From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Dec 14 20:06:19 1998 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 UAA00951 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 20:06:19 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id SAA08296 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:57:50 -0600 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:57:50 -0600 Message-Id: <199812150057.SAA08296@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1053 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, December 14 1998 Volume 01 : Number 1053 In this digest: RE: IN> Absolute Morality RE: IN> Absolute Morality Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Re: IN> Absolute Morality RE: IN> Absolute Morality Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy RE: IN> Absolute Morality RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Re: IN> Absolute Morality Re: IN> Absolute Morality Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy IN> Michael and Dominic Re: IN> Discord & Renegades Re: IN> Numinous Corpus Re: IN> Maximillians Dissonance IN> Discord: Noisy Re: IN> Sorcery Question Re: IN> seneschal query IN> Golems (Re: Sorcery Question) RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy Re: IN> seneschal query RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy IN> Habbalah (Re: seneschal query) Re: IN> Michael and Dominic IN> The Other Limbo Heresy Re: IN> Habbalah (Re: seneschal query) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:56:49 -0500 From: "Matthew Stein" Subject: RE: IN> Absolute Morality >> There's no proof, but I assume _for the common case_. For the common >> case, the Archangel of Judgment is the direct executor of God's Law. > >I feel it's a bit iffy to give Dominic this kind of connection to God, but >I think it's something each GM has to decide for him/herself. Makes sense. For Dominic to have a direction connection to God and for Dominic to be the "direct executor of God's Law" is a completely other issue. Dominic is the AA of Judgement, and I'm pretty sure somewhere in INC or APG it notes that once a Celestial gains a Word, it becomes the personification of that Word. Thus, as the AA of Judgement, Dominic is automatically the personification of judgement; as I understand IN, the Word in the Celestial sense is the pure concept, only within human society does the Word become crowded down by prejudice and language-barriers (cf. the Demon of Spam). So, as the personification of Judgement, Dominic would automatically know God's Law, since that is the pure law of Heaven, and would thus have the necessary ability to execute it -- that's why he pursues his "prey" so zealously. (Actually, I'd bet that Dominic doesn't have a direction connection to God, because Dominic is so zealous that he forgets about other nifty judgement-based discussions such as "nullification" or whathaveyou.) >> And furthermore, Michael was found guilty yet he was still acquitted. God >> is the only one who is allowed to violate absolute morality - which He >> did. > >By overturning Dominic's ruling, God allowed Michael to break God's Law - >it wasn't God who was on trial. If the law doesn't apply to everyone, even >excluding God, it's hardly an absolute. I'd question whether that states that the Law is not absolute. For one thing, laws can be misapplied, and given that Dominic is extremely zealous in his crusade (for whatever reason), he could have misapplied the law so that strictly speaking, Michael was guilty of the crime but not within the spirit of the acts. Second of all, God might have acted as a higher court in some legal systems do: either remand the case back to the lower court (Dominic) to be re-tried, with certain aspects missing (such as "Dominic, I told Michael to do that, so stuff it.") or just re-tried and decided that Dominic's decision was wrong. There's a wonderful Talmudic story about the "zealous defender" which states that if during a trial of a man, the entire panel of judges votes one way, then the case must be re-tried because the man lacked a zealous defender. So, maybe God holds the same belief and just overturned Dominic's decision not because God's Law did not apply to Michael, but because Michael did not have a zealous defender, and short of forcing Heaven to go through Michael's trial a second time, God simply decided that this time it was better to wave that particular law. (Okay, this is where I get shot up. This sort of thing happens in the American legal system all the time, and a defendant's lawyer has yet to cite a precedent of a case wherein this sort of thing happened for why the defendant should be released. In fact, Justices will note that this is an exception granted not to the individual, but in fact to the society since it would be impossible to find a fair trial. This sort of system is basically followed in certain other Common Law countries.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:57:14 -0500 From: "Matthew Stein" Subject: RE: IN> Absolute Morality >NO, NO, NO! >1 Not all angels are what a rational human would call good and not all >demons are what the same person would call evil (IPG and APG). The rational human belief is not necessarily the correct belief. When the United States Supreme Court state that "people of average intelligence would understand something to be 'a', it is" as a test, it doesn't mean that people of average intelligence from Germany, it means people of average intelligence from the United States. This is a generally accepted principle, and I think it's applicable to the question of Good/Evil Heaven/Hell. (So Angels ought to be the one's to define Good, Demons evil. Second of all. A rational human being might not consider any of our actions to be strictly good or evil, so I don't think that works as a valid test. Since everyone is socialized differently, to make an application based upon us as humanity or even upon the "common man" fails when dealing with a subject as broad-reaching as Good/Evil, since you find me two people will a common view of Good and I guarantee that they will have differing views of Evil (or vice-versa). Besides, I can say that I think Good is something different than you do, just because I have a smaller view of "Good" but neither of us are irrational, so both definitions stand. Across the board, however, Angels (being the embodiment of "Good") can explain "Good" and Demons (being an embodiment of a twisted form of "Good," hence the flip side of it) can explain "Evil." There's more to Good and Evil than what's available within our lifetimes or even our perceptions, so how can a single person explain it? I think that we have Good and Evil, with Good in Heaven and Evil in Hell, but both are terms that our outside of our perceptions to understand. >2 The factions in Heaven and Hell have disputes about what is good and what >is evil Good as an overall term is agreed upon by the Angels as is Evil by the Demons. And because I'm human (and can't find my copy of Kant), I can't even give the digest version. >PS: Who decides Heavenly Law? (I guess it might be the Seraphim Council) I'd say Dominic. He's the personification of Judgement, which needs some law or rules to be applied, right? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 22:08:21 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Casca wrote: > So then I had the idea, 'What if I give the list a vague but cool name > for a story seed, and then see what happens?' I decided to go with it. > > Call it a challenge if you like. The creativity on this list is > wonderfully diverse, and I'd like to see what kind of bizarre and diverse > ideas will result from the title. Okay, I'll bite. This isn't as much a story seed as a "What if" kinda thing about the background of IN, that is extremely unlikely to ever show up in any kind of regular game, but might be of interest to others of similarly weird minds (that is, most of you out there). Some random thoughts: Limbo is nothingness, pretty much. When you're there, you feel like you're all that exists. In canon, it's a place where celestials who get vessel-killed end up if they have no heart to return to. Could there be some way for humans to go there? The really nice people go to Heaven, the really bad people go to Hell, and the rest get recycled, right? But what if not all of the in-betweens get recycled? Maybe some end up in Limbo? Who would that be then? Perhaps those who achieve a perfect balance between their Destiny and their Fate, by not doing much of anything important at all. Sounds a bit like (my admittedly very vague idea of) Buddhism - you know, get reborn until you lose all desire and so on. Now, why would God (He set all of this up, of course) squirrel those people away there? Well, if you believe what the Bible says, then the Meek shall inherit the Earth... and who is meeker than he who doesn't make a difference? In essence, those souls are to be released after the Apocalypse, not to Heaven or Hell, but back to the Earth. (Yes, I kinda stole part of this from The End.) So, is this a reward or a punishment? God knows. :) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:14:01 EST From: Samovar3@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Absolute Morality In a message dated 98-12-14 12:12:09 EST, you write: >> Not so fast. I'm not sure Dominic has a direct line to God's Law Hotline - >> Michael's trial might be an argument against it, though I haven't found >> any definite proof either way in my perusal of the write-up. > There's no proof, but I assume _for the common case_. For the common > case, the Archangel of Judgment is the direct executor of God's Law. > And furthermore, Michael was found guilty yet he was still acquitted. God > is the only one who is allowed to violate absolute morality - which He > did. This is why if you take the line where he was pardoned, this argument doesn't work. Being pardoned means that Michael was still guilty of the crime, but he was excused from punishment for past services to Heaven. From the write-ups, I am more convinced that acquittal (i.e. he wasn't guilty) is not the way to go on this issue. S. Flanigan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 22:44:26 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: RE: IN> Absolute Morality On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Matthew Stein wrote: > How about this an explanation of absolute morality within the IN > system and how it applies to Heaven and Hell. For humans, there is an > absolute morality that is applied upon a relatively abstract notion of > good versus bad, etc (cf. the proof of this a couple days ago). I still find this a bit problematic, since the rules aren't the same for everyone. Say Bob's Fate is becoming a serial killer, and Marge's is to become a mean old lady who kicks dogs. If Marge reaches her Fate she goes to Hell, but if Bob becomes a mean old man who kicks dogs he'll be recycled, since he didn't even get close to reaching his Fate. I guess you could derive the "law" 'Be the most unselfish person you can be', but that's a bit thin, IMO. YMMV. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:47:13 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Here's one: The Limbo Heresy is a rumor running around Hell that Limbo is being used as an "underground railroad" to get defectors out. Say you're a demon who's fed up and willing to Redeem, but you aren't on Earth duty (and most demons aren't), so you have no heart and no vessel. The rumor runs that there is a group of celestials that will get you a vessel, then very obligingly kill you, thus casting you into Limbo, then pull you out on the other side. Works like this: There are probably already people circulating in hell, selling stray vessels. Yes, it takes a Superior to create most vessels, but there are also occasional Ethereal-made ones, and in the course of millenia, not even all the Superior-made ones can be accounted for. Most of these black-market vessels are trivial little knock-offs for hiding and escape -- bugs, mice, sparrows. That's okay. There's still a good market for them. If you can get one, fine. If not, the Limbo Express people will give you one. Most of these folk are rumored to be Free Lilim or Janus/ Valefor double-agents. After you get your Heartless vessel, you have to sneak down a Tether (which is the hard part; it might be smart to try an Ethereal Tether) and meet up with another Limbo Express agent, or a little team of them. They're angels, or at least saints and soldiers. You tell them your name and they kill you. You're in Limbo. Then they circulate your name among the Limbo Express folk, and the Essence starts trickling in. When you get enough, according to the rumor, you DON'T get a vessel back. (You'd be a cockroach on Earth again. Hoo ha. What good would that be? You'd just be a Renegade cockroach.) Instead, you get pulled out of Limbo into Heaven and get redeemed. The rumor saith the one doing the pulling is Janus, cheerfully stealing devils from Hell. There is a counter-rumor that this is just a ploy to throw demons into Limbo and leave them there. The fans of the first rumor atttribute this one to the Game, but natural paranoia (or even natural caution) is probably sufficient origin. Another counter-rumor has it that, yes, some Archangel pulls you out of Limbo -- and trashes you. Harvests your Forces to make Relievers and Malakim. Janus and Dominic are the commonest names mentioned. There is a counter-counter-rumor that even been along in Limbo is better than a lot of berths in Hell. It's Hell, after all. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 22:51:19 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: RE: IN> Absolute Morality On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Matthew Stein wrote: > Makes sense. For Dominic to have a direction connection to God and for > Dominic to be the "direct executor of God's Law" is a completely other > issue. Dominic is the AA of Judgement, and I'm pretty sure somewhere > in INC or APG it notes that once a Celestial gains a Word, it becomes > the personification of that Word. Thus, as the AA of Judgement, > Dominic is automatically the personification of judgement; as I > understand IN, the Word in the Celestial sense is the pure concept, > only within human society does the Word become crowded down by > prejudice and language-barriers (cf. the Demon of Spam). So, as the > personification of Judgement, Dominic would automatically know God's > Law, since that is the pure law of Heaven, and would thus have the > necessary ability to execute it -- that's why he pursues his "prey" so > zealously. This assumes that God's Law exists, which isn't necessarily the case. Perhaps God is completely amoral, and just likes to mess with our (and the angels') minds. (Actually, I'd bet that Dominic doesn't have a direction > connection to God, because Dominic is so zealous that he forgets about > other nifty judgement-based discussions such as "nullification" or > whathaveyou.) I don't know what nullification means in this context, but I'm quite sure Dommie is getting a bad rap in the zealousness department. He's paranoid, he sees everything in black and white, but he also finds convicting an innocent worse than letting a criminal go free. > >> And furthermore, Michael was found guilty yet he was still > acquitted. God > >> is the only one who is allowed to violate absolute morality - which > He > >> did. > > > >By overturning Dominic's ruling, God allowed Michael to break God's > Law - > >it wasn't God who was on trial. If the law doesn't apply to everyone, > even > >excluding God, it's hardly an absolute. > > I'd question whether that states that the Law is not absolute. For one > thing, laws can be misapplied, and given that Dominic is extremely > zealous in his crusade (for whatever reason), he could have misapplied > the law so that strictly speaking, Michael was guilty of the crime but > not within the spirit of the acts. If that's the case, then Dominic doesn't have a perfect understanding of God's Law, or else he consciously chose to misapply it, which I find very hard to believe. Second of all, God might have acted > as a higher court in some legal systems do: either remand the case > back to the lower court (Dominic) to be re-tried, with certain aspects > missing (such as "Dominic, I told Michael to do that, so stuff it.") > or just re-tried and decided that Dominic's decision was wrong. I think the explanation given was that without Michael's glory Heaven's cause would be lost. > There's a wonderful Talmudic story about the "zealous defender" which > states that if during a trial of a man, the entire panel of judges > votes one way, then the case must be re-tried because the man lacked a > zealous defender. Hm. I like that. *puts it away in a dark corner of his mind to let it ripen* So, maybe God holds the same belief and just > overturned Dominic's decision not because God's Law did not apply to > Michael, but because Michael did not have a zealous defender, and > short of forcing Heaven to go through Michael's trial a second time, > God simply decided that this time it was better to wave that > particular law. I find this -extremely- hard to accept. Would all of Heaven have gone along with Dominic, including Yves and all of Michael's servitors? No way, IMO. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:53:33 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy Earl, you got yourself one fascinating idea here: Passing vessels between celestials. We've been wondering for years who establishes roles. I'd been assuming for my campaign that it was a reliever doing your growing up for you, if you had to be elsewhere, and then Joe Superior created you an identical vessel. But what if it's the same vessel, passed from reliever to Angel. What if the memories of what that body have done are part of the _body_, not part of the mind, so all the angel remembers in a different vessel are the broad strokes of a life. What if being a given person is only a part-time job for a celestial? steve -----Original Message----- From: Earl Wajenberg [mailto:earlw@mc.com] Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 1:47 PM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Here's one: The Limbo Heresy is a rumor running around Hell that Limbo is being used as an "underground railroad" to get defectors out. Say you're a demon who's fed up and willing to Redeem, but you aren't on Earth duty (and most demons aren't), so you have no heart and no vessel. The rumor runs that there is a group of celestials that will get you a vessel, then very obligingly kill you, thus casting you into Limbo, then pull you out on the other side. Works like this: There are probably already people circulating in hell, selling stray vessels. Yes, it takes a Superior to create most vessels, but there are also occasional Ethereal-made ones, and in the course of millenia, not even all the Superior-made ones can be accounted for. Most of these black-market vessels are trivial little knock-offs for hiding and escape -- bugs, mice, sparrows. That's okay. There's still a good market for them. If you can get one, fine. If not, the Limbo Express people will give you one. Most of these folk are rumored to be Free Lilim or Janus/ Valefor double-agents. After you get your Heartless vessel, you have to sneak down a Tether (which is the hard part; it might be smart to try an Ethereal Tether) and meet up with another Limbo Express agent, or a little team of them. They're angels, or at least saints and soldiers. You tell them your name and they kill you. You're in Limbo. Then they circulate your name among the Limbo Express folk, and the Essence starts trickling in. When you get enough, according to the rumor, you DON'T get a vessel back. (You'd be a cockroach on Earth again. Hoo ha. What good would that be? You'd just be a Renegade cockroach.) Instead, you get pulled out of Limbo into Heaven and get redeemed. The rumor saith the one doing the pulling is Janus, cheerfully stealing devils from Hell. There is a counter-rumor that this is just a ploy to throw demons into Limbo and leave them there. The fans of the first rumor atttribute this one to the Game, but natural paranoia (or even natural caution) is probably sufficient origin. Another counter-rumor has it that, yes, some Archangel pulls you out of Limbo -- and trashes you. Harvests your Forces to make Relievers and Malakim. Janus and Dominic are the commonest names mentioned. There is a counter-counter-rumor that even been along in Limbo is better than a lot of berths in Hell. It's Hell, after all. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:55:45 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Earl Wajenberg wrote: > There is a counter-counter-rumor that even been along in Limbo > is better than a lot of berths in Hell. It's Hell, after all. Oops. Meant to write "that even being alone in Limbo is better..." Another thought: You could avoid the bother of sneaking down a Tether if you can assume the blackmarket vessel in Hell and get killed there. Then everything is "fine" as long as the Limbo Express can get your name (or whatever the pointer is to your identity) circulating to the community that drops you Essence. I forget; CAN one manifest one's vessel in the Celestial realm? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:59:08 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Absolute Morality Even though Dominic is more loath to punish the innocent than to skip punishing the guilty, he still isn't depicted as brimming over with mercy, even in the brightest tones he's been painted in. It might be that he and God differed on what to do with Michael, not because Dominic is not perfectly just, but because he is ONLY perfectly just, while God is also merciful. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:32:28 -0800 From: Greg Jensen Subject: Re: IN> Absolute Morality At 09:41 AM 12/14/98 -0500, you wrote: >It's starting to look suspiciously like there is going to be an inherent >system of absolute morality in the In Nomine universe. I seriously doubt >that this was done on purpose, but when you write heaven without having >been well read in philosophy first, the trap is going to be tripped and >down the rabbit hole everyone goes - so much for Canon Doubt and >Uncertaintly. This may be true to a point, but it appears to me that IN was set up so that the moral biases of the GM were to be the absolute morality. The GM is the final arbiter of what is "good" and "evil." (Or "naughty" and "nice," seeing as it's the holiday season). I think potential IN GMs need to sit down and think about just how they're going to handle this. I have decided, if I ever run a campaign, that it will focus on two entirely different views of morality. One is essentially the "good" and "evil" alignments straight out of AD&D. Following the golden rule and trying not to hurt others makes you good. Hurting others or violating their rights makes you evil. The other definition superimposed over this one is that "good" means "something that God likes and approves of," while evil means "something he doesn't." As God has a wide variety of likes and dislikes, that covers a lot of ground, and even seems to change from one era to another (Dark Khalid would still have been an angel 1000 years ago). Furthermore, it doesn't always mesh with the first definition. It is possible to hurt people in God's name, and save people against God's will. The characters will have to try and come to terms with these indiscrepencies. Greg Jensen http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gjensen/gregpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:39:43 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> The Limbo Heresy Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > Here's one: > > The Limbo Heresy is a rumor running around Hell that Limbo is > being used as an "underground railroad" to get defectors out. > > Say you're a demon who's fed up and willing to Redeem, but you aren't > on Earth duty (and most demons aren't), so you have no heart and > no vessel. The rumor runs that there is a group of celestials > that will get you a vessel, then very obligingly kill you, thus > casting you into Limbo, then pull you out on the other side. > Wait a minute. I thought ALL Celestials had Hearts, no matter what their duty? - -- Brian A.H. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:39:05 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: IN> Michael and Dominic On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 Samovar3@aol.com wrote: > This is why if you take the line where he was pardoned, this argument > doesn't work. Being pardoned means that Michael was still guilty of > the crime, but he was excused from punishment for past services to > Heaven. Not necessarily. A pardon usually means that you're excused from punishment, but it can mean that the pardoner believes the pardonee is actually innocent of the crime. > From the write-ups, I am more convinced that acquittal (i.e. he wasn't > guilty) is not the way to go on this issue. Personally, I think the whole trial was caused by Word conflict. Michael's Word is War. If taking more pride in his accomplishments than is objectively due and encouraging his followers to do the same helps Heaven pursue the war with Hell, then doing so is part of Michael's job. It's part of Michael's job *even if those traits create more trouble in the business of Heaven which have nothing to do with Hell or the War than they assist in the War.* Dominic's Word is Judgement. If undue pride and desire for trophies causes people to make poor judgements, then stopping such behavior is part of Dominic's job. Stopping it is part of Dominic's job *even if the benefits produced are greater than the costs of the bad judgement*. Yes, Archangels are supposed to put the good of Heaven above the good of their Words. And I think they sincerely try to, and Dominic and Michael both were sincerely trying to on the issues Dominic put Michael on trial for. But their Words shaped their priorities and what they thought the good of Heaven *was.* God, otoh, is neither vested with the Word of Judgement nor the Word of War (or is vested by many other words besides, depending on how you look at it) knows what the good of Heaven really is and can make a better cost-benefit analysis. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:14:47 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Discord & Renegades At 4:23 PM +0000 12/11/98, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > A demon with Celestial discord, is considered a renegade (at least >by Admodeus [In Nomine – p. 160]). Check errata, and the chapter on Redemption in the _Infernal Player's Guide_ -- it is *certain* Discords that Asmodeus' Gamesters count as 'Insta-Renegade,' not all Celestial ones. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:16:50 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Numinous Corpus At 4:18 PM +0000 12/11/98, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > The Numinous Corpus Feet says "You can attack with both >supernaturally augmented feet and hands at the same time, as >long as one attack is based on Strength and the other is based on >Agility or Precision" How do you make an attack based on Agility? Throwing is the higher of Agility or Precision, and the GM may choose to create a "Judo" style skill which is based off of Agility instead of Strength. (Doing little damage but tossing the foe around.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:18:16 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Maximillians Dissonance At 4:13 PM +0000 12/11/98, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: FOR THE LAST BLESSED TIME!!! (Gods, this should be a FAQ.) Max didn't get dissonance from that oath. He got dissonance from his *other* oaths, which do *NOT* include the loophole of "when it is my choice" in them. Read them carefully, and note which one was triggered when he got his tail in the vignette. - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:38:23 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Discord: Noisy This sprang into my head full-formed as I awoke... Discord: Noisy (Celestial) Every time the celestial does something that causes disturbance, the level of this Discord is added to that disturbance. (A popular one to inflict on someone, when Asmodeus is training young Gamesters...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:43:51 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Sorcery Question At 8:01 PM +1100 12/13/98, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > Boy, all these questions. Not hard to guess I'm working on >characters for the Servitorium, hmm? > > So with Sorcery, you can only summon a spirit/demonling/demon with a >Vessel, right? Spirit, yes. Demonling/demon, no -- they have celestial forms. Mind you, a demon in celestial form without a vessel is in the same straits as a Kyrio or Shedite without a Heart... If it doesn't leave when its Time Celestial runs out, it starts hurting. Demonlings do not suffer that problem. They're leeetle. > So what I wanna know is, does the summoned critter have >to own its own Vessel, or can the Sorceror create the Vessel for it >using accumulated Essence? Own vessel. > As per the Marches & the stuff on Limbo, you can make a Vessel if >you have enough Essence. Only Superiors and ethereals make vessels outside of Limbo. (Says so in the Limbo rules, unless there's been a Bal of the Media around here...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:48:11 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> seneschal query At 5:03 AM -0800 12/14/98, Martin Arnold wrote: >1) i have two types opf tether [...] Plug, plug: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/Tethers >2) on a minor note, could someone explain how newly created (ie born in >hell) Habbalah would beleive they work for God, why would Prince create >a being who believes this? Makes sense for those created through >Falling, but...? Very simple. If a Habbalite is created (or fledges from a demonling) and does *not* believe it's an angel, all the other Habbalah kill it as a weak abomination as soon as they find out. End of problem. (Demonlings "redeem" into Habbies.) When all your Choirmates tell you you're an angel, it's nice to believe. When they point out that doubting one's angelicness indicates weak-mindedness, it's vital. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:52:35 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Golems (Re: Sorcery Question) At 11:31 AM -0600 12/14/98, Uncle Wolf wrote: >So how do we go about getting golems into the game, if Sorcerors can't create >vessels for habitation by summoned spirits? Nearest thing to a Golem is the Construct from FotM, or Living Relics from Reliquary. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:20:22 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy At 1:53 PM -0800 12/14/98, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: >Earl, you got yourself one fascinating idea here: Passing vessels between >celestials. (Not canon.) At 4:55 PM -0500 12/14/98, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >I forget; CAN one manifest one's vessel in the Celestial realm? No. The appearance of it, sort of. The acuality of it? No. It's physical, and physical doesn't make it to the celestial normally. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:23:21 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy Archangel Beth quoteth: >Earl, you got yourself one fascinating idea here: Passing vessels between >celestials. (Not canon.) Sorry-I wasn't thinking that this idea _was_ canon, suggesting it as canon, or pretending to be someone who has anything other than the most tangential relationship with canon. It's just an interesting extension to a potential solution for a problem we've been hashing over for two years, now. :) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:33:18 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> seneschal query On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 5:03 AM -0800 12/14/98, Martin Arnold wrote: > > >2) on a minor note, could someone explain how newly created (ie born in > >hell) Habbalah would beleive they work for God, why would Prince create > >a being who believes this? Makes sense for those created through > >Falling, but...? > > Very simple. If a Habbalite is created (or fledges from a demonling) > and does *not* believe it's an angel, all the other Habbalah kill it > as a weak abomination as soon as they find out. End of problem. > (Demonlings "redeem" into Habbies.) > > When all your Choirmates tell you you're an angel, it's nice to believe. > When they point out that doubting one's angelicness indicates > weak-mindedness, it's vital. But this doesn't explain why they believe it, only why the ones who don't aren't around for long, at least not if they can't hide it very well. I find this a bit of a mystery as well. I think it has to be part of their nature somehow, but I find it very hard to get inside their heads, so to speak. :-/ Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:10:35 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: RE: IN> The Limbo Heresy At 3:23 PM -0800 12/14/98, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: >Archangel Beth quoteth: > >>>Earl, you got yourself one fascinating idea here: Passing vessels between >>>celestials. > >>(Not canon.) > >Sorry-I wasn't thinking that this idea _was_ canon, suggesting it as canon, >or pretending to be someone who has anything other than the most tangential >relationship with canon. It's just an interesting extension to a potential >solution for a problem we've been hashing over for two years, now. :) Okay. It's a neat idea. Just not a canon one, so I mention it, lest I get people asking me about it later... - --Beth, Archangel of Archives http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Angels/Arcangel.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:14:56 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Habbalah (Re: seneschal query) At 12:33 AM +0100 12/15/98, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: >> >2) on a minor note, could someone explain how newly created (ie born in >> >hell) Habbalah would beleive they work for God, why would Prince create >> >a being who believes this? Makes sense for those created through >> >Falling, but...? >> >> Very simple. If a Habbalite is created (or fledges from a demonling) >> and does *not* believe it's an angel, all the other Habbalah kill it >> as a weak abomination as soon as they find out. End of problem. >> (Demonlings "redeem" into Habbies.) >> >> When all your Choirmates tell you you're an angel, it's nice to believe. >> When they point out that doubting one's angelicness indicates >> weak-mindedness, it's vital. > >But this doesn't explain why they believe it, only why the ones who don't >aren't around for long, at least not if they can't hide it very well. The first Habbalah who Fell knew they had not Fallen. Did not Malakim arise from the purity of passions? They are no longer their weak chrysilis form. They understand that their *Every Whim* is Divinely inspired. And that they must punish the unworthy, those who must not be allowed to drag Heaven down with them. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:37:27 EST From: Samovar3@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Michael and Dominic >Personally, I think the whole trial was caused by Word conflict. From going over the material on it, I'm fairly convinced that it was caused by Michael's bullheadedness. I can see the conversation between the two (before the trial) going something like this: Dominic: (gives a long speech about his fears that overt pride will cause lesser angels to Fall) Michael: Piss off. Keep your nose out of my business. After trying the reasonable approach, Dominic was forced to bring Michael to trial. There God intervened. (I think it was mentioned in the core book that God intervened not because Michael was innocent, but because he was needed. Of course, if we change "needed" to "Needed" it becomes obvious that God is Lilith.) Conflict between the words undoubtedly helped the problems between the two, but I have a feeling that the main reason is that Michael doesn't know what diplomacy is. (After all, that's what his Mercurians are for!) S. Flanigan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:48:40 -0700 (MST) From: Jason Corley Subject: IN> The Other Limbo Heresy Lucifer was supposed to be the first Celestial that really Fell, and all the other fallen angels to some degree end up in hell. Even though other angels may have pride or ambition to match Lucifer's, when you fall, you fall, there's only one direction, and that's down. You can't land anywhere except on Lucifer's side... ...unless you land in the record business. The Limbo Heresy refers to a small, mean, relatively low-powered group of non-demonic Fallen who, instead of changing their celestial natures to the perverse opposite, merely took on human and ethereal natures and subverted their celestial natures almost entirely. In this respect, they resemble Remnants - however, their abilities, exemplified by the eerie way they drift through pop culture, are wholly unique. Eli (their former boss) gave them their name after they singlehandedly brought about the 'limbo craze' of the fifties. (They even named the dance 'the limbo' as a slap in the face to Heaven.) Jason come on baby lets do the twist come on baby lets do the twist take me by my little hand and go like this ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 01:54:49 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Habbalah (Re: seneschal query) On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 12:33 AM +0100 12/15/98, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > >> >2) on a minor note, could someone explain how newly created (ie born in > >> >hell) Habbalah would beleive they work for God, why would Prince create > >> >a being who believes this? Makes sense for those created through > >> >Falling, but...? > >> > >> Very simple. If a Habbalite is created (or fledges from a demonling) > >> and does *not* believe it's an angel, all the other Habbalah kill it > >> as a weak abomination as soon as they find out. End of problem. > >> (Demonlings "redeem" into Habbies.) > >> > >> When all your Choirmates tell you you're an angel, it's nice to believe. > >> When they point out that doubting one's angelicness indicates > >> weak-mindedness, it's vital. > > > >But this doesn't explain why they believe it, only why the ones who don't > >aren't around for long, at least not if they can't hide it very well. > > The first Habbalah who Fell knew they had not Fallen. Did not Malakim > arise from the purity of passions? They are no longer their weak > chrysilis form. They understand that their *Every Whim* is Divinely > inspired. And that they must punish the unworthy, those who must not > be allowed to drag Heaven down with them. ...which still, IMO, doesn't explain how newly created Habbalah, who know they've been created by a DP, think they are the only true angels. Or why they choose to work with demons. Another question: Vapula is a DP Habbalite. Why does he create demons instead of only more Habbalah? Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1053 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.