From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Aug 9 12:45:04 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 MAA12033 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:44:59 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id MAA05835 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:42:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:42:49 -0500 Message-Id: <200008091742.MAA05835@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 #1766 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Wednesday, August 9 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1766 In this digest: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... IN> Luck in IN Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity Re: IN> Thought experiment time... Re: IN> Paganism in In Nomine Re: IN> Precision Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Re: IN> Precision re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Re: IN> Faith and The Sword Re: IN> Weird Campaign lvl Artifact Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... re: IN> the Pictures re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> [DARK VICTORY] Colonel Maria Tzetke Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) Re: IN> Expanded Fire Attunements (somewhat long) Re: IN> Undead and Tethers IN> Fwd: Invitation to join choir8 Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity Re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Re: IN> the Pictures Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) Re: IN> Fwd: Invitation to join choir8 Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) Re: IN> Essence Mines Re: IN> Paganism in In Nomine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 06:00:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... > It's one of the more effective methods of collecting large numbers > of > > low level geases, after all. :) > > How? She can't look into our eyes. One of the advantages of > 'impersonal > cyberspace'. :) It's easy when your computer is a Vapulan Artifact. And you can't deny that we're looking... ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "And on the 8th day God created gamers, and he looked down from Heaven and said, 'It is... well... uh...'" __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:33:57 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> Luck in IN David M. Barr wrote: > Is there luck in the IN world? Canon states there is > fate and destiny, and that there is free will to choose > between them, to strive for one or the other. But is > there choas? or is everything that appears random actually > controlled by forces that cannot be seen? (Free will > rolls the dice, but is it luck or intervention that > makes it snake eyes or boxcars?) What humans call "luck" is often, according to canon, the unconscious expenditure of Essence by humans. It's about all that mundane humans use Essence for. Given that they do it unconsciously and without coordinating with each other, the multiple luck-outs generated by the whole human race probably result in a fair imitation of chaos. (Higher animals -- the calibre that can go to Jordi's part of Heaven -- probably make unconscious Essence expenditures, too, just adding to the stirring of Fortuna's pot.) Given that any monotheistic world is the creation of an omniscient and omnipotent Being, there are limits to just how much chaos there can be in such a world. After all, all events are, at a minimum, permitted by this Being. God's exact role in all this is one of the great traditional philosophical cans of worms. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:42:49 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity David Streeter wrote: > Interesting perspective. I wonder how Laurence reconciles "Thou > shalt not kill", "Love one another as I have loved you" and "turn > the other cheek" etc. I guess maybe demons don't count... but does > that mean Angels of the Sword aren't to kill evil _humans_? "Thou shalt not kill" is more properly translated "Thou shalt not murder," and death in combat has never been held to count as murder. Remember that, according to the traditional account, this Commandment was given to a group of nomads that were going to battle their way around a desert for forty years, then proceed to take the Promised Land by sword. As to killing humans, I thought all angels made varying degrees of effort to avoid killing humans that looked at all redeemable. "Love your enemies" is the command of Christ that's hardest to work into a military mindset. The effort to do so is, I would imagine, one of the forces behind the efforts of Christian cultures to develop doctrines of just war and codes of chivalry. However, all these commands were given to HUMANS. Laurence certainly believes Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, and that means Jesus is the cause of HUMAN salvation, but it doesn't follow that Jesus' commands apply to angels. Instead, God Himself has appointed Laurence commander of the Host. So... Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 09:49:26 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Thought experiment time... If an Archangel pumps a couple of Celestial forces into a Balseraph Remnant, I think you get a new angel with "birth defects," or at least potential birth defects, so the Archangel is unlikely to try it without some special purpose in mind. Celestial forces give rise to consciousness and will, so I think they are the true seat of identity, but Ethereal forces seem to be seat of intelligence and memory. A "repaired" Remnant, the traditional speculations of the list say, would probably have a lot of carry-over from the original celestial's life, but would be someone else. My speculation is that the reconditioned Balseraph would probably turn out to be a Seraph unless the Archangel worked very hard to make something else, and that it would be "born" with dissonance and/or discord, which I presume the Archangel would hasten to remove. The Archangel might then have a shiny new seraph equipped with possibly valuable enemy intelligence information and some skills that you don't often find among the Host. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:40:04 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Paganism in In Nomine - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 3:17 PM -0400 Charles Phipps wrote: >> This has to be the broadest definition of "mysteries" I've ever >> seen. > > Well I believe my only necessary retort to this friend is... > > IT'S NOVALIS. > I believe you missed the entire point. The 'mysteries' that the majority of "people disenchanted with mainstream dogma" pursue within wicca have nothing to do with the celestial, in the same way (equially reprehensible, in my sight) that many, many people make their church a stronghold for their own desires. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Reality is not changed by putting on blinders.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:44:29 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Precision - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 1:30 PM -0600 ben wrote: > >> Precision is the ability to concentrate and focus your mind. It >> doesn't get used much in IN, admittedly. > > My angels get into a lot of car chases (or have to roll to get > somewhere *fast*) and an occasional shoot-out. I'm pretty sure > both skills are based on precision. > > Can't think of any other skills that use precision off the top of > m'head, though. > >> -David > > Ben > > I imagine it *could* be used - and this is just my opinion now, feel free to shoot me down - with resonnances that require fine control for use or interpretation. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Captain, I sense hostility.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:51:04 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 3:55 PM -0400 Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > *The point is to be a sadistic tease. It's fun, low-calorie, and > attracts the correct sort of male attention if done properly. *snork* "The correct sort of male attention?" Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:51:22 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Precision I wonder if "Precision" might not better have been named "Concentration"? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:01:07 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: re: IN> the Pictures > > I feel your "pain;" my wife doesn't fit the stereotype of female >gamers, either. > > What's the stereotype, then? All the female gamers I know are pretty normal. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:05:19 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... > >--On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 3:55 PM -0400 Elizabeth McCoy > wrote: > >>*The point is to be a sadistic tease. It's fun, low-calorie, and >>attracts the correct sort of male attention if done properly. > > > *snork* "The correct sort of male attention?" > I don't know what Beth meant (or rather, I do but it makes every feminist muscle in my body cringe) but 'cowering in fear in the corner' works for me. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:06:18 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Faith and The Sword - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 4:23 PM -0500 David Edelstein wrote: > (Also note that many > Muslim organizations will, while acknowledging that they don't agree > with many of the Taliban's actions, still defend them to a certain > extent.) While those of us who are Christians have no compunction about cutting people loose who decide that, when God said "make disciples of all nations", He meant to add "and if they don't, level their homes." Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Hmmm. Maybe that bit's in the book of Armaments?") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:17:42 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Weird Campaign lvl Artifact - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 2:04 PM -0600 shadowcat wrote: > Charles Phipps wrote: >> >> > First, congrats on coming up with a truly unique and twisted >> > artifact (whatever you've been using, share!). >> >> Thank you Thank you. Truth be told I owe this to musings on... >> >> * Eli actually being an unparrelled genius instead of the happy go >> lucky fratboy he projects (then again many genius's have odd >> habits). * The Rocky Horror Picture show Mansion (along with other >> B movie mansions I once parrodied in a game involving a crazy >> scientist and his traps) * What way would REALLY mess with the >> Celestial heirachy and be worth 100 years of Eli tinkering. > > Oh crud. I just got the idea of Nikolah Tesla, was actualy a > vessel for Eli, while he was playing mad scientist. :-P > I was actually picturing Beakman, which I guess works out to the same thing. Marc. Just Marc Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Which reliever has to wear the rat costume?") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:21:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner-Thornber Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity > Interesting perspective. I wonder how Laurence reconciles "Thou shalt not > kill", "Love one another as I have loved you" and "turn the other cheek" > etc. I guess maybe demons don't count... but does that mean Angels of the > Sword aren't to kill evil _humans_? Jung said: "Are we to understand the "imitation of Christ" in the sense that we should copy his life, and if I may use the expression, ape his stigmata; or in a deeper sense that we are to live our own proper lives as truly he lived his in all its implications? It is no easy matter to live a life that is modelled on Christ's, but it is unspeakably harder to live one's own life as truly Christ lived his." (Modern Man In Search Of A Soul) There is a difference between living the proper life in Christ and living as Christ lived his own life. Laurence lives his life in the Christian way. He believes that Christ was Messiah, he believes in Transubstantiation, and he believes in the Trinity. But Laurence is still, first and foremost, a Malakite and the Archangel of the Sword. He is beholden to his vows. He is what he is. It might be easier to think of Laurence as the Archangel of Holy Crusades, bringing the light of Christ to the pagans and heathens, defending good people, and upholding the virtues of the New Testament. He _can_ be a good Christian in the purity of the concept and still put the sword to the bad guys, even if it isn't anything close to how Christ lived his own life. And, like all Malakim, he has the power to draw out the good deeds and bad deeds of humans, and make judgements. As the foremost crusader for Christ in Heaven, he makes decisions on the good or evil of humans along his vows and a Christian moral code. You'll have to look to Eli or Novalis for someone who lives their lives as Christ truly lived his, along with the acceptance that they'll be misguided, derided, tortured and crucified for their beliefs. Flowers is a better haven for the martyr or even someone like St. Francis of Assisi, who truly believes: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust." - Matt. 5: 44-45 They're more willing to accept the slings and arrows of the opposition, to take the pain of those, in Heaven and in Hell, who would deride them, to be martyred, just to show the evil and the unjust love. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emily K. Dresner-Thornber -- http://www.nodonut.com/zenith George W. Bush -- Not a crackhead anymore! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:21:28 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: re: IN> the Pictures - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 3:08 PM -0700 "David M. Barr" wrote: > Is there luck in the IN world? In honor of Sir Alec Guinness. "In my experience, there's no such thing as luck." Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("The play's the thing.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:22:59 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... - --On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 3:05 PM +0000 Jo Hart wrote: > >> >> --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 3:55 PM -0400 Elizabeth McCoy >> wrote: >> >>> *The point is to be a sadistic tease. It's fun, low-calorie, and >>> attracts the correct sort of male attention if done properly. >> >> >> *snork* "The correct sort of male attention?" >> > > I don't know what Beth meant (or rather, I do but it makes every > feminist muscle in my body cringe) but 'cowering in fear in the > corner' works for me. > > That would be the natural reaction to Beth in my neck of the woods. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Why did we drill?" - Titus) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:24:52 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: re: IN> the Pictures - --On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 3:01 PM +0000 Jo Hart wrote: > >> >> I feel your "pain;" my wife doesn't fit the stereotype of female >> gamers, either. >> > > > What's the stereotype, then? All the female gamers I know are > pretty normal. > Compared to the vapid, slow, self-possessed fashion victim children of the 90s I put up with on a daily basis, I hope not. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("If it's a fact, even if we don't like it, it's not an opinon.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:26:17 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: re: IN> the Pictures At 15:08 -0700 8/8/00, David M. Barr wrote: >Seeing these, as well as the previously posted baby >impudite princess of cute pics (look to the archives, >or the Feb. SJ Games daily Illuminator fo the link) >I can think of something Walter and I very likely have >in common... >The mantra "I am a very lucky man." I don't know -- do you know how much blood it takes to write a 66-page contract...? - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:27:37 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> [DARK VICTORY] Colonel Maria Tzetke - --On Tuesday, August 8, 2000 7:05 PM -0500 Kris Overstreet wrote: > Sadly, the logs are lost, presumed forever, following (a) a web > host system crash, (b) web hose installation of SSH and SKey, and > (c) two personal hard drive crashes which eliminated all my records > of the campaign. Man, talk about an intervention. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("The question of the hour being, WHICH intervention?") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:29:41 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity - --On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 10:26 AM +1000 David Streeter wrote: >> difference. Laurence and Khalid are both devout to their >> religions: they actively practice the tenants and the laws therein >> to the best of their abilities. They follow the laws and codes of >> morality as written in their religious codes. > > Interesting perspective. I wonder how Laurence reconciles "Thou > shalt not kill", "Love one another as I have loved you" and "turn > the other cheek" etc. I guess maybe demons don't count... but does > that mean Angels of the Sword aren't to kill evil _humans_? > The sense in the original Hebrew lies closer to "murder" than "kill" in connotation, unless my memory is failing me utterly. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Card-carrying member of the Ebed Melek.") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:31:13 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: re: IN> the Pictures > > Compared to the vapid, slow, self-possessed fashion victim children >of the 90s I put up with on a daily basis, I hope not. > Maybe you'd be able to stop cowering in corners if you made an effort to be less judgmental about people you don't know, dude. I have (female) friends who like shopping, buying clothes, going to musicals, chatting for hours on the phone, dressing nicely ... and are gamers (and damn good ones too.) jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:52:41 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) At 5:15 PM -0400 8/7/00, William J. Keith wrote: >>For Lilim I prefer Daughter(s) of Lilith. Which, last night, provoked a >>long discussion round here about whether or not Lilith was capable of >>producing children by biological methods. >> >> >>Ashley and Hilary >>omentide.omentide@virgin.net >>http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide > >Some things I've been pondering re Lilith: > >1.) The apple story is well-known to be considered a sexual metaphor by >many interpreters of the Bible. This being the case, Lilith would have >left the Garden before achieving sexual maturity and would be stuck at that >stage. I just want you to know that the idea of a 12-13-year-old manifestation of a Princess of Hell just totally, utterly, and completely broke my brain. >G:IN specifically points out that every Lilim is given a choice at >creation - be Bound, be Free, or be destroyed. (Swiped straight out of the IPG, before anyone gets their diapers in a rash*... ) >3.) Been wondering... could Lilith create a Bright Daughter to begin with? I'm pretty sure the canon answer is Fnord. I.e., it _really_ depends on the GM's take on her. IOC (well, actually our totally non-canon Soap Opera), she can only manage to make a very-Brightly-inclined one, and that's using fresh Archangel Forces as the majority. (Though the one she made for Dominic (long story -- she offered in jest, Yves and Jean sucker punched him mentally and made him go for it ("It's an excellent way to resonate her!" among other arguements), and she was too proud to back down...) turned out to be a .srl**. The one she _did_ make who was apparently Bright from birth, the Princess was mildly blitzed on angel Chocolate*** _and_ using 8 fresh Creation Forces as well as a barely-imprinted-with-Lilim-nature Lightning Force for the magical number nine. [....] >on her person a beautiful relic sword, and the calligraphied inscription: >"You can choose your friends, and you can choose your enemies, but you >can't choose your relatives. Love, Mother" That is a seriously amusing vignette/backstory. >As long as I'm on the subject, could someone(possibly someone official) >clarify the "angelic" status of Bright Lilim? Sure. They're angels. Or at least as much angels as we were demons -- 'cuz we weren't Fallen, or made to those patterns, and even though our celestial form changes, our resonance pretty much stays the same. Well, we get to use photos as well, but really, that's just being able to listen more closely to the Symphony... They get angelic Hearts, they don't roast anymore in Heavenly Tethers, they get to use their resonance on recorded media, Malakim can tell their sense of honor has realigned to Heavenly standards -- they're angels, or close as makes no nevermind, no matter how much they might chop the semantics. > For example, could a Superior create a Choir Attunement for them? See the Superior books dealing with Archangels, or _Fall of the Malakim,_ Lilith/Bright Lilim writeup. O:> All Lilim Choir Attunemnts are Restricted. Many are likely unknown, never having been given to anyone! **** (Choir Attunements come about as an interaction between the Choir nature and the Word, at least as much, and usually more, than as something the Superior creates. So an Archangel doesn't have to _bother_ creating it, so much as bringing the Daughter's Forces in tune with his/her Word and seeing what happens. The AA could probably influence the process once begun, but the whole thing is spilling over into GM Whim so much that Hard And Fast Rules on it are really rather silly -- it's A Superior Thing and unlikely to be of concern to PCs. >Could a Bright Daughter ever achieve Archangel status? I would think so, though first one would need to survive long enough to petition the Seraphim Council... Or, of course, get chosen for the post by God. Should an Archangel show up in the middle of the Seraphim Council, it's kind of conclusive that Someone wanted her there... Whether she could make Lilim or not, would be up to the GM, but I would tend to say "not."***** (If a Prince can't do it...) At 9:34 PM +0100 8/7/00, Omentide wrote: >Ooh. I completely misread this first time. Thoughts of Lilith worrying >about her biological clock ticking away and no gooey biological babies to >look after. Lilim competing with each other to find her the perfect >(mortal) toyboy with substantial genetic endowment... Roll on the >Grigori. Mmmn. Y'know, while I'm sure she keeps tight control of her fertility (she can do that, she's a Princess), I've always had the totally non-canon idea that, as a created human (Or due to her nature as a Princess, takes yer pick.) , she might be to angels what the Grigori were to humans -- i.e., close enough to breed. Without the Song of Fruition... Now, in my little corner of the non-canon multiverse, she'd never do that, wouldn't be aware of the possibilities, and wouldn't be inclined to try the experiment. (Having, no doubt, subconscious awareness that if _I_ had a miserable bout with all-day "morning" sickness and pre-eclampsia and whatnot, _she's_ doomed...) But in someone _else's_ corner, an amusing plot seed (or, if you allow such things, character concept) might be the child of some celestial (Servitor or Word-bound Servitor or Superior, whichever floats your evil little minds) -- biologically gotten and without the celestial in question _knowing_ that one-night-stand had had consequences. (She can ovulate on demand, I'm sure.) I, personally, would make such a child-of-her-body a human. Undoubtedly with 10+ Force-slots (potential Forces, IIRC; see the CPG) and likely manifesting at least 6 of them naturally. Of course, if she felt like carrying a Lilim's vessel to term, she could do that too. If you want to get really twisted, though... I don't remember, someone else may have come up with it, or something that implied it, earlier and I'm just blanking on the previous post... Anyway, if you want to spin things dark, perhaps the "seed Force" that makes a Lilim _is_ one that Lilith conceives somehow. Then she takes the Forces of the unborn human fetus apart and uses them to make celestial Lilim. (Which could explain the legends about her having huge numbers of kids like a frog or guppy -- it's an exaggeration, though she is getting more than one from recycling her own flesh and blood...) * Not to insult anyone's proclivities or lack thereof -- it's just what I'm dealing with a lot, these days. I have diapers on the brain... ** .srl -- Self-Redeeming Lilim. Sort of like a .sea -- Self-Extracting Archive. There are approximately three in our Totally Non-Canon Ravings That Might Not Even Happen In The Campaign Future They're Drawn From. (Also known as the Superior Soap Opera.) *** Angel Chocolate -- see the digest archives. Keyword "Dark Chocolate" or "White Chocolate" will probably find it for you. Opens celestials to the Symphony somewhat. **** The "tag" for this is entirely inspired by the fact that I am up far too early because Iolanthe decided that she didn't want the sheet on her, and "auditioned for Riverdance" to kick it off both her and mommy. ***** And then there's the Hive Mind Princess idea I had for a _totally_ non-canon Lilim Superior... It's totally self-serving weirdness and I'll only post it if people want to see what Beth's brain looks like on chocolate. ****** There is no footnote #6. Should that have been #5? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:52:44 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Expanded Fire Attunements (somewhat long) At 2:41 PM -0700 8/7/00, Michael Walton wrote: > These three facts add up to one thing: angels of Fire can >*automatically* detect demons! Pretty much, yeah -- though it depends on the demon and the campaign's brightness and contrast. I can see a _few_ places where it might break down -- at least for a given Choir. But if you have One of Each in a room, a demon will probably register on _someone's_ radar. > The main limitation of this is that the >angel doesn't know that the target is a demon. Definitely -- and a wise GM will make sure that there are plenty of human targets around... >Cherubim: If they use their Resonance on a subject, they do not incur >Dissonance for harming that person. (Just as a note, this is pretty functionally identical to Dominican Cherubim -- useful, and potentially ironic, but... Just a FYI. (Which can be extrapolated, really, into the official stance that attunements which duplicate other attunements should be rare as hen's teeth if anyone reading this ever makes a canon proposal, and that overlap had better have a very good reason, thematically or ironically...)) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:39:39 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Undead and Tethers At 1:10 -0400 8/2/00, Tim Groth wrote: >Are undead still human enough to influence tethers? Iffy, and probably a GM call. Same applies to Saints. >On a related note does commanding Soldiers to do things to cause a tether >to form count as enough celestial interference to negate the help? In general, I'd say that deliberate attempts to create Tethers, by whatever means, tend to not work well enough for most celestials to bother trying. In other words, the success rate is higher for indirect means (encouraging growth of the underlying Word), so effort is generally best spent that way. My view of Tether formation is that it's not only ineffable, but also somewhat perverse at times. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:07:04 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: Invitation to join choir8 Kindly note I, Beth, am FORWARDING this, not posting it. (Yeah, I'm getting tired of seeing people replying to forwarded posts with "Elizabeth McCoy wrote". I didn't write it, I only forwarded it. If you reply to it, at least keep the ">From so and so" in the message. O:p ) >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:40:20 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from [choir8 Moderator ] >Date: 9 Aug 2000 13:39:48 -0000 >From: choir8 Moderator >Reply-To: choir8-subscribe@egroups.com >Subject: Invitation to join choir8 > > >Hello, > >This is an invitation to join the choir8 group, an email group >that I moderate at eGroups, a free, easy-to-use email group service. >By joining this group, you'll be able to easily send messages to >fellow group members using just one email address. eGroups >also makes it easy to store photos and files, coordinate events >and more. > >Here's my introductory message for you: >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Hey Everyone, > >I've suggested, I've offered, I've even threatened, but now it's going to happen. Since nobody else wants to get behind this "group-created netbook" idea, you've left in it my hands (again, I ask myself what I'm getting into). > >Here it is: the egroup dedicated to the Grigori and their Children, the least explained aspect of the IN universe aside from the Big Guy himself. Basically, I came up with this idea out of a desire to build up some non-canonical background and fluff for the mysterious 8th Choir and I'm looking for some writers to help me. For more info, see the site. It'll take you 30 seconds to sign up as a member, which'll just give you access to the material that will be posted. You don't even have to be part of the mailing list to be part of the group. You can easily set it up so that you don't have to get Grigori-mail unless you want to. If you have any questions about this whole business, just ask. Other than that, just get on the list and let fly with ideas, you don't have to wait for me. Later. > >Jonathan (who's been going by Daedalus) > >P.S. Oh, yeah. Apologies to all those people who were interested in joining the "Laurence-and-Blandine-sitting-in-a-tree" list. All I can say is CREATE YOUR OWN GROUP if you want it so much. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >TO JOIN THIS GROUP, simply choose ONE of these 2 options: > >1) REPLY to this email by clicking "reply" in your email program [No, _don't_ do that. It won't work, since it's been sent to a list, and the Reply-to will go to this list. You will have to send email specifically to choir8-subscribe@egroups.com instead! --Beth] >-OR- > >2) Go to our site at > http://www.egroups.com/invite/choir8 > and click the "JOIN" button > > >If you do not wish to join the choir8 group, just ignore >this invitation. > >Regards, > >Moderator, choir8 > > >SPECIAL NOTE FROM eGroups: Because eGroups values your privacy, >it is a violation of our service rules for moderators to add subscribers >to a group against their wishes. If you feel this has happened, please >notify us at abuse@egroups.com > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:00:10 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Laurence & Christianity - --On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 9:42 AM -0500 Earl Wajenberg wrote: > "Love your enemies" is the command of Christ that's hardest to > work into a military mindset. The effort to do so is, I would > imagine, one of the forces behind the efforts of Christian > cultures to develop doctrines of just war and codes of chivalry. Matthew 5:43-48 'You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of God who is in heaven; for God makes the sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you salute only your neighbors, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You, therefore, must be perfect as [God] is perfect.' In context, this passage speaks to the need for true lovers of God to set themselves apart from petty and arbitrary political or social divisions and extend love to those who might be different. In giving an exhortation not to murder, God teaches us that He abhors the root of murder, as envy, hatred, anger, and desire of revenge; and that he accounts all these as murder - likely to lead to it if unchecked. We can still love someone, and yet, have to punish them for their misdeeds. Likewise, there are times when one has to kill to protect the innocent from the not-as-innocent. A real man takes no joy in this, but undertakes this as a duty to be done with as quickly and humanely as possible, and as dispassionately as possible. Taking joy in the killing of another, aye, that is something different altogether. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 10:11:50 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> the Pictures > What's the stereotype, then? All the female gamers I know are pretty normal. Normal. :-) Actually, the ratio of normal folks versus whacko freaky for-the-love-of-god-get-away-from-me types among female gamers is much better among female gamers than among male ones. Of the female gamers I know -- three -- only one of them gives me the "you're way too weird for me to be in the same room with you" heebie-jeebies. Huzzah for female gamers! > jo "normal" : you'd associate with the person outside of a gaming environment. I know our local gamin' club ain't normal. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:11:20 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Jo Hart wrote: > I don't know what Beth meant (or rather, I do but it makes every feminist > muscle in my body cringe) but 'cowering in fear in the corner' works for me. Someday I wanna meet your fiancee. - -David (you don't scare me... then again, there's an ocean between us) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:16:29 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> This will get me in so much trouble... Marc Bowden wrote: > That would be the natural reaction to Beth in my neck of the woods. Why? When I see a woman striking silly poses with a whip, I'm more likely to laugh than cower. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:17:26 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> the Pictures Marc Bowden wrote: > Compared to the vapid, slow, self-possessed fashion victim children > of the 90s I put up with on a daily basis, I hope not. You're equating "normal" with "boring." Now if you really want to see one of my patented rants, start the old "Gamers are superior animals" cannard... - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:20:26 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Now, in my little corner of the non-canon multiverse, she'd never > do that, wouldn't be aware of the possibilities, and wouldn't be > inclined to try the experiment. (Having, no doubt, subconscious > awareness that if _I_ had a miserable bout with all-day "morning" > sickness and pre-eclampsia and whatnot, _she's_ doomed...) Why? You are neither All Women, nor Lilith. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 12:21:57 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: Invitation to join choir8 Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > Kindly note I, Beth, am FORWARDING this, not posting it. (Yeah, I'm getting > tired of seeing people replying to forwarded posts with "Elizabeth McCoy > wrote". I didn't write it, I only forwarded it. If you reply to it, at > least keep the ">From so and so" in the message. O:p ) You know, your job would probably be a lot easier if you just refused to forward stuff like this. Tell the guy he needs to join the list correctly. It would also get people to be more careful, since they'd no longer be able to rely on you forwarding their message if it bounces. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:17:27 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > > ***** And then there's the Hive Mind Princess idea I had for a > _totally_ non-canon Lilim Superior... It's totally self-serving > weirdness and I'll only post it if people want to see what Beth's > brain looks like on chocolate. I know that *I* would like to see it... ;;;) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 14:27:53 -0300 (ADT) From: Philip Vincent Barkow Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts about Lilith (was: Thoughts about Plurals) On Wed, 9 Aug 2000, Prodigal wrote: > From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > > > > ***** And then there's the Hive Mind Princess idea I had for a > > _totally_ non-canon Lilim Superior... It's totally self-serving > > weirdness and I'll only post it if people want to see what Beth's > > brain looks like on chocolate. > > I know that *I* would like to see it... ;;;) > Seconded! :) > Philip, who's also curious to see what Beth's brain looks like on ice cream and other intoxicants... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 10:32:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Essence Mines - --- EDG wrote: > Essence Mine > a relic I... like... these... a... lot! Where do you get these wonderful toys? ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "And on the 8th day God created gamers, and he looked down from Heaven and said, 'It is... well... uh...'" __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 10:42:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Paganism in In Nomine > I believe you missed the entire point. The 'mysteries' that the > majority of "people disenchanted with mainstream dogma" pursue within > wicca have nothing to do with the celestial, in the same way > (equially reprehensible, in my sight) that many, many people make > their church a stronghold for their own desires. > > Marc. Just Marc. > Elohite Angel of Salvation > ("Reality is not changed by putting on blinders.") A huge "Amen" to the post and the sig line! ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "And on the 8th day God created gamers, and he looked down from Heaven and said, 'It is... well... uh...'" __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1766 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.