From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jan 27 08:24:04 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 IAA16561 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:24:04 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id HAA14585 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 07:46:35 -0600 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 07:46:35 -0600 Message-Id: <199801271346.HAA14585@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 #595 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 Tuesday, January 27 1998 Volume 01 : Number 595 In this digest: Re: IN> Celestial Song of Motion question Re: IN> Ugly Vessels IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition IN> What Would You Be? (Austin Finds Out Who He Really Is) Re: IN> Upside Down Re: IN> Angelic Words Re: Canon Doubt And Uncertainty (Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Re: IN> Beth's Princess of Nitpicking Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man IN> Sloth RE: IN> Fallen Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man Re: IN> Re: Sophia Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man IN> Question Re: IN> Re: Sophia Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back Re: IN> Upside Down Re: IN> Prophecy II Re: IN> Buddhist In Nomine RE: IN> Fallen Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back Re: IN> Fallen Re: IN> Fallen IN> Another NPC Re: IN> Canon Doubt and Uncertainty Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 21:44:07 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Song of Motion question On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Michael Nutt wrote: > A few questions on how people would handle this in their own games... > > First, what happens if the singer attempts to teleport to a spot that he > doesn't get a high enough CD to get to? Does he get partway to his > destination, or does it just fizzle? Since your skill level with the Song > gives you a *range* of distances, I'm sure that this ought to at least be a > possible occurrence... I always wait until after the roll to 'officially' ask the player where he wants to be. He can then choose any location within range. > Second, the character is allowed to teleport himself and some extra > weight... but what if he'd rather just teleport another person, and stay > right where he is? Should that count as extra weight, and just require a > bunch more Essence to power? It's pretty clear that the description > envisions celestials using it on items that may or may not be held by others. (All IMHO, of course, as I understand the rules.) The initial 2 essence covers the Celestial and some equipment (10 x CelF...let's use 40 pounds here as an example); each extra 30 pounds costs 1 essence. So for 2 essence, a 180 pound angel could teleport away with 40 pounds of stuff. If he instead wanted to teleport something nearby to him, he could teleport 40 pounds of stuff for 2 essence, NOT 220 pounds! So teleporting your 185 friend a few miles away would cost 7 essence total. > Third... the destination must be someplace on Earth that the singer has > been before. Could this mean inside a particular vehicle... or just the > location in three dimensions that the vehicle was occupying at some point in > time? For example, could you teleport someone into the middle of the > approach pattern at your local airport, and just hope he's got Wings (or > hope he *doesn't*, if you're trying to kill him...)? Or instead, could you > send him into seat 13-F on TWA Flight 7704, wherever that aircraft might be > right now? I'd say if he knows where the plane is, it's cool to say 'onto the plane'; otherwise, unless he has a way of knowing just where that plane is, he can't do it. Cherubim have an easier time at this, of course. :) 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: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 21:46:52 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Ugly Vessels On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Nana Yaw Ofori wrote: > 1) These points aren't somehow quantized into Role levels or Vessel > levels: If you have a Vessel/3 with Charisma-2 on it, the combination only > costs you five points, rather than 6. It simply means that the net cost of > a Vessel, its Role, and its Charisma can never be less than 0. Rather than 9, you mean. Yes. > 2) By the letter, if not by the spirit, of the rules, this would be > legal on a starting character: Vessel/1: Ugly (-2) Human (O points), > Vessel/1: Ugly (-2) Sparrow (0 [points), Vessel/1: Ugly (-2) Dolphin (0 > points), Vessel/1: Ugly (-2) Mouse (0 points), etc, ad infinitum. The way I play it, you have to pay the minimum for a Vessel/1. I.e., the cost of Vessel + Role CANNOT go below 3 points. Anything else is way too open to abuse. 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: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 21:47:42 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition Well, a friend and I have just started a tenative In Nomine: Hindu Tradition. Since _The Marches_ had a significant *lack* of description of the Gods that over 900 million people follow (and they're quite good about it for the most part, I'm told), we decided to have a whack at it. At first, as we compared the Judeo/Christian duelistic viewpoint with Hindu's NON-dualist view-point (GOOD versus EVIL? Not quite...), I was tempted to just chuck them into the Marches. Naturally, my friend Madhu was not satisfyied with this answer. Right now, the path we are taking is rather simple. The Hindu gods do not stand apart fron the Archangels of Heaven. * Eli => Brahma. The times of great creation is over, Brahma wanders the earth perhaps, setting things in motion which need to be set in motion * Gabriel => Siva/Shiva. A destroyer and punisher. The fact that Gabriel was present for those two "births" has great implications. * Yves => Vishnu. The maintainer, the conserver. The parallel isn't perfect, but neither is life. The Hindu gods were never purged from Earth, since they were Archangels as well! As for the many aspects of each God, there are many opportunities for many worded angels. As the world has grown smaller and the demons have been doing some of their dirty work in India, Siva and Vishu have been working to purge them from among their peoples. And with the loss of followers to Hell, conflict with Hell has become unavoidable. Anyway, just a pet project. We'll see what happens. If anyone else has already started stuff like this, please let me know. I'd be interested in seeing your stuff. - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Check out the PBEM In Nomine: Soldiers of Linn webpage! "And all the time the joke is that the word 'mine' in its fully possessive sense cannot be uttered by a human being about anything. In the long run either Our Father or the Enemy will say 'mine' of each thing that exits, and specially of each man." -Screwtape (from The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:49:55 -0600 (CST) From: "Austin G. Loomis" Subject: IN> What Would You Be? (Austin Finds Out Who He Really Is) As I've mentioned to Beth, I've finally decided I wouldn't in fact be a Kyrio or an Ofanite. I'd be a slightly dissonant, possibly even Outcast, Elohite of Judgment. If I managed to Fall without noticing, I'd be a Habbie of Dark Humor. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:51:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Austin G. Loomis" Subject: Re: IN> Upside Down Somebody described Redneck's "Upside Down" Superiors as the "Bizarro version" of the Archangels and Demon Princes. This is incorrect. As any sufficiently dedicated comix maven can tell you, they are in fact the Earth-3 versions. Austin G. "Or maybe I'm a Habbie of Nitpicking" Loomis, MiSTie #84029 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 21:56:22 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Angelic Words >Neel Krishnaswami wrote: >> Anyway, I felt kind of leery on this point since part of the >> Christian dogma I'm using says that everyone gets perfected after >> death, and that makes it hard to tell saints from anyone else. > >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the Catholic idea of >saints was that anyone who goes to heaven is, technically, a saint, >but *these* guys and gals *here* on the calendar are the ones we >have specific evidence for being in heaven -- i.e. the record of >their lives and works and at least three post mortem miracles and >whatever else the criteria are. I think it's worse than that -- *any* soul in Heaven is a saint, regardless of whether it's human or angelic. I think it's okay to take Michael as a confirmation name, for example. (Confirmation names are supposed to be a saint's name, right?) But yeah, for game purposes it's nice to have some sort of distinction; a human soul who serves on Earth after death probably is the one I'll end up using. - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:06:41 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: Canon Doubt And Uncertainty (Re: IN> By Any Other Name) On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > One of the things that I and Karakash are planning is to find all the > "rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty" and mark them as such > for future writers, etc. I don't promise to take every single one > of every list-member's pet mysteries -- but I'd be interested in > seeing *which* mysteries GMs prefered to keep to themselves... I've gotta ask... You ever gonna de-mystify Janus and Valefor? (I'd prefer that you didn't, personally... 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: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:19:17 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Beth's Princess of Nitpicking On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > >Hell's proofreaders, Lilim of Nitpicking can scan a document (at a number > >of 550-word pages per minute equal to their Ethereal Forces) and correct > >grammar, spelling, punctuation, word-choice and internal inconsistencies. > >Upon receipt of the corrected (or at least red-inked) material, the target > >owes the Lilim a Geas, level equal to the time she spent on it (round up), > > Time measured in what unit? Minutes, hours, days? Refer to the description of Geas, under Discords. Each Geas level represents a specific amount of time--the time a Geas would be expected to take. It seems that Beth is referring to those times. 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: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:41:12 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man >From: Emily Dresner > >> *My* Heaven's so bright ya gotta wear shades. > > Hmmm. > >> The trouble was that since there really weren't any good courses of >> action *even in principle*, PC angst became ridiculous, and everyone >> (players and characters) stopped taking things very seriously. This Is >> Bad(tm). > >It depends on how the Game Master decides to handle the angst. I believe >a little pain and philosophy is good for the soul, but too much and it >turns into a soap opera. There's got to be a balance there somewhere. Well, I had a good GM, but it's hard to care when your decisions don't matter at all. Angst arises from having to make a hard choice that will compromise something you love; if any choice you make will trash everything you love, then you get pissed, not angstful. Justin, my PC, relaxed a lot once he realized this, and grew a lot more interested in stylish violence and tacky one-liners than in trying to save the world. The surface of heroism, rather than the essence. Fun for a little while, but ultimately boring. >> So I decided that moral confusion requires a genuine good for the PCs >> to measure themselves against -- and come up short. That's why Heaven >> is so relentlessly good IMC. The archangels have real moral stature; >> no simple-minded fanaticism, no youthful naivete, a solid understanding >> that reasonable people can disagree even on the most basic points -- >> and they are still able to act, and live with themselves. >> >> *That's* the standard angel PCs have to live up to. Real holiness is a >> lot harder to roleplay than simple shades of grey. > >Since I'm in a _mood_, and on a Jung kick, this brings to mind a question >he posed (and man, can I not find the quote, so the words are mine): are >we to live out lives as Christ suggested, or are we to truly live as he >lived his? To truly live our lives as he his, we need to immerse >ourselves into this sort of neurotic frenzy of self proletyzing, working >one's way into the madness of martyrdom. It probably depends on who your Christ is. Judaean loony who lived in the opening years of the Empire, or the sinless Son of God who freely chose to die for mankind's salvation? Though it occurs to me that either way the answer is "not the way he lived," since on the one you don't want to emulate him and on the other you can't, not on the essential level. >Absolute good is actually a relative, and making everything the smurfs >dilutes some of the gameplay. The Good of Jean, for example, is not the >Good of Eli, and not the Good of Dominic. None of which (well, maybe Eli) >can really answer the above question of how one is to live one's life - >with the lip service to God and being a good neighbor, or to be good in >sacrificing one's life for God himself with no real expectation of an >answer, or even understanding. Well, that's what makes the challenge of being holy so hard. How can you try to live in a holy fashion when you can't even come to a clear idea of what good is? The only answer is you do your best and take your lumps as they come. Doing evil is easy. It's easy to understand the moral tunnel vision of someone who could order the massacre of a Vietnamese village, or to feel the comforting certainty that faith carried to fanaticism can provide, or to see how much easier it is to simply not think about the moral questions when stealing from the till. (I've played PCs who've done all of that, or could have, btw.) Doing good; that's a different question. It's all about balance. You need the approval of your fellows to judge if you are helping them, but you cannot fall prey to sycophancy and hypocrisy. You must stand firm to principle while understanding when exceptions must be made. You must show compassion without tolerating evil. You must judge carefully, but you cannot fail to act. And there is no universal guide to telling you where to draw the lines. That's why there's more than one archangel, IMC. Eli and Gabriel are bad examples, since they are both slated to fall, but Novalis and Michael are both really really good people who disagree on a lot of really basic questions. (You know, I hope none of my potential players were reading that, if I told the truth.) - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:52:48 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: IN> Sloth Is there any canon on the name of the Prince of Sloth? Failing that, are there any good *serious* suggestions? I've read the Ralph piece in the INC, and it's funny, but not what I wanted. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:57:23 -0500 (EST) From: Casca Subject: RE: IN> Fallen On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Perry M. Lloyd wrote: > It's just Fallen, not The Fallen, I believe. Sorry, AA of Grammer on my > back. F***ing Seraphim... It's spelled Grammar, Perry. ;;;) (Sorry, but we Seraphim have to stick together...) - -- 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: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 23:10:59 -0500 (EST) From: Raoul Duke Subject: Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: a lot of really good things, but the one I'm most interested in right now is this: > And there is no universal guide to telling you where to draw the lines. > > That's why there's more than one archangel, IMC. Eli and Gabriel are bad > examples, since they are both slated to fall, but Novalis and Michael > are both really really good people who disagree on a lot of really basic > questions. (You know, I hope none of my potential players were reading > that, if I told the truth.) Now, why does Eli have such a bad rap? He's just doing the Mercurian thing, walking the Earth, getting to know the people. If he's hanging around the art crowd, he's arguably upholding his Word (at least one aspect) in a more hands-on fashion than most of the other Superiors. Does he have any actual duties to maintain? If so, then they must not be terribly essential, since Creation continues apace on Earth. If he's screwed up in your campaign, that's one thing, but I don't think there's anything in canon to indicate he's doing anything detrimental to Heaven. Irresponsible maybe, but not actually harmful. Joe - ------ Big Brother's watching? Learn to become Invisible. "We prefer our metaphysics with a money-back guarantee."-- Penn & Teller How I waste my time: http://acs1.bu.edu:8001/~arie/rpg.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:47:21 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Re: Sophia At 00:38 27/01/98 +0000, you wrote: >One rather mish-mashed tradition of Sophia's fall is that she takes on >human flesh, ends up working as a prostitute in Tyre (?) and is redeemed >by Simon Magus! This sounds an awful lot like the history of the Byzantine Empress Theodora (who started out life in a brothel in Lebanon and ended up married to Justinian and one of the most powerful women in the world). Shes one of my heroines and role models ;) jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:53:51 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man At 23:10 26/01/98 -0500, you wrote: > >If he's screwed up in your campaign, that's one thing, but I don't think >there's anything in canon to indicate he's doing anything detrimental to >Heaven. Irresponsible maybe, but not actually harmful. > > Well the book does say 'even his most ardent followers are afraid of what he has become.' I assume they woudln't be that worried without a good reason. Also Dominic isn't stupid. jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:07:45 -0500 (EST) From: Raoul Duke Subject: Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Jo Hart wrote: > At 23:10 26/01/98 -0500, you wrote: [re: Eli] > >If he's screwed up in your campaign, that's one thing, but I don't think > >there's anything in canon to indicate he's doing anything detrimental to > >Heaven. Irresponsible maybe, but not actually harmful. > Well the book does say 'even his most ardent followers are afraid of what > he has become.' > I assume they woudln't be that worried without a good reason. Also Dominic > isn't stupid. Uh? I must've missed that bit. Now *I* feel stupid... Joe - ------ Big Brother's watching? Learn to become Invisible. "We prefer our metaphysics with a money-back guarantee."-- Penn & Teller How I waste my time: http://acs1.bu.edu:8001/~arie/rpg.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 23:14:12 -0600 From: Sanguinas Subject: IN> Question - --------------D6C782599DCED88A5A597477 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi my name is Andrew. I have a question concerning Kyriotates. The question is as simple as I could make it and at the end of this explanation I have phrased the question in a yes or no answer as best I could: I have a Kyrotate that followes Jordi, the archangel of animals. His name is Buzz and he choses as his host(s) a swarm of bees. In the In Nomine book, it states that " if a Kyrotate leaves his host in worse condition than when he found it, they generate dissonence. Well, in one of our games the swarm of bees was attacked and my Kryotate took 5 points of damage. According to the rules of a swarm taking the damage, five bees were killed. The question than came up as to whether the Kyrotate should take dissonence. The kyrotate was not in one host but several. Surely the angel wouldn't heal all five bees because, once again, the rules state that they would be as dead as George Washington. In conclusion, the question is thus: Does the Kyrotate generate dissonence for each bee killed, or rather if the entire swarm was destroyed? Thank you for your attention, Andrew, Malakite servitor of War - --------------D6C782599DCED88A5A597477 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Hi my name is Andrew.  I have a question concerning Kyriotates.  The question is as simple as I could make it and at the end of this explanation I have phrased the question in a yes or no answer as best I could:
    I have a Kyrotate that followes Jordi, the archangel of animals.  His name is Buzz and he choses as his host(s) a swarm of bees.  In the In Nomine book, it states that " if a Kyrotate leaves his host in worse condition than when he found it, they generate dissonence.  Well, in one of our games the swarm of bees was attacked and my Kryotate took 5 points of damage.  According to the rules of a swarm taking the damage, five bees were killed.  The question than came up as to whether the Kyrotate should take dissonence.  The kyrotate was not in one host but several.  Surely the angel wouldn't heal all five bees because, once again, the rules state that they would be as dead as George Washington.

  In conclusion, the question is thus:  Does the Kyrotate generate dissonence for each bee killed, or rather if the entire swarm was destroyed?

Thank you for your attention,
Andrew, Malakite servitor of War - --------------D6C782599DCED88A5A597477-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:16:43 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Re: Sophia > >One rather mish-mashed tradition of Sophia's fall is that she takes on > >human flesh, ends up working as a prostitute in Tyre (?) and is redeemed > >by Simon Magus! > > This sounds an awful lot like the history of the Byzantine Empress Theodora > (who started out life in a brothel in Lebanon and ended up married to > Justinian and one of the most powerful women in the world). > > Shes one of my heroines and role models ;) You want to be married to Justinian? But.. but... he's DEAD! :P....o - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:43:09 -0500 From: Arlaysa Subject: Re: IN> Angels and the Salvation of Man Idea that came to me as I read through my emails... Michael Moorcock wrote a wonderful book on What if God no longer cared for man and the Devil, in wanting to return to Heaven, took them under his so-called-wing and was the one who answered their prayers... I think the book was called "The War Hound and the World's Pain" or something like that. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 01:19:56 EST From: Calabim Subject: Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back In a message dated 98-01-26 18:07:15 EST, you write: << There is precedent for celestials "discovering" new tricks, i.e. attunements, but usually it's after spending a great deal of time doing something. And it should be something that fits the celestial's Word. Easy answer: PCs can't do it, at least not within the timespan of a typical campaign. More complicated answer: Sure, a PC can do it, but it should take a long, long time, and be very difficult, and he should come up with really creative ways to describe how he learns to manipulate the Symphony in that manner on his own. >> Actually my current situation is a little bit different. I should have made things clearer, but wanted to avoid tipping things to my players. I have an npc who wants to aquire an attunement belonging to a rival demon prince. He wants to do this without either DP's knowledge or consent. (a probable death-wish, but there you go.) This means creating the power on his own. The player characters will likely find out, and having found out will likely thwart said demon. In my case I'm not so much looking for a yes-you-can, no-you-can't type answer, as I am trying to figure out what such an npc will be doing while researching the possibility. For purposes of my game, the actual possibility of getting the power is irrelevant...the demon will likely never make it that far. I'm less concerned with yes-no, and more concerned with HOW, even if it's the HOW of a theory that failed. At present I am assuming that creation of a new attunement would require a rite, similar to rites that summon superiors or generate essence. Ideas? Calabim@aol.com (PS...when Saminga was learning his tricks it appears it was partly what Egyptians knew, and partly his own improvements. Did he already have the word of Death, or did he create attunements first?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:23:16 -0600 (CST) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> Upside Down >Somebody described Redneck's "Upside Down" Superiors as the "Bizarro >version" of the Archangels and Demon Princes. > >This is incorrect. As any sufficiently dedicated comix maven can tell >you, they are in fact the Earth-3 versions. Oh? Are you sure they're not the Superiors of the Anti-Matter Universe of Qward? }:-{D Redneck Kris Overstreet, web pages beyond belief http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck - Redneck Gaijin Online http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ - White Lightning Productions http://www.antarctic-press.com/ - Antarctic Press Web Site http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/acupunct/ - Anatomical Acupuncture http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/dvpbem/ - In Nomine: Dark Victory PBEM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:43:06 -0600 From: Corey Subject: Re: IN> Prophecy II At 06:48 PM 1/26/98 -0500, you wrote: >>Mark-Bob says "2 1/2 stars, check it out." > >Yes, but is Chris Walken in it? It would be a shame if he was not. Yup, Chris Walken was in it, not really sure why though. Lucifer just pops up out of nowhere about 10-15 minutes into it and brings him back from Hell. Lucifer does use that cool cgi raven trick from the first movie though, thats kinda cool. Overall its not half as good as the original but it has more angels, and Eric Roberts is kinda cool as Michael. But it suffers from a weak plot and poor acting. Chris is definately the best actor in the flick. I kept waiting for Maniac to start playing... "She's a maniac Maniac And She's sure She's dancing like she's never had control" Corey, demon of obscure movie trivia > > > >-Jesse, sometime Soul of >Tounge-Planted-So-Far-in-Cheek-I-Have-a-Second-Set-of-Lips > >remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and >kill you... > - --"From the seed of Belial came the vampire Nosferatu which liveth and feedeth on the blood of mankind and abideth, unredeemed, in horrible darkness, on the cursed earth of graveyards of the Black Death." -F.W. Murneau's "Nosferatu" (1922) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 02:13:32 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Buddhist In Nomine Jesse writes: >There are three major branches of Buddhism: Mayahana, Theravada, and Zen. >I follow a Theravada branch. Theravada Buddhism, which is portent in South >East Asia and Sri Lanka, generally rejects the help of other beings in the >pursuit of enlightenment. Neither your teacher, the bohdisatvvas, nor the >Buddhas can directly assist you in your quest for enlightenment. Thus >Theravada does not generally concern itself with angels and demons as they >may be out there, but it does not matter. > >Mayahana Buddhism, concerned in India and Tibet, does accept the help of >other beings. This is taken to the extent of Mayahana practitioners >praying to Jesus, Buddha and Siva one after the other. I am not sure if >Mayahana believes in demons, but I do know that there are a plethora of >good beings trying to help us. > >Zen Buddhism, popular in Japan, does not concern itself with otherworldly >beings. Zen practitioners attempt to control their minds by thinking about >nothing and do not generally accept otherworldly help. > >This is not to say that "heaven" and "hell" are not mention by the Buddha, >I belive this refeers to different stopovers on the red-eye to Nirvana, >rather than endpoints. A Hindu In Nomine would be interesting, though. Wow... this is good, good stuff. Thanks bunches. And, today we just started a Hindu In Nomine, I believe I've sent what little we've done. Feel free to comment. On THAT thread. Back to this thread.... >Zen is quite different from Theravada. Theravada's desire to control the >mind "consciously" where as Zen's goal is to control the mind by >eliminating all thoughts. The premise of Zen is that one should control >the mind by directing it to no-mind. Raoul Duke says: > The thing to remember about Zen is that it's >a very no-nonsense school of thought: it's concerned with living in this >world, since there's no empirical evidence that there even is another, or >that souls exist. Ahhhh... okay... cool. Things are starting to take shape in my mind. That's good. Yeah, I look forward to your recommended Zen websites list. :) AND tomorrow I hope to update the SOL website for your reading enjoyment. :) Than Duc Lo and his further adventures... - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Check out the PBEM In Nomine: Soldiers of Linn webpage! "And all the time the joke is that the word 'mine' in its fully possessive sense cannot be uttered by a human being about anything. In the long run either Our Father or the Enemy will say 'mine' of each thing that exits, and specially of each man." -Screwtape (from The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 02:20:23 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: IN> Fallen Casca bites back with: >On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Perry M. Lloyd wrote: > >> It's just Fallen, not The Fallen, I believe. Sorry, AA of Grammer on my >> back. F***ing Seraphim... > >It's spelled Grammar, Perry. ;;;) (Sorry, but we Seraphim have to stick >together...) > >-- Casca, Seraph of Archives - -sigh- *sniffle* I just can't win against Ultimate Truth... - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Check out the PBEM In Nomine: Soldiers of Linn webpage! "And all the time the joke is that the word 'mine' in its fully possessive sense cannot be uttered by a human being about anything. In the long run either Our Father or the Enemy will say 'mine' of each thing that exits, and specially of each man." -Screwtape (from The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 23:26:53 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back >> > >Actually my current situation is a little bit different. >I should have made things clearer, but wanted to avoid tipping things to my >players. > >I have an npc who wants to aquire an attunement belonging to a rival demon >prince. He wants to do this without either DP's knowledge or consent. (a >probable death-wish, but there you go.) This means creating the power on his >own. > >The player characters will likely find out, and having found out will likely >thwart said demon. > >In my case I'm not so much looking for a yes-you-can, no-you-can't type >answer, as I am trying to figure out what such an npc will be doing while >researching the possibility. For purposes of my game, the actual possibility >of getting the power is irrelevant...the demon will likely never make it that >far. I'm less concerned with yes-no, and more concerned with HOW, even if it's >the HOW of a theory that failed. > >At present I am assuming that creation of a new attunement would require a >rite, similar to rites that summon superiors or generate essence. > >Ideas? Give your PC's an inside line. Something on the order of an artifact that they found or ancient manuscript with the attunement keyed to it in some way. Your PC's don't need to know what the thing does, but the NPC will. On the other hand, you could also have it be a mutual quest. The PC's are looking for the same thing for an alternate reason: Their archangel said to get it, They need it to help a friend (a tome with both the venom and the cure), etc. The NPC is looking for it for its own dark reasons. It's your world, Armand ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 02:46:58 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> Fallen > -sigh- > > *sniffle* > > Its bad net-etiquette to use HTML in a message to a mailing list. > I just can't win against Ultimate Truth... It is generally considered proper to only use one punctuation mark, and not to repeat. Brandon, who is horribly sorry. He couldnt resist the oppertunity to get some good yummy essence *and* giggle. It *is* 2.46am. That's my excuse! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 03:02:37 -0500 (EST) From: Wildcard Subject: Re: IN> Fallen On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Brandon Quina wrote: > > -sigh- > > > > *sniffle* > > > > > > Its bad net-etiquette to use HTML in a message to a mailing list. You mean "It's." "Its" is a possessive pronoun... > > I just can't win against Ultimate Truth... > > It is generally considered proper to only use one punctuation mark, and > not to repeat. Do I see a split infinitive? Janice 3:04 is an even better time to grab that Essence... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:32:34 -0000 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: IN> Another NPC Dear Auntie Angela, I don't know what to do. I just can't stop spending money. It started simply enough when I used to spend all my pocket-money just after it was given to me but it has been getting worse and worse. My house is full of expensive bits of computer that don't work and designer clothes that don't fit me and there are more and more bills coming in. My boyfriend ditched me because he said he couldn't afford me. Now my television is broken and I can't afford to get it fixed! I am desperate, can you help? Penniless in Croydon - --- Dear Penniless, Pull yourself together, you blithering idiot. Of course you will never have money if you can't stop buying consumer goods. You'll not be able to keep any friends either if you leech all their money away on frivolities. We both know its stupid but you are the one who needs to stop doing it. A nice hobby where you can meet new people will take your mind off buying things, and don't expect anyone else to stiffen your spine if you aren't prepared to make an effort to learn self-control. Get off your backside and throw away your television set and find something more interesting to do instead. A. - --- Lashniel, Seraph of David Some seraphim have a tendency to accidentally upset mortals due to an incomplete understanding of mortal society. Lashniel is a different kettle of fish who freely admits that she is often blunt, obnoxious and annoying on purpose. Her attitude is most usually explained as "Look, I don't precisely remember what I said that upset him, but it was the TRUTH." Most celestials (and mortals) who know her are too intimidated to complain, especially as her advice is always good, if blunt. In her role as a magazine agony aunt under the pen-name of 'Angela Stone', she has acquired a cult following of readers and has already been offered a TV talk show and a couple of columns in national newspapers. Corp (2 forces) Eth (3 forces) Cel (4 forces) Str 4 Int 5 Will 10 Agil 4 Prec 7 Per 6 Vessel/3 (human) Role -- ('Angela True', notorious Agony Aunt (status 3, level 4)) Charisma +1 (strong personality) Songs: Healing (Cel/3), Num Corp (Tongue/4), Charm (Eth/2, Cel/2) Emote/4 Fast Talk/1 Small weapon (knife)/1 Dodge/2 Savoir Faire/1 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:19:32 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Canon Doubt and Uncertainty Beth wrote: >One of the things that I and Karakash are planning is to find all the >"rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty" and mark them as such >for future writers, etc. I don't promise to take every single one >of every list-member's pet mysteries -- but I'd be interested in >seeing *which* mysteries GMs prefered to keep to themselves... > >Current "This Will Remain Unclear" areas include: > >o Jesus' nature, and very existance >o Ditto most other Messiahs. >o Are celestials hopped up ethereals? > >Anyway, go ahead, tell me. I don't promise to make you happy >and use everything, but I don't say I won't. Sure -- I'd like to see that Michael's distrust of Yves remain at least plausible in canon. The APG was helpful in this, as it mentioned that Yves did nothing when his Servitors became dissonant. Sorely needed, too, after _Heaven & Hell_. (Though I will note that IMC Yves is an Elohite and Kronos a Balseraph, since I don't like adding too many mysterious powers beyond comprehension to a game. Or at least, this one.) - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:39:12 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) > >Oh, the angst can be arranged, no sweat. Angst is no problem, really. > >K.K. will be taking things a tad more seriously in NO TIME. :) > > Uh, that wasn't a request... I meant that she was turing out to > be deep because she didn't have enough angst, so she was self- > generating... Um... No, no, really. I have no problems. Look at the rest of my players. Are they complaining from 'Lack of Angst'? Nope. > >Hello, do I play too much SUPERS or what? > > Yes. That was actually a rhetorical question. :) > And there's just one problem with your evil plot. I don't care > about the lawn (the groundskeepers already trashed it once and it's > only just recovered to slightly worse than before they "fixed" it), > and I don't have any petunias. > > So the hat is MINE. > How come, when I see 'evil plot', all I can think of is a patch of really nasty crab grass. "My GOD! That patch on the lawn! It's an... EVIL PLOT!" *wring hands* "You may have foiled my plot this time, but I'll get you. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow... but soon! Muhahahaha!" - - Em, feeling really goofy ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #595 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.