From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Nov 17 17:13:29 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA13768 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:13:28 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id RAA16737 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:14:00 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:14:00 -0600 Message-Id: <200011172314.RAA16737@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 #1926 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 Friday, November 17 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1926 In this digest: Re: IN> Magic Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Magic Re: IN> Magic Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Magic Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes IN> Re: Genghis Khan Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Magic Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Re: The Astral Plane IN> Taxes, Government, and Admin... Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN> Magic Re: IN> Magic Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor Re: IN> Re: Genghis Khan Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) Re: IN> Magic IN> The Angel of Taxes Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:02:36 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Magic Bevan Thomas wrote: > Okay, then how about sorcery. [...] However, I find it odd that > they say sorcery is not magic. So do I. I think the fundamental purpose of the "this isn't magic" slogan was to try to keep IN from fusing with the generic fantasy RPG genre. As a logical distiction, it's very wobbly. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:14:54 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes "A.Hamilton" wrote: > The vast majority of folks > really have no choice but to pay the taxes of the land their in. You do have a choice (at least in a democracy): you can campaign to end taxes where you live. If you fail, because the majority of your fellow citizens don't agree with you, then you're correct that you don't have a choice about paying taxes, any more than you have a choice about following any of the other laws that your society has collectively agreed upon. The fact that individual citizens don't get the right to pick and choose which laws they want to follow doesn't make any law (including taxes) immoral. Unless you are an ideological anarcho-libertarian, in which case you're welcome to your views, but neither the vast majority of the world, nor Heaven in IN, agrees with you. Thus, taxes are quite compatible with Trade, inasmuch as economics and politics are very much a part of Trade, and so are the political and economic decisions that go into creating and administering taxes for the good of society. (Again, if you're of the opinion that "taxes" and "the good of society" are mutually exclusive concepts, fine, but don't expect everyone else to agree with you, or to accept the idea of the Seraphim Council being a bunch of anarcho-libertarians.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:18:08 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness "A.Hamilton" wrote: > The only problem I see with this, is that Marc (according to his write-up)> pays himself a salary (in Essence), takes vacations, and enjoys the finer> things in life. It's implied he's quite wealthy both in a corporeal sense> (money, goods) and in a celestial sense (essence). And it's also implied that a lot of other angels have a problem with him. (Also keep in mind that In Nomine was initially much more satirical and tongue-in-cheek than it is now.) > I agree with your assessment that > probably 95% of Heaven doesn't get the idea of self-interested without being > selfish. That wasn't my assessment. I said that self-interest IS selfish. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:19:45 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes "A.Hamilton" wrote: > Though I think Trade would > definitely be a supporter of the libertarian ideal, That would be awfully limiting for Trade. I think Marc has an Angel of Capitalism, an Angel of Communism, and various other economic models, all trying to devise the best one for humanity. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:22:10 -0500 From: "Krishnaswami, Neel" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes David wrote: > > I rather doubt that Heaven is libertarian. ;) No, libertarians accept the principle of taxation for public goods (like law enforcement). It's us crazy anarchocapitalists who believe that a free market can replace centralized government too. (QOTD: The government has a monopoly on force, and like all monopolies it charges high prices and offers poor service.) Of course, when I ran IN I sent me and all my ilk to Hell. We believed in charging interest on debt, see, and that's usury and hence sinful. Marc IMC was very into the notion of Just Price and that whole weird medieval intersection of theology and economics. :) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:22:17 -0500 From: "A.Hamilton" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes > "A.Hamilton" wrote: > > Though I think Trade would > > definitely be a supporter of the libertarian ideal, > > That would be awfully limiting for Trade. I think Marc has an Angel of > Capitalism, an Angel of Communism, and various other economic models, > all trying to devise the best one for humanity. I disagree to an extent. Communism (various strains of it differing) is about taking from one and giving to another by some 'neutral' party. From each according to his ability to each according to his needs. Hardly any trade involved. David on the other hand would like be big on it in a very serious way. I will admit however, that he likely does try different economic models. It's just from my reading of his write-up, he seems pretty close to the ideals of libertarianism. IE: non-initiation of force and free-trade. The other way to look at it is: One might even suggest that Marc's got the perfect model and the human types just haven't gotten it figured out yet, if they'd just get on the bandwagon...and so far libertarianism is one of the few close reflections of his philosophy and not the other way around. > -David A.Hamilton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:22:18 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Magic At 11:19 -0800 11/17/00, Bevan Thomas wrote: > How exactly does In Nomine define magic? I've always had a big interest in >magic, and the only two things that annoy me about In Nomine is the fact >that sorcerers are usually evil, and they say that "magic" does not exist. The following is my own take on this; other IN authors may have somewhat variant interpretations, I suspect. "Magic" in the classical fantasy sense of some set of inanimate forces which can be manipulated by arcane means, doesn't exist. What most people consider "magic" in In Nomine is actually various types of celestial effect, which are ultimately dependent on God's Will (or something like that). It's a bit more complicated than that, and one can argue that celestial powers don't really differ much from some definitions of "magic" (i.e., "using one's will to change the world"). But in the In Nomine celestial's worldview, that's no more "magic" than we'd consider the Internet "magic" -- it's just something that works because the world is built that way, and someone (God) went to the trouble to set up appropriate infrastructure. Songs really *are* magic, as far as most IN mortals are concerned, and only a very few of them actually know the difference. From a celestial's viewpoint, Songs are "backdoors" in the Symphony, that allow you to violate the physical laws of the corporeal realm, and other "magical" effects. But they're not "magic". Sorcery is probably the closest thing in IN to "true" magic -- it's effectively a type of celestial power that only humans can have, so celestials see it somewhat differently than "normal" celestial effects. When we wrote GURPS In Nomine, we had to deal with this, since in the GURPS environment, cross-genre campaigns are common, and IN celestial powers would be colliding sometimes with "real" magic. By default, we made celestial powers like psi and super powers -- they all operate through different mechanisms, and can only interact with each other through their effects. > How is magic defined in In Nomine, and what exactly >makes it different from sorcery and songs? That is one thing that I can >never figure out. Any ideas? Effectively, "magic" in In Nomine is defined as something that operates outside the mechanisms of the Symphony. (Anything that operates within them is just a celestial power by another name, in the celestial worldview.) Angels would find such a notion blasphemous, and demons would probably find it disquieting, at least, since it would by implication be something outside their control. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:33:25 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Magic At 11:51 -0800 11/17/00, Bevan Thomas wrote: >Okay, then how about sorcery. Sorcery does use a lot of hermetic stuff, >pentacles, et al. In fact, they mention that sorcery functions to a certaine >extent in concordance with the magicial practices of the place (hermetic for >European sorcerers, more shamanstic for Amerindians, etc...). Depending upon >how loosely you define magic, yes it could be argued that songs are not >magic. However, I find it odd that they say sorcery is not magic. This is largely a matter of semantics (and possibly a bit of double-think on the part of IN celestials, who are the usual viewpoint for IN "normality"). IN sorcery is mostly a matter of using some set of rituals to focus one's Will on a particular effect. Using Will to affect the Symphony is really just another Symphonic power (and a type of power that's quite similar to demonic ones, at that). The only thing that's really odd about it is that this is a Symphonic power limited to humans only. On the other hand, that maybe isn't so surprising, since it's also rather broad in its capabilities -- something normal for humans, but unlike the narrowly-focused celestial nature. One could also view sorcerous rituals as a sort of shadow of how Songs work; a set of weak Songs available only to humans, who can't rise about the ritual aspects to the pure nature of directing Symphonic effects through one's Forces alone. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:34:59 -0500 From: "Krishnaswami, Neel" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Douglas Muir wrote: > > Oh, good grief. Another libertarian. Must be the cold snap, > driving them indoors. Relax the hair-trigger a little, ok? This isn't rec.arts.sf.written, where the merest mention of Heinlein will trigger a pointless months- long political flamewar. We all know each other, IN is satire so making fun of political beliefs is ok, and as a last resort the list is moderated. If you want, though, I could write up the Angel of Pareto Optimality and the Demon of Public Choice. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:43:25 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Magic At 15:02 -0500 11/17/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > I think the fundamental purpose of the "this isn't >magic" slogan was to try to keep IN from fusing with the >generic fantasy RPG genre. Quite possibly. It's a matter of "flavor", I think, and therefore pretty much a semantic quibble. > As a logical distiction, it's >very wobbly. In In Nomine proper, that's true. It actually made a lot more sense in GURPS IN, where cross-genre campaigns would introduce "normal" magic, which, in GURPS, comes with a bunch of mechanics that are fairly different from In Nomine's various "magical" effects. In particular, in GURPS magic, it's possible to have areas that are "dead" to magic, and it simply doesn't work. This doesn't make much sense for Symphonic powers, as In Nomine defines them. (In fact, in GURPS IN, we implemented the "no magic" rule in In Nomine by declaring the In Nomine world to *be* such a "magic-dead" place. If "outsider" mages managed to get there somehow, they wouldn't have any supernatural powers at all.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:47:18 -0500 From: "A.Hamilton" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes > No, libertarians accept the principle of taxation for public > goods (like law enforcement). It's us crazy anarchocapitalists > who believe that a free market can replace centralized government > too. (QOTD: The government has a monopoly on force, and like all > monopolies it charges high prices and offers poor service.) Oh, wonderful quote. :) I'm still straddling the fence between anarchocapitalist and minarchist. But didn't think it was worth bringing up the minuteau here on list. Email me privately if you like. :) > Of course, when I ran IN I sent me and all my ilk to Hell. We > believed in charging interest on debt, see, and that's usury and > hence sinful. Marc IMC was very into the notion of Just Price > and that whole weird medieval intersection of theology and > economics. :) ObIN: I'd love to hear a little more about that. Sounds like an interesting campaign. > Neel Krishnaswami > neelk@cswcasa.com A.Hamilton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:46:51 -0500 From: Jonathan Walton Subject: IN> Re: Genghis Khan > An interesting idea. Heck, the leader could even *be* Ghengis. > *I* wouldn't care to say where his soul went. Better and better. You're right, there's nothing about the Khan that necessarily means that his soul would have ended up in Hell (because, by many accounts, he was a very good ruler who allowed his conquered enemies to keep their own culture and way of life) or Heaven (since he was a great supported of the Words of Rapine, Theft, Fire, Baal's kind of War, and others). However, you'd think that just about any Celestial in the militant parties of Heaven or Hell would be trying like crazy to get their hands on the soul of the Khan. After all, someone who could get a bunch of grassland herdsmen to build the largest empire the world has ever seen is somebody that Michael and Baal would like to have some long conversations with. But, if this would make any difference, Chinggis (as he's called in Mongolian) was probably a pretty devout Buddhist and, as someone who likely met both his Destiny and his Fate, could easily have been reincarnated. Of course, if the Archangel of Karma is wandering around in the Grey Lands, it might be able to tell you something about that. Hell, if you're getting desperate, there could always be an Ethereal version of the Khan, made from the fear and reverance that our boy Genghis has inspired over the centuries. Of course, said Ethereal might actually believe that it _was_ the Khan, which means that there wouldn't be much of a difference, really. Anyway you do it, both Michael and Baal are going to be excited as kids on Christmas Eve if they're going to get a chance to tangle with an army led by Genghis Khan. One or both of them was probably involved with the Khan's original conquests, along with Makatiel (since the Black Death was supposedly carried from present-day Cambodia by the Mongol hordes, and the Plague was the Prince of Disease's crowning achievment). Ah, the fun you can have with barbarians! Later. Jonathan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:11:49 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor At 11:45 PM +0000 11/16/00, -=|horsefly|=- wrote: >On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 23:42:17 Charles Glasgow wrote: >>From: "Maurice Lane" >>> MarkDEddy@aol.com >>> >I saw Michael's favor as being a red rose on gold >>> >silk - thus Gabriel. [...] >>The thing that keeps me from speculating re: Michael-and-Gabriel is Michael >>[...] has always been 'alpha male' in his mindset and Gabriel [...] More than the gender issue, I (speaking personally and not ex cathedra) would probably say that's the key to why I wouldn't have a real "steady relationship" there. Michael's pretty clearly an alpha type, and so is Gabriel, from what I've seen. Sure, they might have whatever passes for a fling among Archangels now and then, but they're not either of them the sort who provides a "support net" for another. (Cherubim, now, they're the very _essence_ of "support net"...) Besides, Gabriel's an Ofanite, and "long term relationship" for an Ofanite means that they visit for a few seconds every few minutes... O:> But dat's only my personal opinion, and I strongly doubt there will ever be a need for a canon opinion on that one. So do whatever ya want there in your own games and justify it (or not!) however you want, and go have fun. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:11:52 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes At 4:25 PM -0800 11/16/00, Charles E Smith wrote: >Irstia >Lilim Baroness of the Game >Demon of Taxes > >Corporeal Forces: 2 Strength: 4 Agility: 4 >Ethereal Forces: 4 Intelligence: 12 Precision: 12 >Celestial Forces: 4 Will: 12 Perception: 10 >Word Forces: 12 Shouldn't that be Ethereal Forces 6? And Celestial Forces 5, plus 2 additional characteristic points there. At 7:27 AM +0000 11/17/00, Jo Hart wrote: >>I liked! ...But IRS-tia? I'm not sure weather to laugh or cry. > >This is a US joke, right? 'Fraid so. The Infernal, er, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is the group that oversees US taxation. IIRC, they have (or at least had in the past) the ability to put liens on property, or even seize it, without warrants, just because they decide that you owe them money. Or so I've heard, at least. O:/ - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:58:31 EST From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Magic In a message dated 11/17/00 11:54:38 AM, morgan_thomas@telus.net writes: >Okay, then how about sorcery. Sorcery does use a lot of hermetic stuff, >pentacles, et al. In fact, they mention that sorcery functions to a certain >extent in concordance with the magicial practices of the place (hermetic for >European sorcerers, more shamanstic for Amerindians, etc...). Depending upon >how loosely you define magic, yes it could be argued that songs are not >magic. However, I find it odd that they say sorcery is not magic. > I don't. (Find it odd, that is....) Sorcery, as defined in In Nomine and many occult sources, is the practice of summoning and binding spirits. This is classic 'black magic' as defined by the Medeval Catholic Church, as opposed to 'white magic' which more modern sources refer to as simply 'magic.' The problem is that much of what was, and in some circles is, considered magic actually falls under the aegis of modern scientific disciplines - Chemistry and Pharmacology for the potions, Psychology and Physiology for spells and visions, and Physics (especially modern physics) for some of the wonders. So, what you wind up with is a system where there is no way to circumvent the Symphony without causing disturbance, because the Symphony is enforcing the laws of physics and so forth. Which I see as a virtue, not a flaw. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:18:31 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes "A.Hamilton" wrote: > I disagree to an extent. Communism (various strains of it differing) is > about taking from one and giving to another by some 'neutral' party. From> each according to his ability to each according to his needs. Hardly any> trade involved. Not nessarily true. Your "taking from one and giving to another by some 'neutral' party" assumes a Soviet or Chinese-style statist communism, but the "other strains" you quickly dismiss can certainly involve much more in the way of mutual agreement as to the exchange of goods and services among participants. Note that "Communism is evil and couldn't possibly be endorsed by Marc!" is another thread we've already dealt with in the past. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:27:23 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: The Astral Plane At 11:15 AM -0800 11/17/00, Bevan Thomas wrote: >Angel of Karma would be cool. The Angelic In Nomine story in the core-book >(I forgot what its called) mentioned that karma exists. Sure karma exists -- Gabrielites _ARE_ karma! Just ask them. Especially the Malakim. (Canon? Where? No canon here, mon.) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:42:33 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Taxes, Government, and Admin... No, no, I'm not telling anyone to stop the thread dead right now, you're mostly being mostly good. (Some of you are being very good, even.) Just a gentle reminder that the weekend is coming up and you really don't want to let this turn into a flamewar over the weekend with fifty zillion posts reiterating various people's positions. Trust me, you really don't want to have that happen. (If you find yourself posting more than 2-4 replies to the thread in one day, it's probably starting to get out of hand, and would keep till Monday. O:> ) My take? I actually do suspect that "taxes," as it is implemented in the world today, is unlikely to rest easy 'neath the hand of Trade. Which doesn't mean that it's not there, or cannot be there, or whatever -- the Seraphim Council has made... errors before. (*cough*teenagedeath*cough*) As to why they make errors when they're supposed to be so wise? Well, it wouldn't be much of a game if one side were Always Perfect. Remind me to haul out my Dysfunctional Redeemed concept someday. - --Beth, List Admin but not _too_ Djinny today, despite coming down with a cold. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:31:57 -0500 From: "A.Hamilton" Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness > And it's also implied that a lot of other angels have a problem with > him. (Also keep in mind that In Nomine was initially much more satirical > and tongue-in-cheek than it is now.) True on both counts. But he's not dissonant. He's not in danger of falling. Which was my point. (and yes, I realize it was much more tongue in cheek originaly.) > > I agree with your assessment that > > probably 95% of Heaven doesn't get the idea of self-interested without being > > selfish. > > That wasn't my assessment. I said that self-interest IS selfish. And I'm disagreeing. By pointing out a specif case in canon (Marc) of someone who is self-interested without being selfish. > -David A.Hamilton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 21:38:14 GMT From: "Brad Julius" Subject: Re: IN> Magic Seeing as how I don't have the necessary books that conatin information on how Magic and Sorcery is worked in In Nomine, I made my own definition on Sorcerers (For gaming sacks): Sorcerers: 5 Force Humans who discovered the Symphony and/or the War on their own. They have the special ability of creating their own, custom Songs, but at double the price (2 pts / lvl). Now I know this is Non-Canon, but until I get a book that tells me how to work Sorcerers (I'm assuming Liber Servitorum), that's the way I'm gonn run it. =) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 13:40:08 -0800 From: "Kish" Subject: Re: IN> Magic From: Brad Julius <<>>Now I know this is Non-Canon, but until I get a book that tells me how to work Sorcerers (I'm assuming Liber Servitorum),>> The Corporeal Players Guide. - -- Kish ICQ#: 28085879 AIM: Kish K M Kish_K@mindspring.replacewithcom ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:41:58 -0500 From: "A.Hamilton" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes - ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Edelstein" To: Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 4:18 PM Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes > Not nessarily true. Your "taking from one and giving to another by some > 'neutral' party" assumes a Soviet or Chinese-style statist communism, > but the "other strains" you quickly dismiss can certainly involve much > more in the way of mutual agreement as to the exchange of goods and > services among participants. Right, but give me a real world, large scale example that doesn't work in that fashion. And that is what Marc is concerned about, real world application of the idea of trade. It could be argued that all of the large scale, real world examples of communism have led to deteriotion of the human condition. And Marc's shtick is that if people were just comfortable enough, they'd choose to be selfless, and Trade is the way to get there. Additionaly, Communism's theoretical underpinings involve communal ownership (that is, the community owns all resources, whatever labor or goods one produces etc, to be taken and used by folks as they need it.). And you can't Trade something you don't own. So at it's root, Communism really isn't compatible with Trade, IMO. Note, this doesn't make it evil. It just makes it poorly suited to the word of Trade. > Note that "Communism is evil and couldn't possibly be endorsed by Marc!" > is another thread we've already dealt with in the past. See above. Though I think we're getting close to the point where it's just time to chalk it up to difference of opinion. > -David A.Hamilton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:45:07 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > More than the gender issue, Hardly at all a gender issue, I'd say. In addition to the perfectly real issues of two dominators with no dominatee in sight, and Ophanite restlessness, there's the fact that both Michael and Gabriel pre-date sex, and for that matter living cells and atoms. We, being of a species where the males are larger, stronger, and more restless than the females, on the average (and where almost all the cultures ram home the idea that they'd damned well better ACT that way), look at Michael and think "male" unless it's specifically wearing its covert-ops Michelle vessel. An eagle would look at at Michael and think "female"; with them, the females are bigger and stronger. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:50:36 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Re: Genghis Khan Jonathan Walton wrote: > But, if this would make any difference, Chinggis (as he's called > in Mongolian) was probably a pretty devout Buddhist and, as > someone who likely met both his Destiny and his Fate, could > easily have been reincarnated. Or be slated for it. There's no scheduling problem if the wait between incarnations is long enough. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:04:57 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes "A.Hamilton" wrote: > Right, but give me a real world, large scale example that doesn't work in> that fashion. There is none. But that doesn't mean it can't happen, or that Marc's Angel of Communism isn't trying. ;) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:49:44 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes At 2:19 PM -0600 11/17/00, David Edelstein wrote: >"A.Hamilton" wrote: >> Though I think Trade would >> definitely be a supporter of the libertarian ideal, > >That would be awfully limiting for Trade. I think Marc has an Angel of >Capitalism, an Angel of Communism, and various other economic models, >all trying to devise the best one for humanity. That's my take too. (Man, remember the days I disagreed with David?) Different models of economics and wealth distribution all likely had their day. I could see Marc *wanting* to believe the Marxist force of History theory. It suggested that through economics, mankind would go from Feudalism up through Capitalism to Socialism until all shared the burdens equally and the rewards equally. But while I think he'd want to believe it, I also think that as a Mercurian (probably the Prime Mercurian, no matter how many people think Eli has that title ) he understood human nature too much to expect humanity could pull it off. At least, yet. Hm. Perhaps Vapula seeded and encouraged Communism, before Mankind was ready. Who says it always has to be Jean? - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:59:32 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes At 4:41 PM -0500 11/17/00, A.Hamilton wrote: > > Not nessarily true. Your "taking from one and giving to another by some > > 'neutral' party" assumes a Soviet or Chinese-style statist communism, > > but the "other strains" you quickly dismiss can certainly involve much > > more in the way of mutual agreement as to the exchange of goods and > > services among participants. > >Right, but give me a real world, large scale example that doesn't work in >that fashion. Czechoslovakia, before the Soviet Invasion. It was off-book so much the Soviets had to "rescue" it before it disrupted the Revolution worldwide. I assume it was a situation where Davidian support and judicious Yvesian Angels inspired the mechanics of the order to allow for socialism without repression or statism. (Yes, I'm relating it to IN content. That's my job, dang it. ) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:53:06 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness At 4:31 PM -0500 11/17/00, A.Hamilton wrote: > > > That wasn't my assessment. I said that self-interest IS selfish. > >And I'm disagreeing. By pointing out a specif case in canon (Marc) of >someone who is self-interested without being selfish. Here's where I point out that Marc's been under a certain cloud because of that self interest -- to the point that there's been a lot of discussion about why the Archangel known as Heaven's Diplomat has turned out to be so disliked by his peers. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:32:28 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) At 4:04 PM -0600 11/17/00, David Edelstein wrote: >There is none. But that doesn't mean it can't happen, or that Marc's >Angel of Communism isn't trying. ;) Hm... now there's a concept. The Angel of Communism, in disfavor because of the... trouble of the last hundred to hundred and fifty years, trying to build something new, and turning to the only Angels who might have some sympathy.... So... a Word-bound Mercurian of Trade has to convince a bunch of Angels of Stone to help him encourage the formation of a new Communist State -- a true one, where the working class truly controls the methods and means of production and distribution. Where the balance of economics is centered on the commune, not the individual. Where all participate, and none agitate.... Without getting the pus kicked out of him by a flight of Stone Malakim, naturally. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:31:55 -0800 From: "Bevan Thomas" Subject: Re: IN> Magic I read a lot about magic, and I like magic. So this is how I treat it in In Nomine. Most demons and angels tend to identify magic with superstition and seances, and stuff like that. Futhermore, the term "magic" is considered imprecises by them. Therefore, they dislike using the term magic, and do not use it. However, ethereal spirits, non-aligned sorcerers, gray soldiers, etc..., do accept the term magic. Therefore a soldier of Odin, a sorcerer, a shaman, might refer to himself as a "magician," and be quite powerful through his use of sorcery and songs. Basically, it depends upon whose point of view it is. Most angels dislike the term "magic," and so magic does not exist. Some sorcerers call their sorcery "magic" and so magic does exist for them. Point of view. Also, I tend to be more sympathetic towards sorcery. The way, I see it, originally sorcery was not particularly good or bad. A lot of the archangels (especially Uriel and Dominic) thought it was the spawn of Satan, but others like Blandine and Eli actually liked sorcery a lot (Eli's world view is something along the lines of "the world is chaos, created and formed through the application of will," which is a traditional sorcerous view) However, with the Purity Crusada, and the attempts of Hatiphas to destroy all paths to sorcery except hers, the only spirits that sorcers have a good chance of summoning are demons, and the only way they are likely to become sorcers is through demonic initiation. This means that most sorcers now tend to be bad guys. But it doesn't mean that sorcery is inherently evil or corrupting. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:46:58 -0500 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> The Angel of Taxes Okay let's settle this.... Pugglesworth Cherub of Trade Friend of Shareholders Angel of Taxes Cor-1 Str-2 Agi-2 Eth-6 Int-12 Pre-12 Cel- 4 Will- 4 Per-12 Vessel: Human 4/ (-1 Charisma) Role: "Billy" Pugglesworth 6/ (IRS mole) Skills: Bureaucracy 3/, Computer Operation 3/, Economics 6/, Mathmatics 6/, Fast Talk 2/, Tracking (Economic) 5/ Songs: Harmony (Ethereal 5/) Attunements: Cherub of Trade, Divine Contract, Friend of Shareholders, Mercurian of Trade, Vassal of Trade Word Forces: 11 Nobody likes Pugglesworth at the Internal Revenue service, it's not really his fault it's just he has no social skills whatsoever and his mind is so incredibly advanced that making normal chit chat is pratically impossible for him. When he fledged as a Cherub early on, Marc was surprised because he displayed these skills so much he had been sure that he would have fledged as an Elohim or Seraph. In truth Pugglesworth just loves people...it's in his nature but unfortunately he doesn't like interacting with them, to compare himself to an Ethereal he considers himself a brownie of humanity. He aids, he helps, but he is rarely seen by anyone...that's why he loves taxes. Marc doesn't like taxes let's get this upfront. Marc considers them compulsory and convinced that the very idea of them came from the Game somewhere along the line...however he's reluctantly supported the measure because he realizes that an ordered society needs measures to keep trade flowing. It's the same thing with money truly, if Marc had his way the world would still be on a barter system because it makes him sick these useless strips of paper mean so much to people. Pugglesworth though loved the very idea of them and Marc decided his servitor was talented enough to help keep corruption out of the taxation systems of the world. Pugglesworth lives in the Internal Revenue service pratically and he's been there so long it's assumed he's part of the landscape. It's been that way in dozens of taxation systems throughout history including that of his predecessor whom he helped serve during the Roman Empire...but who unfortunately was destroyed battling the forces of Mammon. Pugglesworth views taxes as the ultimate way of bringing humanity together by getting them tied to each other's needs and thus caring about one another. In truth Pugglesworth is a firm socialist who beliefs taxes are the best way to weed out the "paranoia" impulse the rich have left over from years of having to gaurd their wealth against thieves is have them used to sharing their wealth with others plus also seeing the results it brings in education, highways, and food for families who can afford none. He recognizes people don't like the system but people didn't like Repubulics or Democracy either and thanks to Pugglesworth, Alexander Hamilton and the Civil War made a good system for all (or so he thinks). Pugglesworth also handles Marc's taxes which make him only slightly more popular than Lucifer in the group. Basically when not making sure that some poor family has their livelihood taken away by "accident" or that the IRS can't cramp down and destroy the Mafia...or tracing economic flow for diabolicals...Pugglesworth handles listings for Marc that allow the Archangel to get artifacts, essence, and money that is sometimes desperately needed for other endeavors. It's a tough job and he's underappreciated for it but Pugglesworth loves taxes and thinks it helps keep everybody clean and kept from Greed...or maybe that's just what his judgement friends say. In the meantime he's going to take over a bunch of files so some "friends" can go play racketball, sit down with a greasy cup of coffee (his favorite), and start pouring over his works. - -Charlemagne "Since Celestials are immortal the only thing to be sure of is taxes." - -Pugglesworth ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:07:47 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness At 4:31 PM -0500 11/17/00, A.Hamilton wrote: [David Edelstein wrote:] >> That wasn't my assessment. I said that self-interest IS selfish. > >And I'm disagreeing. By pointing out a specif case in canon (Marc) of >someone who is self-interested without being selfish. I think either or both of you might want to keep in mind that there is a spectrum of selfishness vs. selflessness, and that Mercurians are the closest Choir to humanity (barring the Grigori), and might be expected to be just a tad "odd" to "higher" Choirs. Not to mention Word-influence. Trade is, after all, TRADE. Not the "pure" form of Communism where "From each according to its ability, to each according to its need" is more than just the grand opportunity for slacking and "rewarding the useless" that human nature CAN turn it into. (Can, I said CAN, not must, or does, or any other statement of absolute.) Since Marc got his Word before the Fall, one must presume that God knew what It was doing (well, mostly) and believed that "tainting" an angel with that sort of Word was appropriate since it would let him teach humans a better method of sharing resources than "me hit you, take you stuff." - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:11:59 EST From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes In a message dated 11/17/00 1:41:37 PM, ahamilton@tntie.com writes: >Right, but give me a real world, large scale example that doesn't work >in that fashion. *Sigh* I can't believe I'm doing this, but... Israeli kibbutz(es? im?). Mind you, this may not be the large scale you're thinking of, but when you look at human history several thousand people in a network across a country like Israel is decently large scale. Mark (Not to mention several utopian communities over the years) ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1926 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.