From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Jun 10 21:46:03 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 VAA29964 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:46:03 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id WAA29920 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:24:35 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:24:35 -0500 Message-Id: <200006110324.WAA29920@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 #1669 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 Saturday, June 10 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1669 In this digest: Re: IN> The old Eli Fwd: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Fwd: Re: IN> On topic spam =) Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences Re: IN> The toll collector IN> Casting Call for In Nomine Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences Re: IN> The Final Frontier Re: IN> The Final Frontier Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Ooooo boy... (was Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine) Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine IN> [ADMIN] STOP THIS NOW! (Re: Casting Call for In Nomine) Re: IN> The old Eli IN> Is there a Demon of Telemarketers? Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> Is there a Demon of Telemarketers? Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> The old Eli IN> Michael's Trial IN> Tether Question Re: IN> Tether Question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:26:22 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 23:24 -0400 6/8/00, Ryan Elias wrote: >This is something I've wondered, on and off, for a while. Was Eli always >the flaky, slightly comical nice guy he currently appears to be? Or did >he use to be a stern serious Archangel, given to deep ponderings on the >nature of creation and such? I think he wasn't much different in personality (i.e., terminally laid-back), but tended to pay more direct attention to what was going on. I think of him as having the somewhat flakey temperment often ascribed to artists. He can get a lot done, when he's focused on it, but tends to be a little vague on anything outside his current sphere of attention. > Did he have distinctions and a hierarchy >and everything, which were simply abandoned when he left on his little >jaunt? I don't think so. He may have distinctions, but they're probably more a sign of personal approval and respect than actual rank in a hierarchy. If there were a hierarchy up until he started to go AWOL (the beginnings were around 1900, I think, with the final disappearance around 1950), I'd think it would have survived until now, even without him at the head. After all, look at Gabriel's lot. She's hardly more organized than Eli, now, but her organization still functions effectively. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:40:51 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question To put additional addresses onto the "post-allowed" list, from that address (if possible, otherwise I have to hand-authorizeit), send mail to with the following command in the body of your email message: s*bscribe in_nomine-l Your@address.here Where the * is replaced by the appropriate vowel. >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 01:15:23 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from [Tim Groth ] >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 02:16:04 -0400 >From: Tim Groth >Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question >X-Apparently-From: SdshowTim@aol.com > >>Using a Kyriotate would make the spreading of heresy >>much faster, but the dissonance would pile up really >>fast: that's also a problem with Mercurians (as both >>Choirs aren't supposed to let humans suffer by their >>actions). > >Mercurians can let humans be hurt and/or killed by their actions, they just >can't put the smack down on the shaved ape. Impudites are the ones that >have to zoo keep. > >A Seraph actually may be a good choice, even though Janus is into change he >does serve heaven. Its better to have humans get closer to the divine >truth than farther away, if Janus wanted just change he probably would be a >total Outcast superior and go the way of Legion. Besides his Seraphim can >fast talk, and they also can give the truth and know full well a human is >going to distort it and not be as annoyed as other Seraphim. > >An Elohite wouldn't neccesarly have a worse time than any other angel >dealing with a Word conflict. But I don't see heresy as an Elohite Word. >So in the end I'd say Seraph or Mercurian. Seraph for the more bringing >new, if unconvential, Truths. Mercurian for causing change in human social >structures. It depends on how you want the Word used for Heaven. > > > >Timothy, Angel of Rambling >Ofanite of Creation >ArchRival of Mathus > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:43:13 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> On topic spam =) >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:31:26 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\b c a n c e l\b/i at line 5 >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 08:31:23 -0700 (PDT) >From: Guy Royse >Subject: Re: IN> On topic spam =) > >> The company is call Quality Paperback Book Club >> and has a website at http://www.qpb.com >> Their initial offer is 4 books for $4 plus >> shipping and no commitment after that. Plus >> you can order/c a n c e l membership/etc all online. > >I was a member of that club about 10 years ago. They were fair and >reasonable. I picked up a history reference book (I don't remember the >title) that was basically just one big timeline from 4000 B.C. to >present (i.e. 1990). It's been very handy for GMing not only In >Nomine, but any game based (more or less) in the real world. > >Guy > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! >http://photos.yahoo.com > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:48:18 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question At 1:38 -0400 6/9/00, Maurice Lane wrote: [Angel of Heresy...] >The problem is that I'm trying to determine the best >Choir for this poor schmuck ... I mean, angel. I'll add my vote to David's for an Elohite -- this kind of thing is an ideal playground for one of the hairless hair-splitters serving Wind. However, the "best" Choir depends a lot on what you want to do with the character. Assuming it's an NPC (or your own PC), there may be some interesting things to deal with in an "unsuitable" Choir. There are certainly plenty of examples in canon.... (Which, frankly, I think were taken too far -- probably INS/MV influence.) Seraph or Kyrio is probably the hardest to fit, and Cherub nearly as bad -- I'd think they'd tend to be loyal to the followers of their heresy, which could be trouble. All the others would be pretty much fine, though they'd have distinct slants on the Word: Ofanite: would tend to engender as many heresies as possible, and be a rabble-rouser type, probably. Elohim: would promote all sorts of heresies, and the very notion that heretical thought was good, to consider *all* possibilities, rather than just the accepted ones. Malakite: another sort of rabble-rouser, and probably the type to die for the cause. Most likely to foster active rebellions against authority based on philosophical underpinnings (e.g., the "divine right of kings"). "Marxism" might be another sort of heresy that such an angel might have fostered (to borrow from another recent thread). The development of unions in the early 20th century might be another example. Mercurian: most likely to focus on heresies that promote the help the common man. (I suppose one could argue that this might mean another slant on Marxism, for one, or unionism, for another.) But the emphasis would be on fostering political change. A better example might be the womens' suffrage movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:51:41 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences At 3:14 PM -0400 6/8/00, AngelPatriel@netscape.net wrote: >in_nomine-l@lists.io.com wrote: >> #4: Disturbance can attract _unwelcome_ attention. > >I agree, but what happens then? Depends on who showed up. Even just having someone tracking the PCs around can be unnerving enough. Even if it turns out to be someone on their own side! > Assuming the disturbing party are in their vessels, the watchdogs who show up >won't know who's an angel or demon, who's a celestial and who's human, or who >caused the disturbance This is a GM option, actually. I call the two versions "locational disturbance" and "sticky distubance." (Neither term is canon. Sorry 'bout that...) Basically, the GM can choose to use locational disturbance (disturbance leads to the place it happened), sticky disturbance (disturbance leads to the celestial who caused it), or both in succession! (Usually locational first, then sticky.) This is covered in the main book, in the Perceiving Disturbance section, in the lower right corner of the page, IIRC. If you have PCs who won't worry about locational disturbance, use sticky disturbance, or both. >And it could lead to a bunch of embarrasing moments. Exactly! Think, you're an immortal celestial being -- do you _really_ want to be reduced to eyeing each other while the Symphony immitates thrash metal in the background, wondering if the people who showed up are friend or foe? However, demons have a good way of telling who other demons are -- Helltongue. (I believe this is in the Hell section of the main book, and not called that. Dark Celestial Tongue or something.) Helltongue can be spoken in the corporeal realm; angelic cannot (without a Distinction). So a Calabite who's spoiling for a fight (most of them) will say: Hey, youse guys angels or demons? The angels go, "Ur, um, oh hell, a demon!" And the next fight is joined. When the PCs may well be damaged and down Essence from the first fight... Also, if spectators get there in time to see attunements in effect, it can give away identities... In my games, there are common demonling mneumonics for some of the Choirs... "Hands flaming green, be not seen." -- Malakite of Fire. "He's got a pie, prepare to die." -- Malakite of Creation. "Burning Bright, Ofanite." -- Ofanite of Fire. (Those are the only ones I've come up with recently off the top of my head.) Angels will also tend to notice Calabim making things explode just by staring at them. >I also think a bunch of celestials materializing will be pretty noisy, which >sounds like fighting fire with fire. Oh, they don't _materialize_ -- they just drive over in their cars or whatever, and park right around the corner to go see what's up. Perfectly silent. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:59:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The toll collector At 2:40 AM -0400 6/9/00, Douglas Muir wrote: BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I love it. I love it. (Oh, yeah, and I liked the avalanch in an apron bit way back a bit, too.) He's probably being twitchy about the accidents, too -- Impudite dissonance and all. Have you hunted EDG down and talked about getting a "You are Here . . . and Here, and Here . . ." section set up on the IPG? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:44:48 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine Hmmm who would be the best people for certain jobs.... Gabrielle's male form forgive me if I stick with Christopher Walken, we just have to stick with the stogid serious and utterly insane portrayal he usually gives of the old man. For the female form in this case strangely I've always envisioned Robia Lamorte for the part (Jenny Calender from Buffy) as she is elegant yet feisty. Dominic I think would best be voiced by Anthony Hopkins and mostly CGI. Michael I think should be of course should just have the guy who played him in the Prophecy 2 as I use him (yes I'm stealing but when it works-why change it)? Anne Heche or Perhaps Jennifer Elfman for Novalis. Ben Stiller as Eli (with a pretty wild haircut) Van Halen or some other 80s style rocker in the personage of Andre, you don't really *NEED* to act when your doing this guy. For his female form....the heck if I know. For some reason I see Mel Gibson as Baal despite that he never plays the villian. Hmm I'll need to think more on this. - -Charlie ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:57:24 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences At 8:40 -0400 6/9/00, neelk@cswcasa.com wrote: >For my game, I explained to the players (all angels) that angels were >a life form not designed to exist in the physical universe. > >Their supernatural powers were BAD for reality, in the same way that >putting kerosene into a gas engine will wreck it; in fact, even their >very presence on Earth was unnatural. That's what disturbance was; the >sound of the universe breaking. That's exactly the model I have (though expressed much more eloquently than I could probably manage). And, as the Symphony has become more complex, it's also become more susceptible to this sort of damage (though such damage may be subtle). This should be plenty of motivation for angels to be careful. Demons can generally be controlled by orders from above (or below, if you'd rather), with the DPs being concerned that too much noise will prematurely trigger a "well, it's already broken beyond repair, so let's get the bad guys and not worry about the consequences" attitude in the angelic side. And, unless they get support from their fellow Princes (always an iffy proposition), a DP's organization might be facing an organized effort from *several* AAs. That's the dilemma of the demons -- they may outnumber the angels, but the angels are more likely to (unfairly) gang up on the demons. And those wimp allies always let *you* take the brunt of the damage first.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 16:00:18 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences At 10:52 -0400 6/9/00, John Karakash wrote: >> Both PCs and NPCs try to find an out-of-the-way place >> *way* out of town if they need to make a lot of disturbance. (This also >> makes sense if you want to avoid a lot of embarassing collateral damage >> to the corporeal scenery that would raise questions with the human >> authorities.) Maybe this explains crop circles and the like.... > > Walter, this is clever beyond belief. Why not say that >Disturbance, non-canonically of course, causes _odd_ effects in >addition to the direct sensing the Symphonically aware can >manage. Rain of frogs, crop circles, seas turning to blood, >everyone flushing their toilet at the same time, albino alligators, >whatever. Crop circles are an interesting physical manifestation >of the disturbance in the Symphony, much like complex ripples in a >pond. That's a *lot* more clever than I was actually being... I was just thinking that crop circles might have been the "ground zero" of a celestial fight. (Song of Thunder, anyone?) I was thinking about one side calling the other out, and picking the out-of-the-way location for the rumble. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 16:04:58 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> The Final Frontier At 10:54 -0400 6/9/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: > >> Historically, Venus has sometimes been named two different objects, >> the "evening star" and the "morning star". I'm not sure whether >> the civilizations that did this really understood that it was one >> object at different times, and just liked having multiple names, >> or just didn't care. > >If I recall my history of science correctly, the different names >were given when the morning and evening stars were believed to >be two different objects. At least in Greece. Then the Greeks >took over astronomy from the Babylonians, surpassed them in it, >and passed it on to the Romans and the rest of the Classical >world. I thought the Greeks knew they were the same, though it's been a while since I've looked at the history of astronomy. (I used to do planetarium shows, a bit.) The Greeks certainly had adequate observational astronomy to realize they were the same thing -- look at the Ptolemaic system of planetary motion, for example. That may have been *late* classical Greece, though. Certainly earlier Greece may have had "shepherd's astronomy", where they didn't analyze it much. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:21:14 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Final Frontier Walter Milliken wrote: > I thought the Greeks knew they were the same, though it's been a > while since I've looked at the history of astronomy. (I used to > do planetarium shows, a bit.) The Greeks certainly had adequate > observational astronomy to realize they were the same thing -- > look at the Ptolemaic system of planetary motion, for example. > That may have been *late* classical Greece, though. Certainly > earlier Greece may have had "shepherd's astronomy", where they > didn't analyze it much. Yes, that's exactly what I meant. My memory is hazy, but I think before the Socrates-Plato-Aristotle period (and certainly before Thales), it was just "shepherd's astronomy," but as philosophy started to heat up, they got interested in such matters. I vaguely recall Aristotle pointing to the identification of evening star with morning star as a piece of recent learning, like unto the realization that the Earth was round -- not real recent, but within recent history, which was lightning fast for the ancient world. Ptolemy is really kind of late, since he dates around 100 A.D. His was only the last and most enduring of a series of geocentric models. To wrench this back to In Nomine -- the seven planets of ancient astronomy all had definite qualities of astrological influence, which endure in modern astrology. If we're going to hand out cosmic features to various Superiors, do we want to try to make matches with their astrological characters? E.g., Gabriel, the supreme Ophanite, should then probably be linked to Mercury, with its associations of fire, speed, and messengers. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:05:09 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > > Did he have distinctions and a hierarchy > >and everything, which were simply abandoned when he left on his little > >jaunt? > > I don't think so. He may have distinctions, but they're probably more > a sign of personal approval and respect than actual rank in a hierarchy. > If there were a hierarchy up until he started to go AWOL (the beginnings > were around 1900, I think, with the final disappearance around 1950), > I'd think it would have survived until now, even without him at the head. > After all, look at Gabriel's lot. She's hardly more organized than Eli, > now, but her organization still functions effectively. Unless they were the first to go in Dom's ...investigations... I do like the idea that Eli handed out distinctions on an individual basis rather than a hierarchical basis, *that* seems very Eli to me. The idea of no Distinctions or Servitor attuments always seemed a little off to me... The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:39:54 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question >From: Uncle Wolf >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:43:01 -0500 > >I disagree; it is not that uncommon for heretics to be imprisoned for their >heresy, in which case, having a patron Angel that no prison can hold [take >a >look at the Passage Janusite attunement, then look at the OoJ attunement; >now >put these two together {simple logic when designing the Angel -- this is a >monster combo} and no lock, not even a retinal scan with finger- and >voice-print >crossmatch can hold this angel I seem to vaguely remember having a Seraph of Janus in the Liber Servitorum who would fit this modus operandi pretty well ... jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:39:25 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Ooooo boy... (was Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine) On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Charles Phipps wrote: > Hmmm who would be the best people for certain jobs.... Someone didn't read his ListFAQ... - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! "I am the greatest man in the world; indeed I am SO great that I can afford great generosity: I encourage all others to adopt the DELUSION that they are as great as I. If they truly thought that they were themselves the greatest, they too would be as generous; and then we would all be able to HUMOR each other, in peace, for none would feel threatened by the now-harmless delusions of everyone else." -- Philo Drummond ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:24:11 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine In a message dated 6/9/00 2:53:04 PM Central Daylight Time, tcp@zoomnet.net writes: << Hmmm who would be the best people for certain jobs.... >> Uh-oh! Didn't Beth just say "No casting call!"? Didn't she? DIDN'T SHE?????? Aw, man, you're gonna get it now! Reverend Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:43:40 EDT From: AngelPatriel@netscape.net Subject: Re: IN> Casting Call for In Nomine Run Man! Run! - -- - ---------- Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://home.netscape.com/webmail/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 18:21:24 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] STOP THIS NOW! (Re: Casting Call for In Nomine) I SAID no casting calls! I said it very plainly. I said, of the Pyraboard, "(They can do that there, it's not moderated, or so I assume.) " Here is the relevent text from the long Welcome To The List you should have gotten when you s u b s c r i b e d. > (As a note: If you want to know about Roles, check the digests. That's > been asked a lot, but I don't think it's in the FAQ yet. Also, we've > already been through "What is good In Nomine Music" and "In Nomine > Movie Casting." At least 3 times. Check the digests, don't start it > *again*....) CASTING CALLS CANNOT BE POSTED TO THIS LIST. THEY ARE AS VERBOTEN AS MUSIC THREADS. IF THIS ONE CONTINUES, THEN ANYONE POSTING TO IT WILL BE U N S U B S C R I B E D WITHOUT WARNING OR NOTIFICATION. No, I don't care if it's funny. That just means you'll have to grovel less when you promise me never to do it again and I relent and let you re-s u b s c r i b e. Do I make myself absolutely, totally, what the heck do you think you were doing, clear? - --Beth, highly ANGRY List Admin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 18:36:24 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 3:05 PM -0500 6/9/00, David Rodemaker wrote: >>He may have distinctions, but they're probably more >> a sign of personal approval and respect than actual rank [...] [Gabriel has an organization that still functions though she's nuts] >Unless they were the first to go in Dom's ...investigations... What, and cause _more_ Chaos? >I do like the idea that Eli handed out distinctions on an individual basis >rather than a hierarchical basis, *that* seems very Eli to me. The idea of >no Distinctions or Servitor attuments always seemed a little off to me... Oh, Eli has Servitor Attunements. Just no Distinctions. Lilith has no Servitor Attunements. But does have Distinctions (FotM). - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:38:53 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: IN> Is there a Demon of Telemarketers? The answer is simple. No. Why? Because some things should remain a purely human Evil. Both sides probably assume there is a Demon running around with that word, but there isn't. Lucifer just smiles inwardly that Humanity is proving to be everything he expected it to become. After all, he _knows_ from Truth. (No, this isn't anything remotely cannonical. Just some idle musings after having to deal with them too often, and well reading about a little encounter between a Duke of Hell and a bunch of them in a certain book. . . Besides, you have to give those Talking Monkeys the benefit of the doubt. They are perfectly capable of damning themselves, _without_ any Celestial interference.) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:23:10 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 16:05 -0400 6/9/00, David Rodemaker wrote: >I do like the idea that Eli handed out distinctions on an individual basis >rather than a hierarchical basis, *that* seems very Eli to me. The idea of >no Distinctions or Servitor attuments always seemed a little off to me... Huh? He's got Servitor Attunements. Maybe you're thinking of Lilith.... (Or do you think Lilith is Eli in disguise, like is sometimes speculated of Janus & Valefor? Now *that* would be amusing....) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 18:33:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Is there a Demon of Telemarketers? On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Tafka J. wrote: > The answer is simple. > > No. > > Why? Because even Lucifer isn't *that* evil. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:08:43 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > At 3:05 PM -0500 6/9/00, David Rodemaker wrote: > >>He may have distinctions, but they're probably more > >> a sign of personal approval and respect than actual rank [...] > [Gabriel has an organization that still functions though she's nuts] > > >Unless they were the first to go in Dom's ...investigations... > > What, and cause _more_ Chaos? The Hyena? Sure, this is the nutcase who brought the Commander of the Host's up on charges in the middle of a "hot war" (it was only 47 *years* after the Oannes is destroyed) and then only charged Uriel when the Council damn near forced him. The cold war started when Uriel took over (per the APG) and that alone is a scary thought for what it must have been like before... > >I do like the idea that Eli handed out distinctions on an individual basis > >rather than a hierarchical basis, *that* seems very Eli to me. The idea of > >no Distinctions or Servitor attuments always seemed a little off to me... > > Oh, Eli has Servitor Attunements. Just no Distinctions. > > Lilith has no Servitor Attunements. But does have Distinctions (FotM). Yup. I even knew about the the two in the main book when I wrote that. My only defense is that I've been running a fever for the past few days, and there's a three year old running around the house (the wriggling only continues, writ upon a larger canvas ) Somewere I had it in my mind that he didn't hand the Servitor Attunements out that much also, which combined with no Distinctions made the two that he had written up in the book as... Well, I eat crow (Actually I would almost never eat crow but am more than willing to eat humble pie...) I really think the "Midwife Attunement" needs to make it into the expanded write-up BTW. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 23:32:03 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli David Rodemaker wrote: > The Hyena? Sure, this is the nutcase who brought the Commander of the Host's > up on charges in the middle of a "hot war" (it was only 47 *years* after the > Oannes is destroyed) and then only charged Uriel when the Council damn near > forced him. The cold war started when Uriel took over (per the APG) and that > alone is a scary thought for what it must have been like before... This suggests maybe Dominic had good reason for charging Michael -- Michael WAS being vainglorious, and causing much too much disturbance. Perhaps Dominic knew that the Symphony was being strained too badly, and after repeated requests to "tone things down" (to which Michael responded "Hey, we're trying to fight a WAR here, and we don't need any civilians meddling in our affairs!"), Dominic decided he had no choice. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:11:20 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 11:32 PM -0500 6/9/00, David Edelstein wrote: >David Rodemaker wrote: >> The Hyena? Sure, this is the nutcase who brought the Commander of the Host's >> up on charges in the middle of a "hot war" (it was only 47 *years* after the >> Oannes is destroyed) and then only charged Uriel when the Council damn near >> forced him. The cold war started when Uriel took over (per the APG) and that >> alone is a scary thought for what it must have been like before... > >This suggests maybe Dominic had good reason for charging Michael[...] Dominic's Word _is_ Judgment, after all. Not "Judgment when it would be convenient for all parties concerned" or "Civilian Judgment which isn't in effect during martial law." Just Judgment. Birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, Dommie gotta Judge... (Man, it's too early in the morning... Urk, three-year-olds...) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:03:08 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > At 11:32 PM -0500 6/9/00, David Edelstein wrote: > >David Rodemaker wrote: > >> The Hyena? Sure, this is the nutcase who brought the Commander of the Host's > >> up on charges in the middle of a "hot war" (it was only 47 *years* after the > >> Oannes is destroyed) and then only charged Uriel when the Council damn near > >> forced him. The cold war started when Uriel took over (per the APG) and that > >> alone is a scary thought for what it must have been like before... > > > >This suggests maybe Dominic had good reason for charging Michael[...] Yes, actually after the recent discussion on the corporeal effects of Disturbance that makes sense, except that "Reality-Warping Disturbance" was not what Michael was charged with. > Dominic's Word _is_ Judgment, after all. Not "Judgment when it would > be convenient for all parties concerned" or "Civilian Judgment which > isn't in effect during martial law." Just Judgment. Birds gotta fly, > fish gotta swim, Dommie gotta Judge... Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with Justice or Mercy... More importantly, without a Metatron, Dominic has to depend upon his own perspective of what is Right and Wrong to determine how to Judge, (abilities as a Seraph not withstanding) As good a job as he's done all the arguments still stand true. > (Man, it's too early in the morning... Urk, three-year-olds...) Thankfully the early in morning will end, probably semi-soon. But the crawling, and talking, and walking, and climbing, and running... The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:32:52 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Michael's Trial David Rodemaker wrote: > Yes, actually after the recent discussion on the corporeal effects of > Disturbance that makes sense, except that "Reality-Warping Disturbance" was > not what Michael was charged with. He was charged with vainglory. What I'm thinking about is WHY being vainglorious would be a bad thing, besides the obvious, that being vain is probably bad for angels. But Dominic had to have a good reason for bringing Michael up on charges. He's not stupid -- he probably KNEW that this wouldn't be very good for Heaven's War effort. And he probably knew that if anyone could safely be vain without fear of Falling, it's Michael. I see two possibilities. One is that (as someone else pointed out) Dominic simply HAD to charge him, because Michael was committing a sin, and regardless of whether or not it was justified, it's in Dominic's nature to call judgment down upon anyone he perceives committing an infraction. He simply couldn't do otherwise. But if we assume that Dominic has _some_ discretion, then one has to ask, WHY did he charge Michael? He couldn't have really wanted to remove Michael as General of the Host. So perhaps it was because, effective as Michael was, Dominic saw that he was getting too carried away with stomping demons, and disregarding the collateral damage done to the Symphony as he and his angels merrily blasted every bad guy in sight, damn the disturbance. The reason Michael was ignoring disturbance was that he was being vainglorious -- he figured it's his job to whomp on Hell, and he's the Archangel of War and General of the Host, dammit, so screw anyone who (like Dominic) who tries to tell him how to do his job. He don't have to listen to no one but God.... I figure that had Michael been found guilty and not been pardoned by God, Dominic would probably have assigned a penalty like "Thou Shalt Walk Humbly Henceforth, and Thou Shalt Not Disturb the Symphony With Thy Unseemly Boasting and Gratuitous Commotions, and Thou Shalt Take Instructions from the Seraphim Council When Needful." - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 13:46:21 EDT From: Daedalus3D@aol.com Subject: IN> Tether Question I hope all you Tether-heads can help me with this one. I have a 12 (soon to be 13) force Calabite of Belial in my campaign who, strangely enough, has so far managed to stay on the Prince of Fire's good side. He's growing in power fairly rapidly but needs to add some degree of focus to his character development. A Word seems to be a little too much to bestow upon him, at this time, but I was thinking about Word-binding him to a Tether. That would add a ton of stability that both the player and I agree that he needs. However, in order to make the character still be playable, and work well with the other main character in the campaign (an Impudite of Vapula), I think that Word-binding the Calabite to a transient Tether would work nicely, especially if the Word had something to do with Technology as well, giving the Impudite a reason to follow the Calabite around. So, I tried to come up with all the transient Tethers I could think of that could be split or shared between Belial and Vapula. Here's what I have: Nuclear Disasters, Napalm Fires, Bombings/Fire Bombings, Oil/Chemical Fires, Industrial Arson, Factory Fires, or (my two favorites) Nuclear Testing and Active Minefields. In the end, I'm thinking about making the Calabite the Seneschel of Nuclear Testing, who's job is to travel the world visiting sites where current nuclear testing is going on (making those sites into temporary powerful Tethers of Belial/Vapula) and, since nuclear testing is a fairly rare occurance, actively promote his Word as much as possible. The Impudite of Vapula could just hang around as his Prince's representative (since the Tether will be shared/split) and basically be the second-in-command of operations. Any comments, corrections, or other ideas would be very helpful. Also, I was wondering where the upper locus of a shared Tether was placed (if a Tether serves two Princes, and isn't split, who's Castle has the link)? Finally, can a Celestial be Attuned to a transient Tether? I would guess not since it's having the Word-bound at the site that makes the Tether form. For example, every hurricanes isn't a Tether of Wind unless the Seneschel of Hurricanes is there. Help, please. Daedalus ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:25:02 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question At 13:46 -0400 6/10/00, Daedalus3D@aol.com wrote: >So, I tried to come up with all the transient Tethers I could think of that >could be split or shared between Belial and Vapula. Here's what I have: >Nuclear Disasters, Napalm Fires, Bombings/Fire Bombings, Oil/Chemical Fires, >Industrial Arson, Factory Fires, or (my two favorites) Nuclear Testing and >Active Minefields. Vehicle Fires (ships, trains, planes, trucks, and maybe a really *good* car fire) might qualify. It would be a very weak Tether, though, in general. Another might be "Unexpected Explosions" or "Explosive Disasters", which could be anything from a grain elevator explosion to a gas main explosion to terrorist bombs to old WW2 bombs dug up when someone built a new highway. You might also be able to use "Industrial Accidents" -- the destruction Belial encompasses is a *bit* more than simple fire; anything senselessly violent and/or destructive might qualify as being under his Word. >In the end, I'm thinking about making the Calabite the Seneschel of Nuclear >Testing, who's job is to travel the world visiting sites where current >nuclear testing is going on (making those sites into temporary powerful >Tethers of Belial/Vapula) and, since nuclear testing is a fairly rare >occurance, actively promote his Word as much as possible. Possible, though that's a Word that would have made much more sense in the 1950s and 60s, I think. A similar and broader Word would be "Military Weapons Test Sites", which would let you use all the live-fire ranges and such, as well as nuclear test sites, and would have a lot more stability. Such a Tether would probably only be active if there was actual testing going on -- exactly the sort of thing a Vapulan might be assigned to watch over. (And see if the monkeys came up with anything novel, or with interesting side effects.) >Any comments, corrections, or other ideas would be very helpful. Also, I was >wondering where the upper locus of a shared Tether was placed (if a Tether >serves two Princes, and isn't split, who's Castle has the link)? I'd say, wherever the Princes agree it should be. It would have to be in one of their domains, though. If the Seneschal is going to be a Fire Servitor, then it should probably be in Sheol. Belial is much senior to Vapula as a Prince, and possibly more powerful; Vapula would probably be happy to let Belial "have" the Tether, if his people could also use it. (Besides, having Servitors with easy access to Sheol is probably useful.) Belial also likes Vapula, to a degree (though Vapula doesn't particularly care for Belial). > Finally, >can a Celestial be Attuned to a transient Tether? I would guess not since >it's having the Word-bound at the site that makes the Tether form. For >example, every hurricanes isn't a Tether of Wind unless the Seneschel of >Hurricanes is there. Help, please. That's tricky. Actually, the Tether would form without the Word-bound, but it would usually oscillate wildly among all the possible lower loci. The Seneschal's presence merely gives it a preferred locus point. (More or less -- it's been a while since I wrote that stuff....) I suppose an attuned Seneschal would work, but not very well. I.e., the Tether might only land in his location more frequently than any of the other possible corporeal loci, and once there, would hang around for a while, and then skip off for some other, currently stronger locus. (All non-canon, of course, but it would probably work OK.) I'd probably also let the Seneschal sense roughly where the current locus was. - ---Walter ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1669 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.