From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Jan 28 10:32:31 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 KAA03784 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:32:31 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id KAA12126 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:25:27 -0600 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:25:27 -0600 Message-Id: <199801281625.KAA12126@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 #598 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 Wednesday, January 28 1998 Volume 01 : Number 598 In this digest: Re: IN> Role Problems Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) Re: IN> Rigidly Defined Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back Re: IN> Some questions Re: IN> Lilith a human? Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) Re: IN> Lilith Re: IN> Canon Doubt and Uncertainty RE: IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition IN> Re: Role Problems Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) Re: IN> Nitpicking (was Re: IN> Kobal's Last Prank) Re: IN> Fallen Re: IN> Some questions Re: IN> Fallen [Fluff] Re: IN> Song of Motion, Warner Brothers-style Re: IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition Re: IN> Kobal's Last Prank (was Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Re: Canon Doubt And Uncertainty (Re: IN> By Any Other Name) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:00:27 -0700 (MST) From: Jason Corley Subject: Re: IN> Role Problems ATTENTION: THESE ARE HOUSE RULES. THIS IS NOT CANON, NOR IS IT FOR EVERY GAME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. On Wed, 28 Jan 1998, Julian Breen wrote: > Firstly, there is the idea that when a celestial adopts a vessel with > a role, it is retroactively *written in* to the Symphony. In other > words, people suddenly *remember* this role as their friend/ child/ > workmate/ etc. They have memories, photographs, momentos, of the > role that go way back. This seems to be a terrible burden upon the > Symphony if allowed (altering fabric of reality) and must create > blasphemous amounts of noise! It can soon escalate to a *role arms race* > amongst celestials as well. Silly example. Angel discovers that new > bully in the playground is a demon in a role. Sends fax to superior, > superior sends new angel in role of bigger kid. Demon gets ear clipped. > Demon whines to pal who's got some points spare... He creates new > teacher! Teacher picks on bigger kid, etc, etc. This is partly true, partly not. Remember, the whole purpose of a Role is to reduce Symphonic disturbance. So creating a Role certainly couldn't create massive Symphonic disturbance, QED. But this is definitely a valid point: whatever explanation we come up with for how Roles reduce Symphonic disturbance, it has to explain this possibility. My idea is this: Say Chad Celestial has Art Archangel make him a Vessel. Now, even just by being on Earth, this Vessel causes (indetectable except to folks with Perception 20, you know, God, Yves, etc.) Symphonic disturbance by moving around air molecules, breathing, let -alone- talking to people and trying them to persuade them to do good deeds. Now it just so happens that the level of disturbance is just so low that practically nobody can detect it, until Chad starts using Songs and Essence and so forth. A Role is just something you "hang" on a Vessel. It's just as "artificial" as a Vessel. It's, to be a little disingenuous about it, a trick to get the Symphony to look the other way. You're putting down one instrument and picking up another. "No, no sir, no composers here, just the viola section." That part is clear enogh. Angels and demons doing stuff is much more obviously out of line with the Symphony than cops and robbers doing stuff. So how do they come about without causing the massive disturbance they are supposed to avoid? A heck of a good question. Here's my theory: Let's say you're in a car wreck, and when you come out of your dazed condition and look around, you see your girlfriend, some cops, some paramedics, the driver of the other car, and a faceless mob of rubberneckers. Now, to you, the order of "realness" of these people is probably: girlfriend, other driver, paramedics + cops, rubberneckers. To a cop, it's probably: other cops, you + girlfriend + other driver, paramedics, rubberneckers. The "realest" one is the one you know the most. With a Vessel and no Role, there's a limit to how "real" you can be before the Other Side (tm) notices the disturbance you create by doing things that real people do (talking, buying things, etc.) With Role 6, there's essentially no mortally-perceivable limit to how real you are. That doesn't mean that you've actually got a mortal life. It just - -appears- that you do whenever anyone looks. The purpose of having Role 6 is not so that you can "be a regular joe": that's not your job. (Although Outcasts and Remnants would desperately want to cultivate high-level Roles for just that reason!) The purpose of having Role 6 is so that you don't have to worry about mortals finding our you aren't a regular joe and letting all hell or heaven break loose. Think of it this way: Roles are designed for the Symphony's sake. The more powerful a Role is, the less likely mortals are to penetrate the veil of secrecy and find out What's Really Going On by the Celestial who has that Role. Hiding from other Celestials is just a side benefit. > Interesting idea suggested by one of my players on this topic was that > perhaps these roles are those of humans that have met with death in > some way. Car accidents, muggings, failed suicides etc, where the > mortals soul is replaced at the last moment of life by a celestial of > either side (did anyone see that Jeff Goldblum flick on these lines?). > Maybe stillborn infants or conceptions that *just missed* fall into the > same category. Whether or not these people could have had High Destinies > or Terrible Fates may also matter. Definitely an interesting thought, and perfectly acceptable as an explanation of the mechanism by which Roles are done. > Also, a beginning PC can surely not start the game with multiple vessels > each having seperate roles if at least one of the roles has a lot of > social interaction. Another House Rule: Roles never conflict, ever. It just plain never works out that the two Roles have to be somewhere at the same time, or if it does, it's much easier for the Symphony to bend a little: "I'm sorry I'm late, Doctor, but traffic was awful!" than for it to subject to prodding at the role: "You quack! I've been here for hours! I'm going to complain to the medical board!" Of course, the degree to which it will bend depends on the size of the Role which is being tested. Jason whos your daddy yes i am ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:11 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) > >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!" > > Ah, yeah... Now I'm going to think of a patch of > lawn with tinfoil all over it. A foiled plot. Ow. Goombert strikes again... 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:11 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Rigidly Defined Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty > > Free will is another biggie... Either for humans or for celestials! > > Of course, the beauty of the big Free Will question is that SJG can > adopt a perfectly firm canon answer *and* leave it completely > undetermined as well. > > "Characters in the game, whether human, Celestial, have Free Will to > precisely the extent that their human players and GM do, neither > more nor less." Nicely done...I vote that that particular statement be summarily cut and pasted into the canon guide, with a nice attribution. 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:12 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Doing something behind his DP's back > >>>There is another way. The NPC could trade favors with Lilith. This > probably would be a worse idea than making the power on his own but > would be alot easier and quicker. It would not be without the rival > Prince's knowledge but it may be with out his consent. That is he > would be under Geas.<<< > > How would Lilith be able to grant another Prince's attunement? If you can accept the *possibility* of a PC level Celestial *maybe* doing it on its own, the possibility of Lilith being able to pull it off would be an order of magnitude greater. She is a Superior, after all... 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:12 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Some questions > It's not entirely clear whether that's the human or the Cherub who > has the world fall away for a moment. In general, I'd be inclined > to say the attuned person (the human or whatever) *doesn't* notice > (unless he makes a spectacular Perception roll, maybe). The > exception to this is Cherubim of the Wind -- *there*, I'd think the > person might notice something had happened! I'd say that the Cherub should be allowed to make it obvious to that person (which would be what happened in the vignette). Of course, if you make it obvious to the person, you risk making it obvious to others, however... 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:12 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Lilith a human? > >Maybe that's why Hell has more troops than Heaven (another > >factoid buried in the APG); Lucifer's been upgrading humans (yes, > >I know that canon says this ain't done. Canon has been known to > >change). > > Humans cannot become celestials. If Lilith *is* a human, she's > a Superior-level human ("UberSaint!"), not a celestial. Not really. > So long as I'm LE, human souls and celestial souls *will* remain > distinct. Well, I'd point out that the distinction can become insignificant at the game level. At least one superior (Yves) can add the resonance and dissonance conditions of a choir to anybody who has his highest Distinction (the name escapes me). So what's the difference between an UberSaint of Yves with the Elohim resonance, and a powerful Elohim of Yves? History. (Okay, so one doesn't disturb the Symphony through corporeal damage. But the idea still stands, I think.) A related question(s): Any ideas on what would happen to a vessel using angel of Yves that took the Kyrio resonance? Would they loose the vessel? Would they not have as many forces available for use (as per Kyrio of War)? And would they kept the vessel, would they get dissonance if it got frotzed? > On the other hand, Hell is apparently full of little demonlings and > such... * Fairly plentiful * Fairly reliable * Fairly powerful You can only have two. Heaven went for the last two, Hell went for the first two. (Having the first and last without the middle is the reason Limbo is now simply a Celestial watercloset...;-) 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:11 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) > >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!" > > Ah, yeah... Now I'm going to think of a patch of > lawn with tinfoil all over it. A foiled plot. Ow. Goombert strikes again... 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: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:57:45 -0500 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Lilith From: "Patrick Chester" > >> *ahem* Yes, well... There's the other notion that you could >> perhaps find a "lookalike" attunement from the Ethereals... >> Lilith could probably help with *that*. > >Or maybe said DP owes Lilith a small favor... (Am I the only one who >thinks most of the DPs in Hell owe Geas/10 or so to Lilith? ;) More Infernal politics from my campaign. Kobal is quite possibly the most powerful of the Demon Princes IMC, and is certainly the most frightening Prince. (I changed his word to the laughter of despair, which ought to give you a little insight into what this version of Kobal is like.) Though he really doesn't *enjoy* anything, he finds that disrupting the plottings of the other Princes is at least something to occupy himself with. So, back to Lilith. Kobal decided to make her the butt of one of his jokes. He did this by destroying most of her infernal organization, and thus leaving her very much at the mercy (ha!) of the Princes. Lilith was enough of a wheeler-dealer to survive even this, but she was very badly compromised, and had to promise a great deal to retain even some of her autonomy. But each promised tied her more firmly into the lures of hell, and every effort to pull free made her sink in deeper. This is where most bound Lilim come from; they were Lilith's offspring, sold into slavery in order to perpetuate the illusion of their mother's freedom. Oh, and the joke? Kobal got to make the remark, "The green bitch is now running the red queen's race." - ---- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 23:58:08 -0500 (EST) From: Raoul Duke Subject: Re: IN> Canon Doubt and Uncertainty On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Everyone is, however, aware that *some* of the "teasers" in the > main book were there to use in cycle-books? (Though some > weren't, necessarily...) Hmm. Is it unkosher to ask which bits are which? For that matter, what are plans for the line after Revelations/IPG/Liber are all done? (I have a fair idea, I think...) 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: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:44:32 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition David Edelstein >>>>This kind of strikes me as a double standard, you can represent the >dominant culture in publications and you can represent minor cultures and >sects, but you cannot represent the stuff in between? > >Am I missing something?<<< > >Yes. I didn't say Hinduism couldn't be represented -- just that absolute >canonical statements about the "true" nature of Hinduism in In Nomine (eg., >all Hindu deities are just ethereal spirits, or they are all actually >Archangels in disguise) are unlikely. "Archangels in disguise" ??? This isn't Transformers(TM) here. Archangel is a title, dammit. MUST Gabriel call himself Gabriel? S/he is no Seraph. Must Eli call himself Eli? He's a Mercurian. Yves, is well, Yves. No choir affiliation there. Hell, Yves has been described as "God manifest" in H&H. His servitors don't know that, for the most part. I'd be willing to bet that none of the other AA's know that Yves is God manifest (and since no one talks about it, Michael the Seraph won't 'lie detect' anything...) Superiors are busy, busy beings, mysterious to their servitors. Why couldn't Gabriel and Siva be the same being? In fact, due to the nature of the >Marches, some ethereal spirits probably *have* been created as a result of >the beliefs and dreams of Hindus, while some Archangels may have manifested >in a form suitable for Indian culture and thus become Hindu "gods". Hmmm... I'd say that many Judeo-Christian Ethereal Spirits have also been created. There are major Gods under the "big three" if you'll let me call them that. These "gods" might parallel worded angels. But one >should also keep in mind that Hinduism is not exactly like other >"pantheistic" religions -- being a Hindu would not be incompatible with >being a Soldier of God, for example. (Maybe not a Soldier of Dominic, but >many other Archangels would probably have no problem with the Hindu >perspective of the Supreme Being.) I don't know if the concept of "the Supreme Being" is really a tenet of Hinduism, but from what conversations I've had about it, it isn't. But, I'm no scolar on Hinduism. Do we have a Doctor in the house? >Of course In Nomine does essentially say that every real-world religion is >wrong at least in part, since no real religion actually matches In Nomine's >cosmology in its dogma. But thus far, In Nomine has not stated outright >that any religion is absolutely *wrong* and based on completely false >premises. Well... by saying no one is wrong or right is an excellent maneuver to avoid pissing off anyone too much BUT it is made clear to me that the Judeo-Christian perspective is the "correct" perspective if one assumes that Heaven = Correct. Then again, one can always play the game backwards. :) The Marches clearly shows that the God of In Nomine is NOT the God of: Norse Myth, Greek and Roman theology, the Aztecs, the Native Americans, the Aborigines, Egyptian theology, the Japanese Shinto, and Africa. It IS the God of Christians, Jews, and the nation of Islam. This is made clear to me, at least. (Though I believe I saw something about an Ethereal Spirit of Mother Mary -- cool stuff, Ethereal "Christian" Spirits created by belief.) Would a Gabriel is Siva, Eli is Brahma and Yves is Vishnu system work? Why and why not? Brahma was very active in the beginning the world, while things were being created. Then, once the ball was sent rolling, Brahma has moved out of the center of attention and does not have an especially active role. This just screams Eli to me. Sive is the God of Destruction. He will come into focus as the end of the world approaches. I have been told that he also serves as a God of punishment. Gabriel seems to fit this very well. The insanity and the fact that Gabriel was present at the birth of two religions puts an interesting spin on things, though. Vishnu is the God of Preservation. Also, the God of Wisdom, whose name escapes me at the moment, also fall under Vishu. Currently, Vishnu is the focus as Reality is currently being maintained. Krishna is an avatar of Vishnu, and also is Vishnu is a way. There was no real clear Archangel which fits with Vishnu, but Yves seemed to be a relatively good fit. Fitting the three Gods into the In Nomine hierarchy seemed like a good place to start. We decided that it didn't make any sense to have any of the Hindu gods Demon Princes since Hinduism is not a dualistic religion. - -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: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:40:11 -0500 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: IN> Re: Role Problems >Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:57:05 +0000 >From: Julian Breen > >Folks, I have a problem with the way that roles work. Namely, I don't >see that they *do*. Vessels without roles - fine. Kyriotates and Shedim >also fine ( they only possess whats already there ), but I can only see >vessels with roles working in one of three ways , and I'm not that happy >with any of them really. > >Firstly, there is the idea that when a celestial adopts a vessel with >a role, it is retroactively *written in* to the Symphony. In other >words, people suddenly *remember* this role as their friend/ child/ >workmate/ etc. They have memories, photographs, momentos, of the >role that go way back. [Snip] I asked a question much like this a few months ago. Through the consensus of replies I recieved, I came to the conclusion that creating a Role doesn't mess with peoplw's mwmories. Rather, records get changed (usually the old-fashioned way). If these people have memories and photos, it's because the person (or a reasonable facsimile, like a Reliever with a similar Vessel) was actually there to have the pictures taken and the memories made. So a lot of Roled Celestials tend to be from "Out of Town" They also tend to have gotten GEDs and taken correspondence courses, if there wasn't sufficient time to have actually attended the colleges they have degrees from. And there's little chance of a Celestial being invited to a High School Reunion for a school he never attended. > >The second approach is to assume that you've been living in the role for >x amount of time and *cultivating* it. Yet for how long exactly? [Snip] If you're a sleeper agnent, it's not because your mind is sublimed into the Role. It's because your Superior feels he can trust you sufficiently to not blow your cover during the growing-up stage. As for how long it takes to cultivate a Role, I use these guidelines: Role/1 1 week Role/2 1 Month Role/3 1 Year Role/4 5 years Role/5 10 years Role/6 25 years The level of a Role can be bought up, but generally only when the difference of time has passed in the Role. And of course, if the Age of your Role is less than the requisite amount of time, having lived the Role "Since Birth" allows the purchase of the higher level, so an Angel in a 14-year-old Role and a 14-year-old Vessel can have a Role/6. > >Third approach. Vessels with roles are *lived in* by a portion of your >superior until such a time that he designates you to take over. [Snip] Superiors can do a lot of things, but I doubt they have time to make all the Roles their Servitors use. I'd relegate this kind of thing to Relievers/Imps/Gremlins who can be trusted, if it was necessary to keep a Role alive for all that prior time. > >Interesting idea suggested by one of my players on this topic was that >perhaps these roles are those of humans that have met with death in >some way. Car accidents, muggings, failed suicides etc, where the >mortals soul is replaced at the last moment of life by a celestial of >either side (did anyone see that Jeff Goldblum flick on these lines?). >Maybe stillborn infants or conceptions that *just missed* fall into the >same category. Whether or not these people could have had High Destinies >or Terrible Fates may also matter. >Perhaps *Cosmic Law* only allows superiors to use Middle of the Roaders? > Well, that's another way to go. Once upon a time, there was a Malakite of Purity named Myddrin, a participator in Uriel's Purge of the Marches. During the fighting, though,the rest of his platoon got Soul-killed, and he got separated. Then he got lost. He wandered around the Far Marches for about four months, and then found his way back to Blandine's side of the Glade, and made his way back to Heaven. Four months, from his point of view. 1,245 years, from Earth's. Heaven had changed. Earth had changed. After a period of Judgement evaluation, he was welcomed into the ranks of Laurence. Laurence felt that the best way to racclimatize the Malakite into the ways of the Modern World was to make him Live it. Enter the McCormicks, Stacy and Michael. In 1983, Stacy was pregnant with her first child, but due to unforseen circumstances, in the eigth month, Stacy went into labor, while home alone, and Stacy passed out from the pain. The child died during the birth. Strangely enough, when she did wake up, a child was lying at her feet, crying, and very much alive. She never questioned where the baby came from, and neither did her husband, or the paramedics who arrived soon afterwards. And that's a short version of the story of Kenneth "Kenny" McCormick, as of yet, the oldest non-Superior NPC in my "City of Glass" campaign. No immaculate conception there. He's also under strict orders to keep the Role (if not the Vessel) alive at least until he turns 18. So far, he's been pretty lucky, in that he's been able to get rid of the bodies before he's been declared dead. (The rats aren't nearly as obliging in this version \|=). > >Oh, BTW, I was wondering why Khalid got relegated to Fall/Trumpet. >Wasn't he was supposed to turn up in the APG? No idea. I also recall there being something about Tethers supposed to appear in Night Music, and I'd been waiting to see whether my ideas about Tethers matched up. I'll probably type them up and post them to the list when I get time. = http://www.io.com/~beholder ===================== nofori@pop3.utoled.edu === Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Johnathan, Habbalite Captain of the Game, The Demon of Jury Selection. ===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:44:11 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) > >No, no, really. I have no problems. Look at the rest of my players. Are > >they complaining from 'Lack of Angst'? Nope. > > Does this mean I don't have to self-generate my own angst, then? I'm certainly not going to stop you, any time soon. :) > >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 > > Ah, yeah... Now I'm going to think of a patch of > lawn with tinfoil all over it. A foiled plot. > AUGH! A PUN! Help Help! I'm being repelled! My arch-nemesis is the that damned Kobalite, the Demon of Punning. I'll get him one day... how dare he take my dead serious plotting, my scenes of nightmarish horror, my black story line, my great speeches, and _BELITTLE_ them with... with... with PUNS! - - Em, Demon of Reading Too Much Kult Before Going to Bed. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 13:45:39 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Nitpicking (was Re: IN> Kobal's Last Prank) On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 5:47 PM -0500 1/27/98, Brandon Quina wrote: > > >I, a simple lawyer n' nit-picker in hell am ill-suited for tracking > >down and apprehending enemys of the state.. Thus, I defer some of > >the responcibilitys to the other angels.. Responcibilitys? And Beth didn't correct it? I hate it when Superiors go dissonant. Incidentally, according to the WWWebster dictionary, 'nitpicking' was only accepted as a back-formation from 'nit-picking' in 1966. It must really suck having a Word less than 35 years old. Steve, possibly soon to be either new Demon Prince of Nit-Picking, or else 2 Force demonling of Nitpicking, with Particular Responsibility for Haagenti's Washing Up. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:18:22 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Fallen > > -sigh- > > > > *sniffle* > > > > > > Its bad net-etiquette to use HTML in a message to a mailing list. > I will cite an example of your own Superior using pseudo-HTML tags in a message to a mailing list. >From owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Fri Dec 5 21:07:56 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from daemon@localhost) by RedBrick.DCU.IE (SomeMTA) id VAA12675 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 21:07:56 GMT X-Award: Most Improved Society 1996-7 Received: from tolka(136.206.1.9) by Nurse.RedBrick.DCU.IE via smap (V2.0) id xma012669; Fri, 5 Dec 97 21:07:27 GMT Received: from lists.io.com by tolka.dcu.ie (5.65v4.0/1.1.8.2/14Feb96-0535PM) id AA26437; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 21:07:22 GMT Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id OAA00347 for in_nomine-l-outgoing; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 14:54:26 -0600 Received: from hammurabi.nh.ultra.net (hammurabi.nh.ultra.net [205.162.79.24]) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA00277 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 14:53:28 -0600 Received: from [207.180.184.13] (d13.dial-1.drh.nh.ultra.net [207.180.184.13]) $ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19971204154003.2d1fd0ae@pop.primenet.com> Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19971204154003.2d1fd0ae@pop.primenet.com> References: <3.0.1.16.19971203152828.1a876c76@pop.primenet.com> <199711231636.LAA08199@skipjack.bluecrab.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 14:52:44 -0500 To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fluff: In Nomine Movie Trailers Sender: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Status: RO (I think that there are celestials playing with my dreamscapes on a regular basis here...) [Imagine yourself sitting in a movie theater, watching the green "This preview has been approved for all audiances" thing, and then the slightly overloud voiceover and music begins...] Narrator: Lori Jones is a normal woman... Actress Lori, walking down city street, possibly narrowly avoiding getting hit by a taxi or something. Clearly, your Superior is of the opinion that contravention of the as-yet-uncodified rules of net-etiquette is not equal in importance to the contextual clarity provided by the occasional use of said pseudo-HTML. To speak more plainly; the Word of your Superior is not Etiquette, but Nitpicking, and accuracy and clarity are more important than manners. Is this what has become of her Servitors in my absence? > > I just can't win against Ultimate Truth... > > It is generally considered proper to only use one punctuation mark, and > not to repeat. > Indeed. In this case, the use of multiple periods is not necessary to clarify the writer's intent, and this is therefore an incorrect usage. However, I must note again that there are cases where the use of multiple periods is valid and reasonable, such as in cases where the writer does not wish to quote a passage in its entirety, and uses three such periods, appropriately spaced, in order to indicate that there are unquoted materials which are not relevant to the main thrust of the argument being made by said writer. > > > 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! > You should be sorry, but not for the reasons you have outlined. Kevin Walsh, Renegade Balseraph, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:30:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Some questions > On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > > I know... About half of them, I could weasle around that he got *some* > > part of it. (Like taking the Lilim of Gluttony attunement -- you > > don't get the Geas, but you can still cook stuff that people have to > > make a Will roll to refuse.) > > Hmmm. That seems reasonable for someone like Duke Hamet, but I would be > reluctant to say that a character could spend 5 points and get *part* of > a Band attunement, I'd probably go for all or none. > Why not? Once said Prince has developed the technique for giving out part of an attunement, it's likely just as easy for the Prince to hand out said part of attunement as it is to give another attunement that isn't any more compatible with the recipient's resonance. (Most attunements resemble the choir/band's resonance in some way, the major exceptions being the Verdamnt Habbalah of Death attunement, and the way it looks like the Elohim of Trade and Seraph of Trade attunements were mixed up.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:35:12 -0000 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: Re: IN> Fallen [Fluff] - ---Kevin Walsh wrote: > To speak more plainly; the Word of your Superior is not Etiquette, but > Nitpicking, and accuracy and clarity are more important than manners. > Is this what has become of her Servitors in my absence? I'd like to compliment you on the polite and civil tone of this justified reprimand but was it completely necessary to include all of the headers in your quote? They add little additional information, take up unnecessary bandwidth, and add nothing to the point which you were making. This might have been an appropriate point to make use of the ellipses you referred to below. In future, I'd advise a golden rule of paring the included text to 20% of your total email length and note that a more appropriate net.reference is to include the URL of the relevant archived digest. Your servant, jo netiquette daemon "For as laws are necessary that good manners be preserved, so there is need of good manners that law may be maintained." -- Machiavelli ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:39:29 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Song of Motion, Warner Brothers-style > > Scene: Celestial is in an airplane, coming home after a brief jaunt > somewhere else. He looks out the window as the airplane is coming in on > final approach, and notes that he is currently directly above a local > football stadium at an altitude of 2000 feet, and thinks to himself, "This > would be a great place to drop an enemy from." Later, he uses the Song of > Motion to teleport this person he's very upset with to that exact location, > but said individual probably *won't* have the benefit of being surrounded by > an airplane. The ensuing scene would strongly remind me of a Wile E. Coyote > cartoon, though, and might be highly favored among Kobal's minions. :) > I used a similar trick to this in a Mage convention game, except the place I teleported them to was a burning church. (I don't know why it was burning. Maybe one of the other PC groups was upset by all the dead vampires we left there.) To this day I wonder how I managed to overlook the fact that my character had a Caregiver Nature.) My problem with this idea is that the Song's description mentions allowing "someone to teleport himself and a number of pounds equal to 10 * his Celestial Forces". Given the fact that the Corporeal Song of Motion seems to be usable only on the performer, I assumed that you had to go with whatever other objects were being teleported. Kevin Walsh, Renegade Balseraph, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia, regaining Essence. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:49:11 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine: Hindu Tradition Perry M. Lloyd wrote: > I'd say that's pretty on target. This game has a problem with > reality, namely that it's complete Western orietated. Was of the > Chinese Gods, the African Gods? Can we expect to see how much Uriel > damaged them in future supplements? *Ahem* The idea that the monotheistic religions are "Western" is a popular error. The West is part of their territory; they are not part of the West. As to the Chinese and African gods, my guess is that no more will be said about them, simply because the general outline of pagan gods has been given in "The Marches," and those are not, at the moment, very popular pantheons to explore. SJG is in a bit of cleft stick about living paganism. This is because, however polite people may or may not try to be in daily life, the game's premise is that the monotheistic religions are more or less true, and (1) it logically follows that other points of view, such as atheism or polytheism, are less true the more they are incompatible with monotheism, and (2) all three of big monotheisms have long, essential, deep-grained traditions of relentless hostility to paganism. These are, of course, very awkward and embarassing facts, and SJG must, as a practical necessity, avoid drawing attention to them. Silence is one of the best ways, and so "The Marches" only mentions pantheons with very small numbers of modern adherents who are used to having their deities taken as fictional and, for all I understand, often don't take them terribly literally themselves anymore. That is, I never heard of fundamentalist Wiccans, though I suppose they may exist; I *know* there are fundamentalist Hindus. Another out is the match-up process whereby Gabriel = Siva, Yves = Brahma, God = the All, etc. The technical name for it is "syncretism." It's a very old game, but it is best played by GMs, not SJG, since syncretism is NOT a game that all monotheists think highly of. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:53:29 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Kobal's Last Prank (was Re: IN> By Any Other Name) > > > >Perhaps if her grace would supply me with a corporeal vessel I would > >be better suited to pass legal action against those who dare to play > >In Nomine *incorrectly* (imagine that, the nerve).. > > > > A vessel. Hm. And exactly what sort of vessel do you want? I mean, > I do have some stock of puppies over here... > If I might make a suggestion? If it is punishment that you wish to inflict on Habbalah, perhaps you should note that it has been observed that it is far more efficacious to give them a perfectly functional, but aesthetically unpleasing Vessel than to give them a less functional but attractive Vessel. It has been speculated that this flaw in their natures is the result of their obsession with their somewhat arcane ideas of perfection and strength. Not only does it torment them, but it serves to spur them to greater efficiency without restricting their potential usefulness. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:18:19 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: Canon Doubt And Uncertainty (Re: IN> By Any Other Name) > > * The true nature of the Symphony > Whatever about the true nature of the Symphony, I have a burning desire to know how it actually works. > > * The Janus/Valefor question, and especially "How he pulls it off". > Well, the essence of the Wind is changability. (Damn, is there supposed to be an 'e' in there?) Some more general speculation on the nature of Janus' Fall, if in fact Janus did Fall, follows. On page 121 of the main In Nomine rulebook, it says: "Although his mission is to promote change, he himself has changed very little in the past millenia." So we have a contradiction here. And a contradiction involving your Word has a special name, that name being Dissonance. Janus has mistaken superficial change for true change. The destruction of structures of law by theft was a major change when introduced, but it is ingrained in reality now, and cannot really be called a change any more. Janus ran out of new ideas, and fixated on those he already had. And thus he Fell. > * Kobal's Last Prank > > * Why Malakim cannot Fall. (Yeah, I know, already ruined.) > (I acknowledge that I didn't make them Fall, but I wanted them to, and provided a rationale which may or may not be canon-correct.) > * Why Lilim don't change when they go Bright, other then pick up some > wings and so on and so forth. > Because they were created by Lilith and are thus not Fallen? Because they are the embodiments of Freedom, which is neither good nor ill in itself, but only in its uses? (I find that argument unconvincing myself. Lilim don't look like the embodiments of Freedom to me.) > * The true nature of Hell, whatever that means. Just don't come out and > say it was carved out of the side of a decaying buffalo. > Hell is that part of the Symphony set aside by God for those who have transgressed His Will, and also for those of His most trusted servants who must ensure its continued existence. Just one of the manifold theories about Hell's existence held by Habbalah, but quite possibly a popular one. Kevin Walsh, Renegade Balseraph, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #598 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.