From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Jan 15 00:52:02 1998 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 AAA23517 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:52:01 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id AAA02785 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:49:17 -0600 Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:49:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199801150649.AAA02785@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 #565 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 Thursday, January 15 1998 Volume 01 : Number 565 In this digest: Re: IN> Faith and Celestials IN> Soul Stealing Swords RE: IN> Faith & Celestials Re: IN> Who are you, anyway? Re: IN> Faith and Celestials IN> Faith & Celestials IN> Questions, apparently not frequently asked Re: White Wolf LARPS & Seraphim & Faith (Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry) Re: IN> Faith and Celestials IN> [FLUFF] Disturbance IN> vessel-less roles Re: IN> Malakim Vows IN> IN and college classes Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry (or Faith, if you will...) IN> remove from list Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry Re: IN> Malakim Vows Re: IN> Rule Call... Raphael (Re: IN> Faith & Celestials) Re: IN> Malakite and dissonance IN> remove from list Re: IN> vessel-less roles RE: Disturbance (Re: IN> Losing your wings?) Re: IN> Celestial Tongue (was Re: IN> Malakite and dissonance) IN> Disturbance Cheat Sheet Re: IN> Rule Call... Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry Re: IN> Who are you, anyway? RE: IN> Faith & Celestials IN> Who's God now? Re: IN> Who's God now? RE: IN> Faith & Celestials RE: IN> Faith & Celestials Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:51:56 +0100 From: d.ranzato@bpa.vnu.com Subject: Re: IN> Faith and Celestials But why has Faith such a profound effect on vampires? You're asking why things have a profound effect on vampires in the World of Darkness? You poor misguided person. A little miscommunication. I was writing about Vampires in general. In Folklore vampires are afraid for crucifixes, holy water and other items of Faith. This was because they were cursed by God and therefore they also could not stand the Light of Day. At least, that is what I always thought. Therefore, vampires would be very afraid of angels. Maybe a very old vampire is a threat to a young angel. But I think that any normal angel would (and should) have no trouble in destroying one of those pesky bloodsuckers. In the campaign that I run the touch of an angel has the same effect on a vampire as holy water or any other blessed item. Let those puny creatures of the night know that they are not demons and never will be. :-) Donato Ranzato ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:19:09 -0000 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: IN> Soul Stealing Swords > Is there anyone besides me who is now thinking of Elric's > [soul-stealing? soul-eating?] sword, Stormbringer? *laugh* Yes! Actually I am also thinking of a dagger I once made up that has notoriously appeared in a lot of campaigns of all sorts. Last known appearance was being toted by a hunter for a one-off Vampire scenario on the Lusitania ;-) (Not to give the ending away but.. it sank) I'll write these up briefly, just for interest (and nostalgia). The Ivory Daggers. Background: Allegedly there were originally three daggers although only 2 have ever been confirmed as sighted. In appearance they are simple ivory daggers with carved hilts. Anyone who is sensitive to such things can work out that they radiate some kind of power. Origins: Unknown. Assumed ancient Egypt. Power: The three compose a soul-dagger, a face-dagger and a heart-dagger. Only the first two have ever been witnessed in use. The third may only be a myth. In game terms, these will be extremely noisy. There may be some sorcerous ritual requirements to preparing the daggers before using them. Soul-Dagger: When someone is stabbed with the dagger, their soul is drawn into it's hilt. The dagger can store one soul at a time, so the 'old' soul will be displaced. If mortal, it will go to wherever dead souls go. If immortal/ celestial it will end up inside the slain body (which can then reanimate) -- ie. mortal souls have such a strong tie to their bodies that they cannot survive in a foreign one. A body which is left soul-less will rot at the usual rate (unless in a body bag or something). The soul in the dagger can attempt to communicate. Face-dagger: When someone is stabbed with the dagger the carvings in its hilt shift to model the victim's face. The face which was previously on the hilt is shifted to the stabbed corpse, as are any other body alterations. This is the one which has been used most often -- its a perfect way to mask who the murdered party was. If the victim can somehow survive the death-wound (ie. through being significantly tougher than mortal or regeneration) then the new body 'sticks'. Heart-Dagger: The hilt is carved into a visage of a hideous beast.It is rumoured that if anyone dares to use it to commit suicide, it will drain away the blackness from their soul and leave it spotless, and the beast's face becomes even more terrifying. Obviously there is no proof and someone who was undoubtedly damned would have to find it, kill themselves and see if they ended up in heaven or not, to see if this worked. jo - --------------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G.K. Chesterton http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:33:07 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: RE: IN> Faith & Celestials > > I'm sorry, but as a seeker of information about things like > there, I'm curious. Raphael's listed as a Cherub in the APG-where is he > listed as otherwise? > He's a *what*? A Cherub? *blink* Woah. Maybe my translation of the Book of Tobit is different then the author's, but I'd like to know where that came from and what the logic is. I realize my conception of the guy has got to be different then other conceptions for various reasons, but I'm having serious problems buying that. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:49:18 EST From: DSChenin Subject: Re: IN> Who are you, anyway? At 10:41 PM -0500 1/13/98, Perry M. Lloyd wrote: >> > Question Everybody.. If you were a non-mundane thing in >> > the In Nomine universe, what would you be?? Angel of Gormet Cooking Mecurian of Eli in the service of Novalis Obsidian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 09:25:21 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Faith and Celestials People have been offering various definitions of faith, often more than one at a time. I think that "faith," like "love" and many other short, common, important words, has several definitions. It seems to me that "faith" has two "poles" that most of its definitions fall between. One pole is firm belief, often in the face of a lack of evidence or contrary evidence. Another is loyalty, as when one speaks of a faithful wife, husband, friend, servant, or dog. Faith as belief would not be much of an issue for celestials, though people have pointed out how they could be agnostic if they tried hard. Faith as mere belief without the question of loyalty is also not very important in the sphere of morals and action, even for celestials, as the disciple James pointed out: "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that -- and shudder." -- James 2:19 I think faith as belief is a secondary development of the idea, based on the fact that, if you don't believe God exists, you certainly aren't going to go on to trust in His love or be loyal to Him and obedient (except by coincidence) to His will. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 09:43:53 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Faith & Celestials >>>I'm sorry, but as a seeker of information about things like there, I'm curious. Raphael's listed as a Cherub in the APG-where is he listed as otherwise?<<< Check the APG errata. TPTB decided to make Raphael an Elohite instead. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 09:43:51 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Questions, apparently not frequently asked >>>Here's a Horror: Strength 12, Large Weapon/6, Talisman/6 (big sword w/ Large Weapon/6) Let's see, with Autosuccess, that sword does its normal Power +4 plus 12!? Hell yeah! Now THAT'S a Celestial not to piss off, that's all I have to say... [Total Power +16, baby... "Let's go."]<<< Yup. That very concept is mentioned in the Liber Reliquarum, as an example of Things You Probably Don't Want To Let Players Get Away With. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 09:14:46 -0600 (CST) From: Bolie Williams IV Subject: Re: White Wolf LARPS & Seraphim & Faith (Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry) On Wed, 14 Jan 1998, Casca wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 1998 gibsonc@NKU.EDU wrote: > > > isn't faith beleif without knowledge? if so, then angels don't have faith > > that God is real, they truly know it. Faith can mean many things. I have faith in my friends. This doesn't mean that I don't know if they exist, it means that I know that if I'm in trouble, they'll be there for me. My impression from reading the New Testament is that the people of the time felt like they knew God existed. That wasn't a question and had nothing to do with Faith. What they had Faith in was that they would be forgiven their sins and loved by God no matter what. This is the kind of Faith that Angels can have. Also, it seems to me that whatever advantages Faith may confer, True Knowledge would confer more. If you *knew* with absolute certainty that there was a God and a Heaven and that Heaven was awesomely wonderful wouldn't you act a little differently? Bolie IV ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bolie Williams IV bolie@io.com http://www.io.com/~bolie/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:06:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Faith and Celestials > But why has Faith such a profound effect on vampires? > You're asking why things have a profound effect on vampires in the World > of Darkness? You poor misguided person. > A little miscommunication. I was writing about Vampires in > general. In Folklore vampires are afraid for crucifixes, holy water and > other items of Faith. This was because they were cursed by God and > therefore they also could not stand the Light of Day. At least, that is > what I always thought. My apologies. Certainly it's good folklore. > Therefore, vampires would be very afraid of angels. Maybe a very old > vampire is a threat to a young angel. In WOD, most very old Vampires are definite threats to the world in general. (By very old, I mean 900+ years old.) But I think that any normal angel > would (and should) have no trouble in destroying one of those pesky > bloodsuckers. In both In Nomine and WOD, that wouldn't be an issue. I know the demon templates in such as The Storyteller's Handbook to the Sabbat are much stronger than any vampire under about 200 years, and those are minor named demons. > In the campaign that I run the touch of an angel has the same effect on a > vampire as holy water or any other blessed item. Let those puny creatures > of the night know that they are not demons and never will be. :-) > In In Nomine? Em...none? Which game is this? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 11:39:40 -0500 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: IN> [FLUFF] Disturbance >But I could easily see a GM deciding that something *that* loud >should cause a few rounds of stunning, sort of like Thunder does. On a note of lesser magnitude, in a recent In Nomine session, I had three of my players go Celestial (to beat up a Shedite), then summon a Superior, all behind the Celestial Song of Shields. After it was all over, they stood outside the local Divine Tether (a couple blocks away) to listen to the fireworks... -Loki (remember the wave effect -- one person going celestial, now two, now three, now three and a Superior being summoned...) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 11:50:17 -0500 From: bruce dykes Subject: IN> vessel-less roles At 04:25 AM 1/14/98 -0600, you wrote: > >A role is linked to a human vessel. (p.43). It is the *reality* of >the vessel. If there's no vessel, but there is a persona, then the >role is 0 (it's blatantly not real) but it's influence could still be >great. > pg 53 of the AGP says that some Kyrios have roles that can performed anonymously, the example given is that of a computer consultant who communicates solely by email... A role is an identity, with all the associated documentation. A level 1 role would have only a photo ID still warm from the laser printer by the time it goes into the laminator. A level 6 role would have an adoption certificate, high school diploma, yearbooks, drivers license, photos in the hometown newspaper, etc. Any role is real, that's what makes it a role. Take the example of Charlie from "Charlie's Angels". Quite possibly a Kyrio of Jean, given that we only hear from him through that speaker phone... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 12:08:09 -0500 (EST) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim Vows David Edelstein mentions: >>>>I imagine it would really depend on the oath. For example, if a >demonic plot is uncovered to assassinate the pope within the next 72 >hours, then the oath "I shall vigilantly stand guard for the next 4 >days" is a perfectly honorable vow. "I shall hunt this foe for a week >is weasily, as a malakim's honor would be tainted by giving up the >chase.<<< > >True Malakim vows are permanent, though. A Malakite could swear to do >something on a temporary basis, and he might take that promise as seriously >as he takes all his other oaths. But unless he has a *true* oath like >"Always keep my word," I would not impose dissonance if he ends up breaking >his "temporary oath". And I most certainly would not allow him to LOSE >dissonance (as described in the APG) by taking new oaths of limited >duration. Now that the APG has been brought into the discussion, perhaps we should recall that it says in black and white that any Malakite oath of limited duration *must be replaced* by another oath as soon as its term has expired. While the example they gave was "Slay all dragons" now that Uriel has already exterminated them, presumably any oath with a built-in time-clause fits that category as well. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 12:42:46 -0500 (EST) From: Casca Subject: IN> IN and college classes I have a funny story that was just related to me by one of my players. He had just come from a class in which the teacher required the students to write their names on folded 8x10 index cards and place them on the front of their desks. Across the front row of the class were the names Marc -- David -- Michael -- Dominic. The class? Comparative Religions..... - -- Casca, Seraph of Archives (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 09:45:42 -0800 (PST) From: Querent Subject: Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry (or Faith, if you will...) Faith can not be defined as logical. Game or no game, faith defies logic. Logic is similar to mathematics. If A is true, then B must be true, C is false, and D is still undefined. The problem is that it starts with the word "if". Any logic professor will agree, a logical argument must always be founded upon a given postulate which can neither be proven nor disproven. Without imperical data to support it either way, how then does one determine if the foundation is indeed correct? One makes a leap of faith. Descarte's "I think therefore I am" is a leap of faith. "Electromagnetism and gravity are the only forces in the universe" is a leap of faith made by scientists who simply have witnessed no phenomena to refute this. When attacked, every logical argument must back itself with a foundation of some sort. And when the foundation is attacked, the only response can be "I choose to believe that it is true." This is why an atheist and a devout religious follower can never sufficiently argue a case strong enough to refute the beliefs of the other. They start with diametricly opposing postulates, and then expand upon them. - ---MarkDEddy wrote: > Faith, in In Nomine is not an emotional response. It is a logical, reasoned > approach in response to an angel's unceasing awareness of the presence of God. == --Querent USELESS FACT: The Seattle edition of Monopoly sets Boeing as Boardwalk, and Starbucks as Park Place. Microsoft, a leading business in the area and the target of many monopoly accusations does not appear on the game. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:28:14 -0500 From: Art vanMeeteren Subject: IN> remove from list remove from list ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 18:51:31 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry At 02:05 14/01/98 -0500, you wrote: > >>I think that honour might well be illogical if you think about it for long >>enough (pragmatic and honorable don't really seem to go together to me -- I >>s'pose Laurence must have Elohim.. or maybe not). Also good taste isn't >>logical ;-) > > I'm not sure that pragmatism is a good measure of logic. Ask a >logician what the practical use of her art is, and she'll get pretty testy, >often enough. In addition, the question of "practical for what" needs >attention. If a Malakite isn't honourable, she can't acheive her goals. I don't know. If her main goal is 'eradicate evil' then being honorable isn't necessary to accomplishing that. It /is/ necessary for her to be true to herself.. but that needn't apply to a non-Malakite. >Not being honourable is impractical. Examples? :-) I can see it might be useful to cultivate a trustworthy reputation but apart from that... > I'd further argue that good taste is more logical than bad taste. ;-) > I agree. But then I thought Spiceworld was a cool film! jo ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:12:22 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Malakim Vows At 8:10 PM -0500 1/13/98, David Edelstein wrote: >True Malakim vows are permanent, though. A Malakite could swear to do >something on a temporary basis, and he might take that promise as seriously >as he takes all his other oaths. But unless he has a *true* oath like >"Always keep my word," I would not impose dissonance if he ends up breaking >his "temporary oath". And I most certainly would not allow him to LOSE >dissonance (as described in the APG) by taking new oaths of limited >duration. [Note that the dissonance-loss trick is mentioned on one of the the sample-segments on the web! http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/Angelic/excerpts.html#lk3 ] [Now summoning up energy to update the INC...] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:04:11 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Rule Call... At 7:52 PM -0800 1/13/98, bruce dykes wrote: >What's the highest level of a Role that doesn't have an associated vessel? > >I was reading the Kyriotate chapter in the APG, and it mentioned that some >Kyrios may have roles that could be performed anonymously. [...] >So, what's the highest level a role can have without an associated vessel? >I would say 4...but is there an official ruling... I don't think there is, and am not sure that the *Role* couldn't be up to a 6. You see, you don't *know* that I'm not a Kyrio, and those pictures of me just my favorite host... But you all know that I exist... Status would have to be pretty low, though, since to some extent, it's how much one is in the public eye... (Or would it? I suppose a Kyrio might go for "Pro Football Star" and just hop around a team. Scary.) I think it really is a GM call. Kyriotates are prone to that, since they are one of the most complex Choirs. [Now summoning up energy to update the INC...] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:17:11 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Raphael (Re: IN> Faith & Celestials) At 8:10 PM -0500 1/13/98, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>The reference to him being a Cherub, in the APG, is errata. *Bad* >errata, no donut. <<< > >No, Khalid is correctly listed as an Elohite. It's Raphael who was >errata'd. (And that's not my fault, they changed that on me *after* the >book had already gone to the printer!) Ah, okay. (I think I caught Khalid as something else at least once, though...) I knew it was some Cherub-Elohite confusion. *sigh* Still annoying. At 5:21 PM -0800 1/13/98, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: > I'm sorry, but as a seeker of information about things like >there, I'm curious. Raphael's listed as a Cherub in the APG-where is he >listed as otherwise? Where is he listed as an Elohite? He's not, yet. But there is some material that works much better with him being an Elohite -- he knew that Legion was going to take everything out, and that there was only one way, one *utterly self-sacrificing* way, to take the Demon Prince of Corruption out. And he did it, like a good Elohite should. The material would lose a lot of impact, if it were just him doing that Cherub thang. [Now summoning up energy to update the INC...] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:24:52 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Malakite and dissonance At 9:28 AM +0000 1/14/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >I discovered yesterday that it had been in Dublin ( I presume >it was bought in Dublin anyway) for a couple of days before being sold >out. Given the speed with which both the places which sell rpgs in Dublin >get new stock, I confidently expect it to be in tomorrow, or maybe next >year, or not at all. Ugh. SJG Mail-order? >> (I've forgotten precisely which thing covered in the APG was in >> here... Email me privately with a reminder, and I'll try to >> summerize a little...?) >> >So have I, and I've been deleting most of the stuff I get on the mailing >list because I'm intimidated by the prospect of having more than 500 >messages in my old-folder. I know what you mean. :-p Oh, well. It was probably about Malakim. If you can think of any Malakim questions, email me and i'll see what I can do... >> Saying that the points spent are the "default" vessel level is >> certainly one simple way to deal with it. >> >Ah...relying on the GM's generosity. Loads of fun. Thanks for clarifying >it, though. Different things work for different campaigns. Someday, maybe there'll be a Pyramid article or something for GMs... [Now summoning up energy to update the INC...] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:35:43 -0500 From: Art vanMeeteren Subject: IN> remove from list remove from list ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:50:32 -0500 From: johnk@ascc01.ascc.lucent.com (John Karakash - Lucent ASCC) Subject: Re: IN> vessel-less roles > >A role is linked to a human vessel. (p.43). It is the *reality* of > >the vessel. If there's no vessel, but there is a persona, then the > >role is 0 (it's blatantly not real) but it's influence could still be > >great. > > > pg 53 of the AGP says that some Kyrios have roles that can performed > anonymously, the example given is that of a computer consultant who > communicates solely by email... Yup. That was my contribution (and matches a character I have...) An 'anonymous' hacker can be as deeply embedded in human society as any random shmo you run into on the street. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:11:12 -0500 From: Jack of Spades Subject: RE: Disturbance (Re: IN> Losing your wings?) On Tuesday, January 13, 1998 17:25, Elizabeth McCoy [SMTP:emccoy@nh.ultranet.com] wrote: > At 8:00 AM -0500 1/13/98, Brandon Quina wrote: > > >Anyways, that reminds me.. What kinda disturbance would Mitrah cause > >if her little scheme to destroy the Catacombs goes through and she > >DOES destroy her tether and cause a huge earthquake?? > > Are we back to the "Are there celestials on the moon?" questions > again? > Actually, the shattering disturbance that set this off happened out in the asteroid belt... about 2000 years and and unknown number of light years from the main In Nomine setting. But that's another point altogether... Lee Davis * Fantasy Geographic Society * Web & game design jack.of.spades@mindspring.com * http://imagen.home.mindspring.com/fgs/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 17:26:24 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Tongue (was Re: IN> Malakite and dissonance) On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, York H. Dobyns wrote: > But: is it that the angelic language cannot frame statements that are > *false to fact*, or that it cannot be used to make statements *that the > speaker disbelieves*? I see possible headaches either way. In the former, > angels have a sure-fire method of identifying any demon: upon encountering > a suspect, go find a private place, spend 2 Essence to go Celestial, > and attempt to say "So-and-so is a demon" in the angelic tongue. > In the latter, Balseraphs can still lie in the angelic tongue, since > they hoodwink themselves into believing their own lies. Since the latter doesn't really bother me, I vote for that one. :) C'mon...you've gotta give the demons some loopholes; they're DEMONS. Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Married to Rev. Unibomber on 11/15/96 - be jealous ;) Meow! And finally, a special message to anyone who thinks I give a damn... \|/ ____ \|/ ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 17:44:54 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: IN> Disturbance Cheat Sheet This isn't any kind of revised rules or simplification. It's just the normal IN disturbance rules, in quick-and-easy calculator-friendly formulae, for everyone who wants to use the rules (instead of winging it) but wishes they were easier. DISTURBANCE IN THE SYMPHONY A Quick Reference for Detection and Range For the formulae below, "F" is the Celestial Forces of the Celestial trying to detect the disturbance, and "D" is the bonus to the disturbance detection roll. CHANCE OF DETECTION The chance for a Celestial to detect a disturbance at a certain range in yards is: Perception + D + 1 - (Distance / F x D) On a calculator, start with 0, then: 1. Subtract the distance (in yards). 2. Divide by the Celestial Forces. 3. Divide by the Disturbance bonus. 4. Add Perception. 5. Add the Disturbance bonus. 6. Add 1. Round down. That is the target number for detecting this disturbance. RANGE The range (in yards) at which a disturbance can be detected by a Celestial with a target number of TN is: (Perception + D + 1 - TN) x F x D On a calculator, add Perception and the Disturbance bonus and 1, subtract the target number, multiply by Celestial Forces, then multiply by the Disturbance bonus. EXAMPLES A demon with 4 Celestial Forces and Perception 6 is standing 200 yards away when a 9 Force angel enters the Corporeal realm (+9 Disturbance bonus). He'd roll against (6 + 9 + 1 - (200 / 4 x 9), which is (16 - 200/36), which is (16 - 5.55), which is 10. He wants to summon his Superior (a +20 Disturbance bonus), but first he wants to run far enough away that this new Celestial won't hear it. He's guessing that the angel has 4 Celestial Forces and Perception 9 (guessing high to be on the safe side), and wants its target number to be 1 or less (i.e., impossible) to detect the big disturbance. The range for that target number is ((9 + 20 + 1 - 1) x 4 x 20), which is (29 x 80), which is 2320 yards, about one and a third miles away! Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Married to Rev. Unibomber on 11/15/96 - be jealous ;) Meow! And finally, a special message to anyone who thinks I give a damn... \|/ ____ \|/ ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:38:19 -0800 (PST) From: Querent Subject: Re: IN> Rule Call... Playing devil's advocate (a balseraph of the game): King Arthur can not be proven to ever have existed, but he's got an awful lot of status. The Unabomber could easily have been a Shedim's role. (He jumps from host to host, each time sending packages from a new location. It keeps the authorities guessing about suspects, but the MO is always the same...) And if you won't accept that: The entire inner circle of the Illuminati are an alliance of outcasts and remnants, each with unimaginable resources and an incredible sphere of influence. Status of 6. Not famous, but then, status does not HAVE to include recognition, merely influence. - ---Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> Status would have to be pretty low, though, since to some extent, > it's how much one is in the public eye... > == --Querent USELESS FACT: The Seattle edition of Monopoly sets Boeing as Boardwalk, and Starbucks as Park Place. Microsoft, a leading business in the area and the target of many monopoly accusations does not appear on the game. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:43:26 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry > > I'd further argue that good taste is more logical than bad > > taste. ;-) > > I agree. But then I thought Spiceworld was a cool film! Say it ain't so, Jo! The Spice Girls simply worry me. I don't know which worries more, though: the thought that they are just acting that dumb because it's what they have been told to do, or the thought that they could really be that dumb... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "I want an Internet. Can I have one of those?" - One of the Spice Girls, at an AOL press conference ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:43:26 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Who are you, anyway? > Question Everybody: If you were a non-mundane thing in the In > Nomine universe, what would you be?? Nathanael ("gift of God") Elohim of Creation in service to Lightning currently working for Zephan(/being worked over by), the Cherub of Unfinished Ideas (Creation, in service to Dreams) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "Have you ever noticed...whenever God needed a killing...he sent an angel. Have you ever wondered what a creature like that must be like? Your whole existence praising your God but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?" - The Prophecy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:43:26 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: RE: IN> Faith & Celestials > Woah. Maybe my translation of the Book of Tobit is different then > the author's, but I'd like to know where that came from and what the > logic is. I realize my conception of the guy has got to be different > then other conceptions for various reasons, but I'm having serious > problems buying that. Well, he's been errata-ed. Two questions, though: 1) What would you say he was? 2) Book of Tobit? I'm assuming it's not one of the books in the Bible - what is it, and is there any way to look at it online? (Why pay money for a book when I'm already paying $15 a month to rent access to thousands?) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "Have you ever noticed...whenever God needed a killing...he sent an angel. Have you ever wondered what a creature like that must be like? Your whole existence praising your God but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?" - The Prophecy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:43:26 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: IN> Who's God now? > Personally, I'm beginning to think that God is another case of Dread > Pirate Roberts syndrome.... Hmmm - that could make for an interesting background piece: some of the superiors have been, at one time or another, God. Yves was the first (at the Creation, and shortly thereafter), followed by Kronos (who became so dissillusioned at the Fall that he Fell himself). Gabriel was for several thousand years (And the bush burned, and yet was not consumed), until the conception of Christ. Eli was for a while ("Eli, eli..." My god, why hast though forsaken me?), but stepped down soon after recalling Uriel. So who is God now? Who, indeed? Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "Have you ever noticed...whenever God needed a killing...he sent an angel. Have you ever wondered what a creature like that must be like? Your whole existence praising your God but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?" - The Prophecy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:03:55 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Who's God now? > > Personally, I'm beginning to think that God is another case of Dread > > Pirate Roberts syndrome.... > > Hmmm - that could make for an interesting background piece: some of > the superiors have been, at one time or another, God. Yves was the > first (at the Creation, and shortly thereafter), followed by Kronos > (who became so dissillusioned at the Fall that he Fell himself). > Gabriel was for several thousand years (And the bush burned, and yet > was not consumed), until the conception of Christ. Eli was for a > while ("Eli, eli..." My god, why hast though forsaken me?), but > stepped down soon after recalling Uriel. > > So who is God now? Who, indeed? > > Kobal. :) Well, that's sort of how my week has been, really. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:02:57 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: RE: IN> Faith & Celestials > > Woah. Maybe my translation of the Book of Tobit is different then > > the author's, but I'd like to know where that came from and what the > > logic is. I realize my conception of the guy has got to be different > > then other conceptions for various reasons, but I'm having serious > > problems buying that. > > Well, he's been errata-ed. Two questions, though: > > 1) What would you say he was? I made him into a Mercurian for my game's purposes, for various reasons. According to the Zohar (Moses de Leon), Raphael was sent to Earth to look over man's maladies. He's been said to have delivered the Book of Raziel to Noah, and to have healed Jacob's leg after his tussle with the unknown Angel (Dictionary of Angels - Gustav Davidson). He is the 'sociable' angel. He is the 'friendly' angel. He tells jokes when and where he shows up (but I don't think in the Book of Enoch). In Tobit, he teaches, and gets uncomfortable when people bow to him when they learn who he really is. Most of his appearances have him at least eating dinner with another human. He usually has a pilgrim staff and appears as a normal guy in most of his images. His hair is even good. How he ever got to be something else in Canon is beyond me. Maybe I've simply done more research on him because he's necessary for my universe, and I'm just getting fond of the guy. ** Amusingly enough, because Raphael shows up in Enoch I,22 as a guide to Hell, he gets taken down as a demon in some literature. Did I use this? Maybe. > > 2) Book of Tobit? I'm assuming it's not one of the books in the > Bible - what is it, and is there any way to look at it online? (Why > pay money for a book when I'm already paying $15 a month to rent > access to thousands?) The Book of Tobit is in the collection of Apocryphia. It's, I believe, the first real appearance of Raphael anywhere. He goes on a pilgramage to Media with Tobit, to go deal with Tobit's to-be wife, Sarah, who is possessed by the demon Asmodeus. Tobit and Tobias and the rest do not know that Raphael is an angel until he comes out, says it, and goes 'Celestial'. He even had a Role as Azaruah, son of Hananiah. Raphael comes across as a teacher, a healer, and an all around fun guy. He doesn't seem to have the normal Angel problems with humans. He is not emotionless or restrained (Elohite). And considering he shoved Tobit into the bridal chamber with a demon, saying "Hey, no biggee" he's no Cherub. Go read it for yourself and come to your own conclusions: http://www.inform.umd.edu/EdRes/ReadingRoom/HistoryPhilosophy/ Apocrypha/book-of-tobit Go back a link and you can get the books of Judas Maccabees. Mmmmm... Maccabees. ** Another aside, which amused me to no end. Tobit 3:8 reads "For she [Sarah] had been married to seven husbands, and the wicked demon Asmodeus had killed each of them before they had been with her as was customary for wives." Tobit 8:3 reads "...so repelled the demon that he fled to the remotest parts of Egypt. But Raphael followed him, and at once bound him there hand and foot." Go Raph. Interestingly enough, I believe this is the first point where I have totally disagreed with canon, period. And I doubt I'll budge any time soon. I just absolutely don't understand the author's logic, or where it came from. - - Em How can you say, "We are wise and the law of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pens of the scribes has made it into a lie? - Jeremiah 8:8 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 05:18:59 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: RE: IN> Faith & Celestials At 20:43 14/01/98 +0000, you wrote: > >Well, he's been errata-ed. Two questions, though: > > >2) Book of Tobit? Its Apocrypha -- I found a copy online at http://web2.airmail.net/webchap/apoc/TOB.HTML. From what I remember of it, Cherub would have been quite appropriate >;) (he was sent to look after Tobit and see him through his adventures, after all). I think self-sacrifice should be a noble story whoever does it. jo ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 23:39:09 -0500 From: Ni Ke Hsin Subject: Re: Re: Re: IN> In Nomine Jewelry >> I'm not sure that pragmatism is a good measure of logic. Ask a >>logician what the practical use of her art is, and she'll get pretty testy, >>often enough. In addition, the question of "practical for what" needs >>attention. If a Malakite isn't honourable, she can't acheive her goals. > >I don't know. If her main goal is 'eradicate evil' then being honorable >isn't necessary to accomplishing that. It /is/ necessary for her to be true >to herself.. but that needn't apply to a non-Malakite. But the malakite loses her abilities to fight evil if she's not honourable. In fact, she starts becoming evil herself. So that isn't practical for her. Being honourable is often very practical towards the end of liking oneself. Not always, sadly. I haven't seen Spiceworld, so I have no opinion about the logic involved in liking it. Ni Ke Hsin ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #565 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.