From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Oct 6 15:50:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA13406 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 15:50:15 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id PAA12982 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 15:14:19 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 15:14:19 -0500 Message-Id: <199710062014.PAA12982@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 #387 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, October 6 1997 Volume 01 : Number 387 In this digest: Re: IN> On playing demons Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> being nasty to Shedim. IN> [Silly] Last weekend's IN game. Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote IN> KTE: A late-breaking addendum Re: IN> On Playing Evil IN> Vessel Question Re: IN> IN in other settings Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? IN> AndCon and IN IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> Mark's vision of In Nomine Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote IN> On Playing Evil IN> On Playing Evil IN> On Playing Evil IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> IN in other settings Re: Re: IN> White Wolf's Games vs. In Nomine Re: IN> How I See Demons Re: IN> On Playing Evil Re: IN> Band Attunements Re: IN> On playing demons Re: IN> On playing demons Re: IN> being nasty to Shedim. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:27:06 -0400 () From: Greg Subject: Re: IN> On playing demons > > > In Nomine doesn't say what happens to humans in the > > > upper Heavens. > > > > I don't. But if any celestial seriously thinks that Heaven is > > worse than Hell, then if they have a shred of decency they will > > reject *both* sides and work to bring down *both*. > > The problem is, no regular angel has been to higher Heaven, and only > some of the AAs are supposed to have. > And God might be brainwashing the angels, anyway... How does this change anything? If you think Heaven is a good organisation, work for it. If you think Heaven is as bad as Hell, don't work for it. But whatever you do, *don't work for Hell!*. > > > > Adjust the colors, reverse them -- at least humans *exist* in Hell, > > > and are mostly still self-aware creatures. Would you rather have > > > your individual personality eradicated entirely, washed away in > > > the Light, or would you rather hang around Shal-Mari and bus tables? > > > > Personally, I'd prefer obliteration - and almost *anyone*, I > > would think, would prefer obliteration to somewhere in Hell > > *other* than Shal-Mari. But any celestial that knowingly supports > > a regime that does *either* to souls is worse than any Nazi that > > ever lived. > > For some demons, we are about the equivalent of cows. How many of > you object, morally, to the situation that cows in? At best, kept > in cheap pleasure palaces while they are drained of what we want > from them, at worst, ripped apart for what we want from them. Firstly, I would object strongly if cows were tortured, as humans are in so many parts of Hell. Our treatment of them may not be ideal (and certainly ought to be better) but it falls way short of the torments of the pit. Secondly, what we do to cows does not last forever. Thirdly, I'm not sure that cows would have a better existence on the loose. > > For some demons, it works on balance of fears. Demons can either go > along with it, and save their hides, or try to change sides, and > risk getting smoked by *both* sides. > > Does this make these demons good? No. But they aren't all evil - > just cowardly (with good cause) and selfish. Selfish to an amazing degree. Just think about what they are willing to do to us again and again to save their own hides. "I vas just followink orders" is a pretty lousy excuse. Greg. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:37:47 -0400 () From: Greg Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > Just as a general remark -- It seems to me that the central issue > about this thread is exactly what is meant by "getting off on" > gamed violence, as in David's original remark, "*Getting off* on > fictional badness is what bothers me." > > We've had references to venting the day's irritations with some > gamed melee. But (1) unless the GM is particularly graphic, this > is usually as clean and innocuous to the senses as a '50s TV western > shoot out, where bullet wounds never show, Why is this less awful than fake violence where the blood *does* show? If the media really does make people shoot other people in real life, I don't care whether my assailant is expecting blood or not. > and (2) this is not the > same as playing a demon that endlessly connives to torment others, > here or hereafter. > > And author or GM who supplies a detailed and well-thought-out villain > has to have spent some considerable amount of time in the villain's > head, and the same could be true of a player with an evil character. > I think there is a delicate but importnat distinction concerning the > NATURE of the enjoyment the player (or GM or author) gets from > playing the villain's part. There are certainly at least these two types of enjoyment. I'm still not convinced that there is a *moral* difference between them, though. > > On the one hand, there's the craftsman's enjoyment: "Oo, I'm glad > I thought of that one. That works well. Yes, yes, that's just > what he'd do." On the other hand, there's a more direct pleasure: > "There, that'll fix the little swine. Now how can I get back at > the other?" > > The craftsman's enjoyment is, I think, innocuous, maybe even > beneficial. The direct enjoyment is disturbing. The craftsman > is detached, and may even take pleasure in watching his villainous > character be set up for a long, hard fall, may even ASSIST in the > set up, if he can do that in character. The direct enjoyment > seems to reflect an attitude that would like to be just as rotten > as the imagined villain, if only conscience or prudence didn't > veto the plan. Where does this come from? Most R.P.G. P.C.s are in almost constant danger, and frequently in great pain. Does that mean that anyone who plays R.P.G.s would like to be in danger and pain? You are making a substantive psychological claim here that I see no evidence to support. > If only prudence vetoes the plan, the case is really > alarming. If conscience vetoes the plan, the case is probably not > alarming, but not the best spiritual health, either. Why is in bad spiritual health? What more do you need than happiness and morality? > > And, once again, we're talking about a villain, who works consistently > and hard at generating misery. Not a simple combatant in melee, > used for blowing off steam. I think the two are very different. Why? The first may hack one individual up slowly while the second hacks a lot of them up quickly. What's the big difference? > > Kingsley Lintz wrote: > > > I'm noticing that killing is considered a lot more acceptable in > > gaming than rape...I would actually suggest that it's also more deeply > > ingrained. > > Also, "rape" is the name of a crime, a sin. "Killing" can be evil > or not -- unless you are a strict pacifist. Well, heck, I can set up a contrived situation in a game whereby rape is the *right* thing to do. "The nature of the curse means that only way to save X from an eternity of torture is to have sex with him, but...it will only work if you don't ask first" Greg. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:18:33 -0400 (EDT) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> being nasty to Shedim. "like many folks on this list, I really don't like Shedim. I don't mean in a "they shouldn't be in IN" way, but in a "they really make me feel eurgh" way." It's the 'violation' factor, I think. The power to get into someone, make them do horrible things and *like* it. I'm reminded of a scene in "Strange Days" where a rapist forces himself on a victim and strangles her while she's wearing a braintaping apparatus that makes her feel *his* sensations rather than her own. Disturbing, to say the least. yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:42:47 -0400 (EDT) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: IN> [Silly] Last weekend's IN game. One of the players in our game last weekend was desirious of a word, but wasn't of sufficient power (or competency). We decided to compromise. We gave him a Gesture. He's now the Angel of (hand out, palm down, rotate in quarter-circles -- the sign of 'so-so' or 'enh'). :) There's probably an Angel of (thumbs up) and (thumb-and-forefinger circle, other fingers extended). I don't feel the need to go into Demonic gestures. yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:33:19 -0400 (EDT) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote Ah ha! I do get to my mail! > >[...] I love GMing this game, it's a riot and a half. But I will drop > >it like a hat and never play again if it becomes "You must use what we > >have published, and BTW, go buy a new book so you are current with Canon." > > If I ever say that somebody can't do something *IN HER OWN GAME* > because it's "not canon," smack me upside the virtual head. I may > say, "No, I won't make a pronouncement on [x] that changes canon > to what you want," but I hope I *never* say, "You can't do that. > It's not right. Buy the book and see why." Cool beans. I don't expect anything I post to ever be canon, except for something very small that may have snuck it's way into the LARP (which is another story entirely). Heck, I don't even use all of my own stuff, or even half of it. Although I have a major complaint about Sorcerers and the lack of the Angel Raziel. *waggle finger* Some Kabbalists you lot turned out to be. :) When I decide on what fun things he does, I'll post him.... > I'll tell the people *who care* what the canon is if they ask (I'd > do that anyway; Archangel of Archives), but for you and Oops -- > hey, you're playing the game backwards. All I can do is sit over > here with Big Eyes and cheer occasionally... I saw that in the rulebook finally. I didn't know where that came from, but now I do and... KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE! I am officially In The Know. It's crazy. My players are so strung out on angst I don't know what to do. It's fantastic. - - Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:47:51 -0500 (CDT) From: "Austin G. Loomis" Subject: IN> KTE: A late-breaking addendum My last visit to the INC revealed to me that I'd left something out of a KTE addendum, so in the interests of completism, I'll add it in. Know the Enemy (a comprehensive course for young demons, in determining the strengths and weaknesses of the Enemy) series created by Elizabeth McCoy #15: As delivered by a surviving Soldier of Hell (original series by Adam Canning) Christopher: Not our problem. Tell your demon and go on. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:43:31 -0700 (PDT) From: nightgaunt@earthlink.net (Alexander Shearer) Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil > What is do special about rape? I'm not sure, but for me it is. I'll have to think about why (it's good to be able to explain these things). > >> 1: This depends on situation a great deal. Is it really bad when one set of >> amoral undead creatures tortures another? Maybe not. > > I think it would be if it happened in real life. As to whether two >fictional people engage in torture, it makes no difference if the >fictional torture is between two evil people, or one evil person and a >helpless victem. None of it is real, so none of it is bad. Maybe. I just don't necessarily appreciate the torture/etc. of yo random helpless person, even in fiction. OTOH, do I care if the Calabite breaks his Servants fingers? Not terribly. [1] > >> 2: I say "seems" because...how can I know? I've found, however, that this >> kind of thing can be reflective of the person in general. > >Perhaps it can. But what evidence is there that playing evil characters >makes people act out such atrocities in real life. I never said that. It's stupid to say that because someone played his first evil character, he is now going to go steal candy from children. My possible cause and effect runs in the opposite direction. It's more that I wonder about how the person already is if they really want to spend their recreational time with pretend atrocities. As I noted, "seem" is very much the operative word. I've never roleplayed with anyone who wanted to do that stuff anyway (in the game). > >> 3: Yes, rape bothers me. It has no place in my games. I'm not going to >> preach, though. > > Interestingly, I can't stomach rape in my games either. But I regard >this as a psychological quirk rather than a stand against evil. I don't know that I said it's a stand against evil. That sounds very dramatic and sweeping. I wouldn't call it a quirk either - it reflects me in general, and not just on this particular roleplaying issue. >Interestingly, in the only case of a character *trying* to rape someone >that >I can recall, the player was a woman. The character btw, was male and the >intended victem, female. Make of that what you will. > Hmmm. I'd need more psychology in my background. 1: I had this idea last week for a Calabite who is constantly being abused BY his Servant. It makes for a funny picture. Alexander Shearer nightgaunt@earthlink.net gaunt@uclink4.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:20:18 -0400 From: Twila Oxley Price Subject: IN> Vessel Question Um, I'm trying to come up with my angel of folk music :-) (hey, I actually have the concept fleshed out!) but... I have some quick questions about vessels -- if you buy one at level 3, what exactly does that mean? Maybe I'm just too stuffy-headed from my cold, but the IN book isn't terribly clear about the differences between what a human/3 vessel is compared to a human vessel with level 3/status 3... Twila (who isn't usually this dense, but she thinks her ethereal forces have taken a beating from the demon of nasty head colds.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:25:59 -0400 From: Hunter Johnson Subject: Re: IN> IN in other settings On Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:46:31 +1000, Jason Mulligan said: > I've been wondering (well actually one of my group suggested this) > is anyone has thought about or tried to run an In Nomine game set in > another time/place. Like say medieval France, or say a game in and > around the time of Solomon. I've thought about combining In Nomine and Deadlands, but my Deadlands campaign got shelved before I did anything about it. Hunter - -- J. Hunter Johnson /\ SJG Errata Coordinator (sjg-errata@io.com) http://www.io.com/~jhunterj/ /()\ Knightmare Chess Development Coordinator jhunterj@io.com /____\ South Park: Care Bears on Acid -- G.C. Settlers RoboRally Brain Groo LunchMoney DinoHunt Knightmare GURPS AoR INWO ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 10:40:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Dennis C Hwang Subject: Re: IN> On Playing Evil I'm probably not the target audience for this question, but... On Mon, 6 Oct 1997 MarkDEddy@aol.com wrote: > I'd like to add one point to the current discussion of killing, rape, and so > on: > > Death is something our (i.e., Modern American/Western) culture has really > sanitized in real life. Think about it. When was the last time you saw a > dead body? Oh, probably a few months ago, I was seeing several a day. > Was it before or after the mortician had been at it? Long before. > Was it > someone who had died violently? In some cases (gunshots, accidents). > I think that many people who don't have a > problem with simulated violence/murder and do have a problem with simulated > rape may be more familliar with *real* rape than *real* murder. Sadly, I think this is probably quite true. OTOH, "eliminate (i.e. kill) the enemy" is a predominant theme in games (video, RPG, even some boardgames in an extremely abstract fashion such as chess). We tend to justify "killing" in games because the situations place us in a "kill or be killed" environment much of the time, and therefore the violent actions can be placed in the context of survival or self-defense. And if you happen to pump a few extra rounds into that scuzzball demon who just happens to look like your boss, well, that's just, er, incidental catharsis, right? ;) Rape, on the other hand, does not fit those themes. I can't imagine any situation in which rape could be justified as a self-defense or survival tactic. - --Dennis dchwang@itsa.ucsf.edu xenopathologist at large! Deathwalker for President: for some *real* health care reform. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:50:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Donald G Bixler Subject: Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote > Cool beans. I don't expect anything I post to ever be canon, except for > something very small that may have snuck it's way into the LARP (which is > another story entirely). Heck, I don't even use all of my own stuff, or > even half of it. I'll second that. Hell (pun intended), I probably won't actively use more than a fifth of the stuff I work out- I keep cranking out the ideas and let 'em ferment. ;'} I sort of take Vapula's approach to idea generation. ='o And I seriously doubt that I'll ever post anything canon that I'm not quoting. I don't think that they're crazy enough to take a suggestion from me. > Although I have a major complaint about Sorcerers and the lack of the > Angel Raziel. *waggle finger* Some Kabbalists you lot turned out to > be. :) When I decide on what fun things he does, I'll post him.... I wasn't that impressed with them either, but that's okay. I had already worked out my own version. (Ask Dotti- her character was summoned by a rather surprised weekend wizard goofing around with an old book.) > I saw that in the rulebook finally. I didn't know where that came from, > but now I do and... KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE! I am officially In The > Know. Yo Joe! I still want an IN tee-shirt with that line and Furfur... > It's crazy. My players are so strung out on angst I don't know what to > do. It's fantastic. *chuckle* Can't help out much there with ideas. My impudite is suffering from a very specific form of angst, Dotti's character is more in shock than anything else (meeting Lucy will do that), and my habbalite is busy with an uppity test subject in the Psychological Research department. (That demon is definitly not a nice person...) > - Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards Hey! Them's fightin' Words. You're cutting in on my turf. ='p ;'} Oops da Ogre, Demon of In Nomine Played Backwards mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 13:47:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Stacy Stroud Subject: IN> What do we mean when we say "evil"? Nathaniel Eliot wrote: >Does this make these demons good? No. But they aren't all evil - >just cowardly (with good cause) and selfish. My response here is not directed specifically at Mr. Eliot. His is merely the latest example of something I've been noticing in a number of posts on the "playing demons" issue, so I picked his rendition to quote. What I've noticed is this: Quite a few people have made a specific distinction between "selfishness" and "evil" where demons are concerned. As Mr. Eliot says, a demon can be selfish and cowardly without being evil. That leads me to ask: What do we mean when we say "evil"? I realize that there are probably as many different answers as there are members on the list, but I think adding this aspect to the discussion might prove fruitful. Based purely on my own reading of the posts so far, I'd opine that many of the folks making the selfish/evil distinction are using "evil" to mean "cruel." So a truly "evil" demon would be one who, in the words of Prince Edelstein, "gets off" on causing misery. But is that really all there is to evil? IMHO, it's not. Selfishness and cowardice can easily be just as evil as cruelty -- and evil in a more subtle, more dangerous way. A demon (or a real, live human!) who just doesn't *care* what his actions do to others because he's selfish is a morally repugnant creature. Perhaps he's never quite as spectacularly sadistic as the cruel person, but he's still evil in my book. Similarly, under the right circumstances, a coward can be just as evil as a selfish or cruel person. Note that I am speaking here of *cowardice*, not merely fear. Fear is a normal and morally neutral response to danger. Giving in to fear, especially in place of standing up for what's right, is cowardice. Similarly, true courage is continuing to stand up for what's right, even in the face of fearsome consequences. IN demons who continue to promote misery and tempt souls to Hell because they're afraid of what will happen to them if they don't *are* evil, and evil *because* they are cowards. Now, this is all IMHO, of course. As you might notice, my personal morality tends to identify strongly with In Nomine's use of selflessness and selfishness as the ultimate roots of goodness and evil respectively. I agree with whoever it was who said that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. (As Moriah long ago pointed out, that is pretty much the stance taken in Catholic moral theology, to which religion both he and I subscribe.) So I'm curious what other people mean when they say "evil," and especially when they distinguish evil so carefully from "mere" selfishness. Stacy Stroud sstroud@uky.campus.mci.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:03:00 -0500 From: "Yeager, Alex" Subject: IN> AndCon and IN I was the resident MIB for AndCon last weekend in Toledo. My SJG events revolved around INWO and IN; thought I'd post a few ramblings on observations made. The interest level in IN was amazing; there were four actual games run (one by myself), and I also scheduled four introduction sessions (covering game basics, some canon history, and character generation). Even the intro sessions were well attended (the games were all either sellouts or near-sellouts). Many folks had already purchased the game and were curious for more info,... ...particularly on character generation. I had a char gen worksheet (if you can call 16 pages for only celestial chars a worksheet) to step through the process, and this seemed to be the piece most of the attendees were anxious to cover. (Note: this worksheet is NOT available until approved for personal use by SJG, so I can't pass along copies currently, so sorry). For those of you who GM at cons (and haven't been privy to the discussion on mib-l), think strongly about running a non-gaming intro session or two. You may get more response than you think. Janice Sellers was a guest of honor for Chaosium, and attended one of my intro sessions. Now, I took John K. at face value with his previous "pronounce as thou wilt" proclamation on this list, and invariably went with the "lazy" pronounciation by default (my degree is Nybbas-aligned; the linguistic path of least resistance seemed natural). However, after watching Janice wince a few times, I am eager to see her promised posting on pronounciations (after all, the point that most/all of these names have legitimate, documented genealogies/pronounciations was well taken). I'll be posting my con event as a scenario/seed to this list (and, with a bit more cleanup, elsewhere). With a smidge of tweaking, it would play marvelously for either an angelic or demonic group (though I required angelic for the event), and has some bits that should grab those with brightness controls full-up (and a good chuckle for others, too). Finally, if there's anyone else in the Toledo/Ann Arbor/Detroit area that I could use as a resource for the occasional scenario review, please drop me a line off-list. A big thank you goes out to Nana Yaw Ofori for assistance with this con; since I'm not "with group" at the moment (IN-wise), I'd appreciate anyone with an occasional moment to spare... Alex Yeager YeagerAW@Maritz.com MIB 0230/FoL/INWO Local 23 BOUNCE ALERT! Replies to my address may bounce; it IS a valid address! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:18 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> On Playing Evil >>>Have you ever been mad or frustrated at your job, boss or friend? Sure, we all have. Our instinct is to do something about the situation, fight or flight. Doing nothing--politely and civilly suppressing our feelings-- stresses us. Whether we kill characters in IN, murder simulated people in a computer game or hack and slash our shrubs and weeds, we're fighting. We're doing something in place of what we couldn't do before. We feel good because, in a socially and morally acceptable way, we're relieving the stress we build up by suppressing our urges to fight in real situations. People roleplay killing with glee because they can feel the stress draining from them with each kill.<<< Yes, but there are other ways to relieve stress. And I think there's a difference between playing an adventure game where you kill opponents presumably because they are "bad guys" and pretending to slaughter innocent people because you get off on playing evil. Frankly, I think even playing violent games where you're the good guy has an effect on your worldview....but I do it myself, so oh well. - -David (never claimed to be a saint) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 21:02:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Shadowcat Subject: Re: IN> Mark's vision of In Nomine On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, Dorothy Bixler wrote: > Dotti Michelle (Hell Sworn since 1991)- Donald and I can't be the only > Pagans around here. Nope, I am as well. Not a satanist, just a Pagan. Shadowcat All cats may look upon a king. No comment on the Queen ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:34:00 -0500 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> How I See Demons - Sidenote Donald G Bixler wrote: > > > - Em, Demon of Playing IN Backwards > > Hey! Them's fightin' Words. You're cutting in on my turf. ='p ;'} I still want to know: how do you fit the book on the turntable and get it to stay there? *g,d,r* tom t. [James is having nothing to do with things like this {points to the above}] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:16 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> On Playing Evil >>>To what? If to simulated violence, I don't mind. If you mean to real violence, I don't think that we are an unusually violent age. If anything, the media has helped expose the horrors of violence and made us take a more serious attitude towards it.<<< I disagree. - -David (oh well) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:14 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> On Playing Evil >>>!!! I also play games where the P.C. gets wounded in combat, but I don't find *that* appealing. Indeed, most of my P.C.s live *horrible* lives that I would want no part of.<<< Presumably you don't TRY to get your character wounded, and don't roleplay your character enjoying it... >>>But let me leave that aside for a moment. Even if playing someone evil *did* say something bad about the player, this doesn't show that playing someone evil is bad.<<< I am not saying it should be forbidden or that it means playing evil characters makes you a sociopath. I HAVE played evil characters myself....but increasingless less as I get older and become a little troubled, frankly, by how jaded I have become. >>>What did a Vampire player ever do to you to make you so concerned?<<< Never said any such thing. But then, I tend to avoid the overly-serious WoD players. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:12 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> On Playing Evil >>>This partially covers it. Catharsis through fake violence is a bit of a given. I enjoy wargames (not only for this reason, though...and I rarely play them these days, but that's more a time issue), I occasionally play really violent RPGs, and I did a solid half hour of sparring during open workout today. This is an easy and fun roleplaying scenario. I don't see people having a problem with "all the angels go kick some demonic butt" or the corollary.<<< However, this doesn't extend to the full spectrum of the discussion. Sure, I'm torqued off at that woman who sped up to hit me two weeks ago when I was crossing the street (true story...first time I'd ever seen someone consciously do that). I felt like smashing her car. Maybe, later on, I could have vented by having my Cherub pound a demon's head in with a tw- by-four. I don't think it's so pleasant if someone feels the need to relieve stress by roleplaying rape, torture[1], or other unpleasant action of choice (e.g. playing a Shedim...:)).<<< [etc] Well put, Alexander, that sums up a lot of my feelings nicely. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:10 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> On Playing Evil >>>He says it better than I could:<<< [George Carlin quote snipped} I did not say that media by itself creates a violent society. However, the issue is more complicated than that. There is a dynamic between society and pop culture that reflects both. It's true violent crimes are less common in Japan, but I would not say that their fondness for anime depicting schoolgirls being raped by monsters makes a healthy statement about their sexuality. (And bear in mind-- low rape statistics in Japan doesn't mean a low frequency of rape. Remember how difficult it was for a woman to report being raped in the U.S. twenty years ago or more? It's still far worse for a woman in Japan.) >>>Guess what - that part's in everybody. It's part of our animal heritage to kill and rape - it ensures survival.<<< We have the basic instincts for violence. That's not the same as *enjoying* it. Animals don't kill for pleasure, they kill out of necessity. And "rape" among animals doesn't involve the same dynamic as in humans. >>>If you've never fantasized about kicking the daylights out of some idiot who just cut you off, then you are in the minority, my friend. A very small minority.<<< Of course I have. The question is, how do I react to it? More importantly, let's suppose I *could* kick the daylights out of that idiot and get away with it. Should we encourage people to indulge in their violent impulses? - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 15:02:44 -0400 From: "C Lee Davis" Subject: Re: IN> IN in other settings Setting-wise, I've been running In Nomine in the 40th century, after Armageddon, for about 6 months now. For details, check out http://imagen.home.mindspring.com/fgs/ptb/ih_external.html. Generally, my story is about the struggles Heaven has to go through to re-establish Faith in a universe that has forgotten all about God, Lucifer, and the War. Needless to say, I am anxiously awaiting info on Khalid... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 15:35:37 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: Re: IN> White Wolf's Games vs. In Nomine At 1:57 AM -0600 10/4/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> >> Or do I have to get out the bullwhip and leather? >> > Oh, THAT'LL end the conversation. >> What, you humans *like* things like that? No, no, certainly not I..