From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Jul 31 15:18:48 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 PAA28339 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:18:48 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id PAA30193 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:17:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:17:14 -0500 Message-Id: <200007312017.PAA30193@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 #1747 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 Monday, July 31 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1747 In this digest: Re: IN> Licence to Smite Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract RE: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract IN> Ranma 1/2 in IN (was Weird artifact #1) Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> Anti-Malakim IN> The Novalis Argument (Was the thread that would not die) Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract IN> What's up? Re: IN> Celestial Poisons Re: IN> The Novalis Argument (Was the thread that would not die) Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract Re: IN> Celestial Poisons ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:27:42 GMT From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Licence to Smite >From: Maurice Lane >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN> Licence to Smite >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:07:05 -0700 (PDT) >Canonically allocated? Sure. Exclusively canonically >allocated? _That_ I'd argue. :) > >I'm playing without a net here, BTW (as I'm at work >and away from my library), so bear with me. > >Any intelligence agency worth its salt on Earth has >its own paramilitary arm (except, of course, for the >CIA*) that can be used for what is sometimes called >"direct action". Now, they can often utilize formal >military forces, but there are situations where >soldiers are ill-suited by training and inclination to >carry out certain objectives ... Three words -- "special operations troops". Who are deliberately trained to *NOT* think, act, move, or speak like conventional line soldiers. Indeed, the mental and psychological qualities necessary for success as a special ops type are in many respects *opposite* to those that make the best line trooper. Incidentally, Michael also has Celtic warbands. As well as formally organized bodies. And roving wolfpacks. And lone loonies. And... ... well, kee-ripes, he'll pretty much hire *anything* so long as he's sure of what side it's on -- or at least of what side it *isn't* on. OTOH, by all means, run your own campaigns the way you wanna. I mean, who doesn't? *eg* - -- Chuckg and there are times >where you need someone, anyone, there _right_ _now_. >It's more efficient to have a permanent force >(especially if it's one where _you're_ the final >authority, rather than a absent military hierarchy). > >Now, extend this to the Host. There are quite a few >discrete, organized forces, ranging from ronin >(Gabriel) to disorganized warbands (Janus, David >[sorta])to internal security / political officers >(Dominic) to formal military forces (Laurence, >Michael). They all can be quite useful, but they have >their own masters/mistresses, and their names aren't >Marc or Litheroy. :) > >Besides, dissonance problems make for fun headaches. >Larry's knights aren't too good at improv. Dave's >gangbangers tend to reactive responses, rather than >proactive. The Hounds of God would enjoy playing >Mission: Impossible, actually, but they can't be >trusted to not report back to the Big D him/herself. >Windies can't spend a month screwing with somebody's >head: heck, they can't spend a long weekend on the >task. Mikey's warriors have difficulty knowing when >to cut and run (well, it's more like they know, but >they don't really _care_). Gabbie's Lost Lambs have >their own problems. Marc & Litheroy might have >preferred to get some Creationers, but Eli doesn't >answer the phone anymore. > >Really, a group who's major problem is that they have >to successfully defend the faithful (i.e., win) is >pretty attractive to someone who needs special/covert >ops work done. They'll use the other groups, if and >when, but Zaddie's people are pretty much the default >option. > >Anyway, that was my rationalization behind it all, so >if you don't wanna use Zaddie, feel free. It ain't a >deal breaker for the rest (and it _does_ give Marc and >Litheroy some other reason for existence. Two out of >three ain't bad). > >:) > >Moe > >*Of _course_ they don't have anybody that can do >discreet wet work or subversion. Really. I mean it. :) > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. >http://invites.yahoo.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:45:10 -0500 From: Uncle Wolf Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > Prodigal wrote: > It is possible for Novalis to be a committed pacifist, and yet still be > capable of resorting to violence if no other choice presents itself. She'll > even work her hardest to find another choice, but in the end, even as a > Mercurian is capable of waving in the Malakim when all forms of negotiation > fail, so too is Novalis able to fight if circumstances dictate. And remember, when all is said and done, at the end of each day, Novalis is a Cherub, a Guardian Angel, the original Fighting Choir of Heaven, inclined to get good and physical in protection of their charges [this is a paraquote of the opening paragraphs {non-vignette} of the Cherubim Choir section of the Main book]. > And I brought up venus flytraps because, as Flowers, they fall under her > word. Their violence is not that of choice, but rather of necessity (as they > would starve otherwise.) So too with the Archangel under whose aegis they > fall. And Her Superior write-up makes it plain that she has thorns, just like the berry bushes, and roses, and... well, you get the idea. Nice passive defenses that allow the attacker to hurt himself, without the plant having to do a thing. Hopefully, whoever does the Superiors splatbook edit/write-up for Novalis will remember to let us in on *some* of the passive defenses, either Song, Attunement, Artifact, or strategies, that Novalis and Her Servitors have come up with. Maybe we can even help the future writer along by coming up with a few here on the list [points at implied consent to use portion of the listFAQ] So... discuss amongst yourselves... *g* Tom Timberlake, 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: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:24:15 -0700 From: Rolland Therrien Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract - -----Original Message----- From: Sean McCarthy To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 10:52 AM Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract >Oh, just what we need .. a mailing list rules lawyer. > >Sean >(To keep it relevant, I happen to think The Love Of God is an interesting >concept. I'm sure there is a good angel-sounding name that means Love of >God in Hebrew. Either as Love Aimed At God or God's Own Love. Anyone know >what that name would be? It could be an interesting NPC...) > There was an Angel of God's Love: His name was Andrealphus. Well, his word was Love (period). But that Word embodied God's Love as well, and The Angel of the Love of God was certainly one of his top Servitors. Though he was probably the first Servitor Andrealphus killed when he fell, since he stopped believing in Love, and expecially God's Love. Might make an interesting campaign to have some NPC Servitor of Novalis petionning for the word of The Love of God, and of Lust's efforts to ruin his chances... - -Exit the LoneWolf ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:39:27 PDT From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract >From: "Eeyore" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: >Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract >Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:18:50 -0500 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Charles Glasgow >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 12:24 PM >Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > >I mean, what's Baal's or Beliai's response going to be to a non- > >violent Gandhi-style protest? They won't even *hear* what the > >opposition is trying to tell them -- they'll see a stationary >*object*, >whack it with a sword or a flamethrower, and step over the >pile of meat on >their way to their next object-to-be-whacked. > >And accomplish what, exactly? > >You can play your Flowers however you like, but mine (actually a Creationer >in Service to Flowers, but she has the zeal of a convert) is pretty close >to a total pacifist. As Rachel sees it, except in those rare circumstances >when she adopts celestial form, what's the worst that a demon can possibly >do to her? Put her into trauma. That'd suck, but she'll make it back. True, but your *Archangel* does not have the luxury of spending weeks staring at her Heart over and over again... the organization can go on without you for a while, but it's a lot harder to deal with without her. (Also, any Demon Prince that's going to take on an Archangel at all is darn sure going to go for the soul-kill, not just the corporeal death. I mean, if you're going to take on that big a headache in the first place you may as well *finish* it.) >This War is one in which one has to throw Clausewitz right out the window. Who mentioned Clausewitz? >It isn't *about* destroying the enemy's forces. From Heaven's side, yes and no. From *Hell's* side -- their objective is quite plain. In addition to corrupting the humans, they want to turn Heaven and all its inhabitants into a smoking crater. Regardless of what you think, what *they* think also has to be taken into account. And what they think is that a target that won't fight back is an easy meal, not a reason to stop and rethink the essential rightness of their action. Servitors have more freedom of action than Archangels. Your Superior *can't* tell herself that it's OK so long as she makes a good try... she has to win. If she loses, a whole lot of other people lose along with her. With great power goes great etc. [snip argument based on how Flowers *Servitors* should act -- 'cause nobody's disputing that. What we're discussing is whether or not our Archangel should be the type of person who would lift a hand in extremis, or the type who would still stand there going "Can we talk?" even as the forces of Lucifer rip her last Celestial Force off her quivering carcass.] > >Gandhi's civil disobedience methods only work if your enemy has at >least >a *smidgen* of concern left remaining as to whether you live >or die. >When it comes to Hell, that smidgen is simply not there. >Individual >demons may care or may repent -- demonic society as a >whole is still quite >firmly focused on the goal of razing Heaven >flat and having every angel >live either Fall or die. >The analogy breaks down. Your equivalent of the British aren't in charge. >It's the attitude of your *Indians* that's important. Eh? Pardon? Regardless of what your Archangel thinks or doesn't think, the vast majority of the Demon Princes are still trying to stick her head on a pike. Ergo, if she is written as incapable of violence even in the last extremis of self-defense, she might as well cut her own head off and mail it to them and save them the trouble. Dying nobly under the tank treads is still dying. When you're talking about a human going nobly to his reward in the hereafter, or the mere loss of a corporeal vessel, that's one thing. When you're discussing whether or not your Superior will lie down under those treads even to the point of soul-death, that's something else again. > >This is why I object to trying to make Novalis into a *total* >pacifist. >It's like declawing a cat and then throwing it into a pit >bull's kennel. >The cat would have been on the short end of the odds >anyway... but now, it >has *no* chance. >Sure it does. Oh, it's going to get ripped apart, all right. But there is >a fair chance that the folks who watched you toss the cat in are going to >be thoroughly disgusted by your behavior and work to prevent this sort of >thing from happening again. *blink* Actually, given the percentage of demons seem redeeming, the odds are about 95 out of a 100 that they'll go "Whoo-hoo! What a show! Do it agaIn!" Counting only the Demon Princes, odds are about 99.9%. >If so, that's a Flower that can feel good about a job well done when she >comes out of Trauma. Again, you're talking Servitors, I'm talking how the Archangel herself should be. She has *less* freedom of action than you do -- you die (permanently), you just died for the cause, and another Servitor carries on. *She* dies, her Word takes a severe beating along *with* her, and that's assuming that it don't just wither and die. I can easily believe that *Servitors* of Flowers can be total non-violence pacifists, even to the point of passively letting yourself be mulched forever rather than lift a hand. You've got the luxury of being such. Your Archangel doesn't. - -- Chuckg ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:50:42 -0500 From: Christopher Gerkey Subject: RE: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > From: Charles Glasgow [mailto:cglasgow@hotmail.com] > I can easily believe that *Servitors* of Flowers can be total > non-violence > pacifists, even to the point of passively letting yourself be mulched > forever rather than lift a hand. You've got the luxury of > being such. > > Your Archangel doesn't. What if Novalis can't be mulched? What if the reason she's lasted so long, even though she's a total pacifist, is because she's just *too tough* to be taken out? She *is* a cherub, designed for defense, and she's been around for a very long time. What if Michael doesn't get along with her because he knows what an incredibly powerful warrior she would be if she wasn't so committed to peace? As you point out, she's an archangel, a different order of being. And she's devoted her existence to defensive and healing power. That strikes me as a being that would be very hard to kill. Topher ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:04:28 -0700 From: Rolland Therrien Subject: IN> Ranma 1/2 in IN (was Weird artifact #1) - -----Original Message----- From: Richard Gant To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:10 AM Subject: Re: IN> Weird artifact #1 > >On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Rolland Therrien wrote: > >> >Okay, just give Litheroy's servitors an umbrella with a solid steel >> >core. It really *is* an umbrella; it's just that when you whack people >> >with it they hurt an awful lot. :) >> >> Ah, you mean the Ryouga Habiki special Depleted Uranium Core battle >> umbrella? That one's been in business for years! Unfortunetly, it's an >> invention of VapuTech, which was supplied to the aformentionned Human >> Martial Artist (an unknowing Soldier of Hell), by his demonic overseer, a >> Shedite petionning for the word of Pathological Obsession. > >Soldier of Hell? Nah. I don't see it. > >I'd say a cursed Ethereal soldier, who was granted great physical strength >(5 Corporeal Forces) at the cost of his Precision (seems like a good >attribute to tie a sense of direction to). He's also the occasional >unwitting tool of the Demon of Making Ranma Saotome's Life a Living Hell. This Demon would be a Djinn of Kobal, right? I mean, who else but a Djinn of Kobal could be so intensively focusing on making a single mortal's life a living hell? She probably started out when Ranma was very young, when he slipped that book about the Neko-Ken (actually a guide for Guardian Cat Fist, a Cherubim Martial Art) into Genma's possessions. That made Kobal smirk, so she decided to do some more, by setting up the Ukyou Kyonji incident, and the Ryouga Habiki incident, and then went on from there. Along the way, that Djinn, Takahashi (I know, I'm being unfair; but she does seem to enjoy making Ranma's life Hellish), picked up a few other Demons who wanted to "Help". There's the Balseraph Demon of Blaming Everything on Ranma (who enjoys visiting Ranma's rivals in their dreams), the Habbalah Demoness of Romantic Obsession over Ranma, and the Shedite Demon of Ranma in sulting Akane at the wrong time (now you know why he keeps insulting her.) Unbeknownst to either of them, they have been carefully manipulated by a Balseraph of Kronos, who decided to use some agents of Dark Humor to ruin Ranma's happiness, thus turning him slowly towards his dark Fate, all on Kronos' orders. Why? Turns out Ranma is a decendent of a Grigori of War. That's why Ranma is such a Golden Boy of Martial Arts. You could build an interesting series of adventures around Laurence, Gabriel and Yves sending a group of Servitors down there to help Ranma solve his problems, so that he may meet his Destiny, which involves him becoming one of Earth's greatest martial artists. Additional stuff: The Jusenkyo Valley would be a tether to an Etherial Realm of Pagan China, with the Jusenkyo Amazons being a group of Etherial Spirits. That's why Cologne would want Ranma to mate with her grand-daughter, as Grigori blood would give their tribe a powerful weapon against the Celestials. The Jusenkyo springs would be a wierd trick made by Kobal eons ago, which are actually dormant vessels, which imprint themselves on anyone who falls into their springs. Any other ideas? - -Exit The LoneWolf ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:06:26 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > And Her Superior write-up makes it plain that she has thorns, just like > the berry bushes, and roses, and... well, you get the idea. Nice passive > defenses that allow the attacker to hurt himself, without the plant Servitors of Novalis no doubt specialize in Songs of Harmony, Shields, Motion, and other Songs that enable them to squig humans (angels/demons with redeeming qualities) out of harm's way. Their "thorns" are probably songs that prevent their foes from attacking or disable them in a non-violent fashion. I'm sure that's as equally irritating to demons as having one of Gabriel's angels unleash flaming green hands of death on them. > Tom Timberlake, Cadre Cherub of Heaven Ben ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:19:25 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Anti-Malakim John Karakash wrote: Good job, the Anti-Malakim are seemingly a bunch of ruthless nutcases and fanatics as must be truly loved by the Habbalah. Good job. Though instead of the virtues one wonders if they should instead be called the sins....I'd hate to see one of these guys end up with a Word too, let alone a Prince. Also what was wrong with the Anti-Paladines? I happened to like them and use them alot for my Darth Vader, General Krull (Willow), and other warrior for evil characters. Tsk Tsk Tsk. - -Charlemagne Good is Love and Evil an abscence of Good. So what is Love? - -A waxing poet Seriously Boring - -Andre ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:32:18 -0700 From: "Sean McCarthy" Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim There's an anti-paladin in my Vampire game. (NPC) They call themselves the Legion, but anti-paladin is so descriptive... You have the anti-paladins who are fanatic unholy warriors for evil...then you have the antipaladins who are literal opposites of paladins. (Cowardly, greedy, lazy, etc...) I do have a question about these anti-Malakim...why the no-first-attack oath? Sean ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________ Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633 ___________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:32:23 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> The Novalis Argument (Was the thread that would not die) As someone pointed out the Hitler rule has been broken... (For those of you who don't know what the Hitler rule is-let me reiterate from the Yves dictionary) The Hitler Rule: The Hitler rule is a little known rule of internet etiquette that says when an arguement has progressed to the point of comparing a fictionalized subject or issue to the excesses of Nazi germany in hopes of proving his point; he has progressed to the point of bad taste and seriously overestimating the issue's importance. The topic is thus to be dropped. (thank you) Frankly what has come to annoy me about the debate of Novalis's pacism is that for the past few threads you've been saying exactly the same thing about the poor girl but each is trying to get the other to say one is wrong on the connotations that are said about the other's wrong. In In Nomine Novalis is described as a peaceful young protestor among the angels who believes in talking first and violence only as a last resort. Up front this says that Novalis is very close to a total pacifist but not entirely one so. All this talk about Venus flytraps, thorns, and Nightshade frankly has no bearing on this fundamental facet of Novalis's personality other than cute metaphors. Though it has been insinuated if enough people spread the idea that roses are lethal weapons and poppies dangerous objects (if anyone visits WWII torn areas of france be sure to check out the poppies there-they have small crosses in them that are said to mark a fallen soldier for each)....Novalis will become nasty simply because it's her word. That's unlikely to happen. Novalis let's be blunt abhors violence, excess, and the like and doesn't want it to become accepted among the Angelic heirachy. She realizes that like death it is a part of life that is CURRENTLY inescapable but she refuses to stop protesting it, and will NEVER so because she believes it is her obligation to bear witness that THIS *IS* WRONG. It is necessary but wrong....and thus hopefully curb the angels from becomming as bad as Lucifer and company. Whether she'll acknowledge someone ever as beyond redemption or tolerance is unknown but the fact remains her violence currently to all aspects is situational...and as an archangel she has great resources to avoid doing it for the most part. A situation might exist for her power level but who knows if we'll ever see it in cannon (it's likely nasty) and she forgives her servitors who soul kill a Habbalah who is about to sacrafice babies. She has to. As for whether Michael and her will ever have a lasting relationship-my .02 is it's not really that difficult. Frankly one could argue they've had one for 25,000 years with Michael tearing away the warriors who fight for the sake of fighting, bloodshed, carnage, and death and Novalis cleaning up after them.....and on the reverse Michael attacking those who refuse to listen to Novalis's loving good. They may argue but on the end they're still willing to hold each other when one just wishes things were pure again. I'm fairly sure little more needs to be said...though the latter opens a whole NEW can of worms on Superior relationshps. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:48:53 -0500 (CDT) From: edg@pyramid.sjgames.com Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Sean McCarthy wrote: > I do have a question about these anti-Malakim...why the no-first-attack > oath? That's just a personal oath, taken by a representative Ratsach; he was formerly a Malakite of David. - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:49:40 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Sean McCarthy wrote: > I do have a question about these anti-Malakim...why the no-first-attack > oath? I have no idea... =) Perhaps something like 'assist other servitors of Prince if they are actively in combat unless ordered otherwise' would make them deadly enough. 'Destroy all renegades of my Prince on sight' is probably good as well. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:54:17 -0700 From: "Sean McCarthy" Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim Sorry, wasn't paying enough attention. Splendid writeup. Sean ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________ Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633 ___________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:56:21 -0500 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Gerkey" To: Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 1:50 PM Subject: RE: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > > From: Charles Glasgow [mailto:cglasgow@hotmail.com] > > > I can easily believe that *Servitors* of Flowers can be total > > non-violence > > pacifists, even to the point of passively letting yourself be mulched > > forever rather than lift a hand. You've got the luxury of > > being such. > > > > Your Archangel doesn't. > > > What if Novalis can't be mulched? Then she's tougher than Legion and Raphael put together. > What if the reason she's lasted so long, even though she's a total pacifist, > is because she's just *too tough* to be taken out? She *is* a cherub, designed > for defense, and she's been around for a very long time. > > What if Michael doesn't get along with her because he knows what an > incredibly powerful warrior she would be if she wasn't so committed to > peace? Then you are using a non-canonical writeup of Michael that has him capable of that petty a form of jealousy. > As you point out, she's an archangel, a different order of being. And she's > devoted her existence to defensive and healing power. That strikes me as > a being that would be very hard to kill. ... by anything short of a Demon Prince. Or several. - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:57:45 -0500 (CDT) From: edg@pyramid.sjgames.com Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, John Karakash wrote: > I have no idea... =) Perhaps something like > 'assist other servitors of Prince if they are actively > in combat unless ordered otherwise' would make them > deadly enough. 'Destroy all renegades of my Prince > on sight' is probably good as well. The former is covered under the Second Law^H^H^HOath, the latter under the Third. ^_^ - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:54:02 -0700 From: Rolland Therrien Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Malakim - -----Original Message----- From: Charles Phipps To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 12:30 PM Subject: IN> Anti-Malakim >John Karakash wrote: > > >Good job, the Anti-Malakim are seemingly a bunch of ruthless nutcases and >fanatics as must be truly loved by the Habbalah. Good job. Though instead of >the virtues one wonders if they should instead be called the sins....I'd >hate to see one of these guys end up with a Word too, let alone a Prince. I had another idea about an Anti-Malakim, that works like this: Malakim are basically the ultimate Samurai; honorable and fearless. Now, what is the opposite of a Samurai? A Ninja! So a good Anti-Malakite should be a demonic Ninja. A Shadow-like being with attunments towards deception and self-concealment, working through tricks and illusions. >Also what was wrong with the Anti-Paladines? I happened to like them and use >them alot for my Darth Vader, General Krull (Willow), and other warrior for >evil characters. Tsk Tsk Tsk. Darth Vader rip-offs get rather boring, when overused. And they should never be allowed as PC characters. - -Exit the LoneWolf ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:12:08 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract > > Okay, we've breached the Hitler rule. This argument should be officially> > over. Please for the LOVE OF GOD end this thread. No. Hitler has come up in IN before. Besides, the rule you're referring to is when someone in a flamewar calls another person a Nazi. That hasn't happened (yet). - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:05:41 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: IN> What's up? Here's something I'm curious about. What the hell has Eli been up to? Does he have a secret plan? Or is he just out having fun? I'd like to hear all your suggestions and ideas. Even the SJ people (I won't mistake your ideas for canon, don't worry.) Reverend Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:22:10 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Poisons At 8:19 PM -0400 7/29/00, Zeresh43@gateway.net wrote: >Hey, it says in Night Music that there exists Ethereal and Celestial Poisons. > Does anybody know what any of these are? It just says "most Celestials >don't have knowledge of such things." In our Totally Non-Canonical Stuff Box, there exists... Celestial Chocolate. Celestial Chocolate comes in various types and flavors, of which the most common are "dark" and "white." Dark Chocolate, visible as a relic if in the corporeal realm (or ethereal, for that matter), is an angelic "aphrodisiac." But before you go running to Andre with it, consider what that means for an angel: instead of merely enhancing the corporeal urges for fleshy pleasures, it opens the soul to others, just a little, causing a bit of spacing out as the angel goes into a state of "Mmmm! Wanna cuddle and show love and caring and snuggling and everything rings with the Symphony and I LOVE just _everyone_ here, even that demon on the couch who just doesn't see the light entirely yet but we're working on her..." (Yes, the stuff came up in conjunction with my "Gray Renegade" Lilim. (Gray Renegades -- do a search on Pyramid. www.sjgames.com/pyramid -- even just there, you can get a teaser.) I _said_ it wasn't canon.) Dark Chocolate isn't _poisonous_ to mortals, quite, but isn't good for them, either. Being opened to the Symphony in that way can be surprisingly addictive, and responsible angels (or even irresponsible ones, after being smacked upside the head by their responsible brethern) do not share Chocolate with humans. Then there's White Chocolate. In the corporeal realm, this opens an angel's soul _utterly_ to the Symphony -- and to the souls of anyone else who's dosed with White Chocolate and one is in physical contact with. Think a varient of the Celestial Song of Unity (LCant, p. 60). With the CUDDLE urge added in. This stuff _is_ dangerous to humans. In Heaven, it tends to send the person's consciousness as close to the Higher Heavens as it's possible to get these days, zoning the angel out and leaving them with indescrible WOW GOOD memories when they come down. A "dose" is usually a wafer-thin sliver, maybe the size of someone's fingernail. Even if it's not detected as a relic, the intense chocolate odor is usually a givaway. All kinds of Chocolate _are_ poisonous to demons! But, interestingly enough, only to the extent that the demon in question is selfish. A Gray Renegade, especially one on the track to redemption, can sometimes indulge in Chocolate. (Though it's usually an acquired taste.) Lilim, with their Perception-based resonance, are a bit more tolerant of the dark stuff. Don't try slipping it into a demon's lasagna, though -- the intense odor is, to diabolical senses, as vile as Shedite slime! (In our Non-Canon-and-I-STRONGLY-doubt-ever-will-get-close ramblings, it's been determined that an angel and a demon sharing White Chocolate is a BAD idea -- at best, with a redemption-bound demon, it's a little prickly. At worst, with a very stubborn demon with a crush on a Malakite, it's "errant stupidity" (to quote the Archangel who showed up to pull their Forces away from each other befor the demon dissolved and the Malakite turned into a puddle of Discord), as the demonic "ME-ME-ME-ME" symphony ran smack up against the angelic "WE ARE ALL CONNECTED" Symphony... On the other hand, there's also a redemption-bound demon who's got a yen for cooking and is occasionally seen in the company of "HeyYouiel," also known as Eli, vaguely incognito -- _she_ is practically addicted to Dark Chocolate, and the angelic consensus is that she'd redeem in an instant, if she didn't always have something cooking on the stove, or needing stirring, or chopping up, or...) As noted above, the above is ALL TOTALLY NON-CANON. Use at your own risk. I'm not even sure I've got all the mechanics right, since I think they're more vague and "what moves the sideplots" kind of mechanics anyway, and not invented by me. As a further note, it got established that Lilith, with her Perception- based Need-reading ability, _did_ acquire the taste for Dark Chocolate -- in _extremely_ dilute form, and only occasionally. It tended to get her tipsy. (Why would she eat the stuff? Beats me -- why do people eat that poisonous fish sushi stuff that, if improperly prepared, can kill?) - --Beth, typing w/a baby (iolanthe) on her chest. Vapitalizatoin & spelling difficult, typing w/1 hand & supporting baby w/other. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:08:07 -0500 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> The Novalis Argument (Was the thread that would not die) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Phipps" To: Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 2:32 PM Subject: IN> The Novalis Argument (Was the thread that would not die) > As someone pointed out the Hitler rule has been broken... > > (For those of you who don't know what the Hitler rule is-let me reiterate > from the Yves dictionary) > > The Hitler Rule: The Hitler rule is a little known rule of internet > etiquette that says when an arguement has progressed to the point of > comparing a fictionalized subject or issue to the excesses of Nazi germany > in hopes of proving his point; he has progressed to the point of bad taste > and seriously overestimating the issue's importance. The topic is thus to be > dropped. > > (thank you) Aka Godwin's Law of the Usenet. The fallacy of said law is that it presupposes that Nazi Germany is *never* a valid analogy to *any* thing at *any* time, which is of course false -- it is a perfectly valid analogy to the topic of "soulless conscienceless monsters and what they do to the helpless", being as that's what they actually were. It is utterly beyond the pale to compare *your debate opponent* to Nazi Germany in any way, shape, manner, or form -- which is why Godwin's Law exists in the first place. However, nobody here did that. > Frankly what has come to annoy me about the debate of Novalis's pacism is > that for the past few threads you've been saying exactly the same thing > about the poor girl Errrr... no. They keep saying that Novalis would *never* get violent, we keep saying that she would but only as a last resort. There is a difference. > but each is trying to get the other to say one is wrong > on the connotations that are said about the other's wrong. > In In Nomine Novalis is described as a peaceful young protestor among the > angels who believes in talking first and violence only as a last resort. Up > front this says that Novalis is very close to a total pacifist but not > entirely one so. Pre-cisely. Agreed. Abso-bleeping-lutely. Never said otherwise. (Of course, defining exactly what "the last resort" *is* is its own separate debate...) OTOH, anyone else here who has Novalis as an *total* committed pacifist -- no violence, at no time, under no circumstances whatsoever -- err, there I disagree. > All this talk about Venus flytraps, thorns, and Nightshade frankly has no > bearing on this fundamental facet of Novalis's personality other than cute > metaphors. Though it has been insinuated if enough people spread the idea > that roses are lethal weapons and poppies dangerous objects (if anyone > visits WWII torn areas of france be sure to check out the poppies there-they > have small crosses in them that are said to mark a fallen soldier for > each)....Novalis will become nasty simply because it's her word. That's > unlikely to happen. > > Novalis let's be blunt abhors violence, excess, and the like and doesn't > want it to become accepted among the Angelic heirachy. She realizes that > like death it is a part of life that is CURRENTLY inescapable but she > refuses to stop protesting it, and will NEVER so because she believes it is > her obligation to bear witness that THIS *IS* WRONG. It is necessary but > wrong....and thus hopefully curb the angels from becomming as bad as Lucifer > and company. > > Whether she'll acknowledge someone ever as beyond redemption or tolerance is > unknown but the fact remains her violence currently to all aspects is > situational...and as an archangel she has great resources to avoid doing it > for the most part. A situation might exist for her power level but who knows > if we'll ever see it in cannon (it's likely nasty) and she forgives her > servitors who soul kill a Habbalah who is about to sacrafice babies. She has > to. > > As for whether Michael and her will ever have a lasting relationship-my .02 > is it's not really that difficult. Frankly one could argue they've had one > for 25,000 years with Michael tearing away the warriors who fight for the > sake of fighting, bloodshed, carnage, and death and Novalis cleaning up > after them.....and on the reverse Michael attacking those who refuse to > listen to Novalis's loving good. > > They may argue but on the end they're still willing to hold each other when > one just wishes things were pure again. > > I'm fairly sure little more needs to be said...though the latter opens a > whole NEW can of worms on Superior relationshps. Indeed it do. :-) - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:16:05 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> IN Romance -- Opposites Attract >True, but your *Archangel* does not have the luxury of spending weeks >staring at her Heart over and over again... Look, it's entirely possible that Novalis can direct an achingly warm smile at a demon prince ... and he'll put down his sword and walk away, weeping. (Like her seraph attunement, but moreso -- she might be just as good at getting people to stop fighting at Baal is at getting them to start.) She's a superior. Give her and her word some credit. What if Flowers really is as powerful a Word as War? That's how I would see it. And if a human being can be a pacifist, how much more can an archangel? jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:16:12 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Poisons In a message dated 7/31/00 3:08:54 PM Central Daylight Time, emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: << Dark Chocolate isn't _poisonous_ to mortals, quite, but isn't good for them, either. Being opened to the Symphony in that way can be surprisingly addictive, and responsible angels (or even irresponsible ones, after being smacked upside the head by their responsible brethern) do not share Chocolate with humans. >> Could this stuff, say, trigger a genuine symphonic awakening in a 6+ Force human? I'd say, very possibly. Reverend Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1747 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.