective and give them nasty migraines. Cherubim can attune to themselves and know when they are in danger, and get in trouble if they die. Owie. Ofanim... already resonate themselves. Elohim would know instantly if their actions were spurred by subjectivity rather than objectivity, which seems like a handy thing for them to know. But so what, they already get smacked by dissonance if they act based on subjectivity. At least this way they can know for sure. Malakim would know if their actions were honorable and dishonorable, which would provide them with an inviolate compass of right and wrong, which explains why so few get dissonance. Kyriotates... funky foo. Mercurians would know what others think of 'em and be better able to smooth their way through humanity and angels. Don't seem so bad to me. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:38:05 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will >From: Whistling in the Dark >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >>Balseraphs can. Calabim can. Habballah can. *ponder* If Impudites self-resonate, do they get into a feedback loop? jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:54:08 -0400 From: "Galen G. Silversmith" Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will > Return-Path: ben@zianet.com > Heck, what are the repurcussions of this? > > Seraphim can know if they are telling the truth, which isn't too useful > since the dissonance smacks 'em right away, and if they are sure they are > telling the truth anyway and their resonance says so and the other guy is > contradicting them and also telling the truth, it starts to get subjective > and give them nasty migraines. There is more to this one than you say; Seraph will be able to know if theya re telling the Truth, as well as the truth, in a good number of cases. This is kinda valuable. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 22:41:40 +0100 From: "Stuart Park" Subject: IN> Re:Chess Pieces Okay, some minor disagreements queen: the earth - Cant be, thats the board. Possibly Novalis, Gabriel? Possibly not helped by the lack of feminine AA's. > king: yves - hmm, subtle, appears weak but may hold the key to a good endgame... > bishop: dominic + Michael - Fast, agile and responsive. Flankers to the royalty. > rook (the horse bloke) More commonly (or actually known) as a Knight. Eli + Gabriel - Mainly because these pieces are more dynamic in the beginning and players using them heavily tend to be flamboyant. > castle: david + Laurence - strong, stable, a tad boring. I mean, how many people actually like playing with Rooks, Pawns - Probably Mercurians Actually, I really should see if I can find any angelic chess sets kicking about... Stuart ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:42:36 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Campaign Suggestions? From: J. Michael Smith > The next question is the Demon Princes. Survivors include: > Belial-Probably itching for a rematch with Gabriel. Hey, these guys might > work together JUST so that they could fight each other in peace. i can't see armageddon taking place and these two both surviving, to be honest. i would have thought as soon as the chips are down and all hell breaks loose the first thing they'll do is fight it out for the word of fire. if gabby's still alive, belial should be smoked (pun intended), or vice versa. all IMHO of course liam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 21:50:09 +0100 From: "Stuart Park" Subject: IN> Re: idemon of SAR > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 10:41:33 EDT > From: Daedalus3D@aol.com > Subject: IN> Re: Demon of Some Assembly > > Okay, I already feel like a jerk for nitpicking like this, but who in the > world would bother to learn native Taiwanese? Everybody in Taiwan speaks > Chinese anyway. > > Hey, look at it this way. If that's the only thing I can find to complain > about, I think Zactartol is pretty solid. > > Man, I need some sleep. Later, > > Daedalus Wasn't that the point, you get the product, pull out the manual which has 50 languages, and not one of them is yours.... - - although I think he should get that special language 'technicalwritereese' - take assmebly point a, insert into point 2c (as illustrated), a language with no grounding in reality.... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:42:17 -0500 From: Uncle Wolf Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will ben wrote: > > > Look, I don't see Laurence as dark. I *do* see him as ultimately > > militant. That's not innately bad, you know. > > Hrm. I see Baal as ultimately militant. I see Laurence as extremely militant, but also extremely honorable. That honor is why I agree with David in saying that intentions do count for Laurence. > > > Eric Alfred Burns > > Ben Ben Ben An you are supported by the statements in the main book, to the effect, if not verbatim, that Laurence is honorable to a fault, and, under Laurence's Malakite Attunement, that Laurence's Malakim are [implied -- like their boss] Heaven's most honorable fighters, as opposed to Michael's, who win more often [than any others -- not sure if this is part of the paraquote or just my own interpretation]. Tom Timberlake, sometimes Cadre Cherub of Heaven - -- Strange blood, howl again, for now we know to well - Better a friend on paths unknown, than to be alone in hell! "Strange Blood" A Wolfrider's Reflection, by various artists ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:52:18 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) From: Leath Sheales > Don't forget, some Ethereals claim that God was one of them who simply > figured out the trick to the Celestial realm. If their story has any merit > (YMMV) then it's only a matter of time before another one figures out the > trick. yeah, but no one in heaven believes this story has any merit. therefore i can't see them using valuable resources "just in case" > We already know Kronos can slip demons into Heaven without setting > off the alarms. All he needs is an angel for the demon to follow, or maybe > a tether with an open-door policy. *we* know that, coz we've got the sourcebooks. i don't think anyone in heaven knows it (except maybe yves and some of the AAs). so again, i don't see them taking that many precautions against it. they know that in the last few hundreds of thousands of years since the fall, demons fry if they get in (i wonder who the first demon to try to sneak back into heaven was? must have been a nice surprise...) liam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:48:07 -0700 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: IN> Check amongst yourselves... Recently seen, this summarizes the usenet and mailing list cultures I have been immersed in for...a very long time now actually. http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html Not only do I think many will find this exceedingly funny if they're been on this list for a week, a year or more, but I also think an amusing effort can be made to map these personality types to various Superiors. But would that lead to Superiors and their .newsrc files as a thread? I'm not sure I could live with myself for that. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 21:11:57 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Free Will At 2:38 PM -0700 5/16/00, Jo Hart wrote: >>From: Whistling in the Dark >>Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >>>Balseraphs can. Calabim can. Habballah can. > >*ponder* If Impudites self-resonate, do they get into a feedback loop? There is the charm side of the resonance. I have to wonder if Impudites self-charm just for the fun of it.... - -- 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, 17 May 2000 11:25 +1000 From: surturz@zip.com.au Subject: IN> UGG! Here's an interesting plot seed: I'm not very cluey on this, but millenia ago there were an offshoot of the human race (neanderthal?). They definitely were not our ancestors (ie we didn't evolve from them), but "cousins". If a community of neanderthals were found to be still living, hidden away from human society somewhere, what implications would this have for the war? What superiors would get involved? (Jordi would be an intriguing possibility) Perhaps neanderthals are the children of the Grigori (this would probably be a divergence from Canon, however). SurturZ Habbalite of Factions, Angel of Constructive Criticism ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:58:04 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: IN> Webpage Update: Solitaire Moves! Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later (what with my previous web-provider kinda sorta like closing my account). So, I managed to move my entire In Nomine site to it's new (and hopefully permanent) home. http://www.thrifty.net/~tafkaj/in-nomine/ Enjoy! (Heads up for you SJG webmonkies to _please_ update all the links to Solitaire to the above addy. Alas, I can't put up a redirect on the old site like I did the last time I moved.) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1630 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.