From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Nov 30 12:34:12 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA27305 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:34:12 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id MAA00645 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:11:00 -0600 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:11:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199811301811.MAA00645@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1027 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Monday, November 30 1998 Volume 01 : Number 1027 In this digest: Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> !! Wanted Home Product Assemblers !! Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Films and angels Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN IN> Oops Re: IN> Oops Re: IN> Films and angels Re: IN> Atheists in IN IN> Re: IN- Pagan Soldiers Re: IN> !! Wanted Home Product Assemblers !! Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Atheists in IN Re: IN> Oops ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 19:59:46 -0500 (EST) From: Doubting Eric Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Greg Jensen wrote: > Greetings! > > I'm new to this list, having just read In Nomine. I wanted to ask what the > opinion is about atheism in In Nomine. I mean, the dichotomy seems to be > (I know it's actually a bit more complex, but basically: for God, and > benevolent; or against God and selfish/evil. Now what about an atheistic > humanist? They certainly wouldn't be following the will of God. I also > don't think you could really call them selfish, and definitely not evil. Short answer: They're wrong. Long answer: Belief is one of the things that In Nomine leaves wide open to interpretation. Yes, the premise of the game is a Judeo-Christian-Muslim universe to an extent, although it doesn't perfectly match any of the above. However, the game material makes no statements on the eventual fate (or Fate) of humans who do not ascribe to one of these three religions. Nowhere does it say, for example, that all Buddhists go to Hell for not acknowledging God. Nowhere, also, does it say that the will of God is to follow a specific faith. Certain Archangels may support a given faith, but the Archangels are not God, nor do they claim to be. It is entirely possible that a secular humanist, while denying the existence of God, would perform good works for his fellow man, and in that sense do the will of God. Of course, if this means our sample atheist ends up in Heaven when he dies, well, it's bound to be a surprise. Keep in mind also that given the level of involvement the various celestials have on Earth, it's very likely that anyone performing conspicuous good works, regardless of faith, is bound to attract attention. Having angels and demons fighting to protect or corrupt you is enough to cause just about anyone to rethink their faith (or lack of). > What would happen, for example, if a demon truly wanted peace and > prosperity for others, but thought that religion interfered with that goal, > and therefore was opposed to faith in God? Would he become renegade, or > even ascend? Or is this a legitimate (albeit not selfish or evil) goal for > a demon? Truly wanting peace and prosperity for others? That doesn't sound much like a demon to me. And if it is a demon, get them to a Redemption Clinic and get them fast! They're wising up! Seriously, though, while certain demons may deny the existence of God, it's a rather difficult delusion to keep up in the face of the overwhelming evidence of being a /demon/ in /Hell/ fighting /angels/. Denying faith, on the other hand, is a common tactic of demons. The more damage the Adversary can do to the structure of religion, the easier time they have in corrupting the morals of humanity. "The greatest trick the Devil pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." Verbal Kint (Kevin Spacey), -The Usual Suspects- > Greg Jensen > http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gjensen/gregpage.htm Eric ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 21:39:33 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> !! Wanted Home Product Assemblers !! Hunt these people down and destroy them. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 22:39:50 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN > I'm new to this list, having just read In Nomine. I wanted to ask what the > opinion is about atheism in In Nomine. I mean, the dichotomy seems to be > (I know it's actually a bit more complex, but basically: for God, and > benevolent; or against God and selfish/evil. Now what about an atheistic > humanist? They certainly wouldn't be following the will of God. I also > don't think you could really call them selfish, and definitely not evil. The long and short of atheism in the In Nomine universe is that they are incorrect. It is difficult to argue the non-existence of God in the face of the absolute existence in both Heaven and Hell. Interestingly, if you look at your Existentialism texts, you'll discover the unsettling fact that no two Existentialists agree. Camus does not agree with Sartre, who does not agree with Kafka, Nieztsche, Jaspers or Heidegger. Jaspers went so far as to compare and contrast Kierkegaard and Nieztsche just to express how no one's views really did agree. It seems to me that any really good Existentialist or Secular/Cosmic Humanist who follows the normal faithless life is doomed to end up arguing their Godless philosophy for eternity under the whips of Habbalah while cowering in the alleys between beautiful manor houses of Malphas's Stygian Paradise. [Tickets now on sale at your nearby Ticketmaster!] > What would happen, for example, if a demon truly wanted peace and > prosperity for others, but thought that religion interfered with that goal, > and therefore was opposed to faith in God? Would he become renegade, or > even ascend? Or is this a legitimate (albeit not selfish or evil) goal for > a demon? I have in my game a Malakite of War who, while believing in God, subscribes to no religion. On the other hand, I also have an Ofanite of Fire who believes that he was designed and created to spread the Word of Allah. It takes all kinds... but they are not demons. A demon who goes around doing selfless, good acts in the wish for peace and prosperity is doomed to end up on an episode of Nybbas's favorite gameshow, "Good Demons Gone Bad IV". This is where a battle raged, mindless Calabite with numinous corpus claws tears apart their bound victim's body and sucks out the marrow out of bones while the victim's scream on television - at least until the last force is torn apart. I hear it gets very good ratings in Gehenna and is occasionally used as motivational videos for Baal's troops. The long and short of it is that selfless peaceful demons die messily, especially if they happen to get caught doing this. Heck, there are times that it's likely to make the demon downright dissonant, and that's going to get spotted sooner or later. There is no guarentee that a nice Archangel is going to swoop down, and it's very likely that any angel they approach is going to put a bullet between their eyes. That's Renegade territory, and that's no fun at all. If the demon is very lucky, he'll make a much happier, socially adjusted angel. Angels don't require religion - they're ANGELS. They serve God, they don't need a ritualistic lever to get them closer. Some like it for roles, some need it for other reasons, but it's largely unneccessary. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 21:50:22 -0600 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Films and angels Peter Witney wrote: > On the subject of films, I saw one a few weeks ago called Henry Fool. > In it, a stranger (a wandering writer) wanders into town and inspires a > rubbish/garbage man to write an epic poem, then he inspires him to get it > published and the man becomes rich and famous (while the travelling writer > stays poor and gets into trouble). > My point is this- the inspiration makes the wandering writer sound like a > Menunim, I haven't seen the move, but without more info, I suspect the inspiration isn't very Menunite like. Just having the character walk by quoting one line from "The Odyssey" without saying anything else isn't going to be all that photogenic. If he really _does_ inspire the lead like a Menunite would, I might have to track this film down. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 00:17:14 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Greg Jensen wrote: > Greetings! Hi, Greg! Welcome aboard! > I'm new to this list, having just read In Nomine. I wanted to ask what the > opinion is about atheism in In Nomine. I mean, the dichotomy seems to be > (I know it's actually a bit more complex, but basically: for God, and > benevolent; or against God and selfish/evil. That's basicaly about it. The details are where everything boggs down. > Now what about an atheistic humanist? They certainly wouldn't be > following the will of God. I also don't think you could really call > them selfish, and definitely not evil. Hmmm... My opinion? In In Nomine, the atheist would die and learn taht he has been doing God's will anyway. Religion isn't really that important in the game, except as a means to encourage humans to achieve their Destinies and/or reach Heaven. Strictly, I don't think belief in God is even needed. > What would happen, for example, if a demon truly wanted peace and > prosperity for others, but thought that religion interfered with that goal, > and therefore was opposed to faith in God? Would he become renegade, or > even ascend? Or is this a legitimate (albeit not selfish or evil) goal for > a demon? Sounds like a legitimate goal for a demon to me, although such a demon would probably be a Renegade. After all, the Hierarchy of Hell isn't interested in peace and prosperity - just in victory on their terms, which will allow them to reshape the Symphony to fit their own desires. I don't know if they'd ever Redeem, since that requires the help of an Archangel. Besides, if he is still acting in opposition to Heaven's goals, Heaven might not want him back. > On a related note, is there any source (or plans for such) to introduce > Grigori PCs (the ultimate humanists). I think I heard a rumor that they may be seen in the next Cycle series, but I know nothing for certain. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 21:26:09 -0800 From: Greg Jensen Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN At 07:59 PM 11/29/98 -0500, you wrote: >Long answer: Belief is one of the things that In Nomine leaves wide open >to interpretation. Yes, the premise of the game is a >Judeo-Christian-Muslim universe to an extent, although it doesn't >perfectly match any of the above. However, the game material makes no >statements on the eventual fate (or Fate) of humans who do not ascribe to >one of these three religions. Nowhere does it say, for example, that all >Buddhists go to Hell for not acknowledging God. That's pretty much what I thought. Thanks for this answer. >Seriously, though, while certain demons may deny the existence of God, >it's a rather difficult delusion to keep up in the face of the >overwhelming evidence of being a /demon/ in /Hell/ fighting /angels/. >Denying faith, on the other hand, is a common tactic of demons. The more >damage the Adversary can do to the structure of religion, the easier time >they have in corrupting the morals of humanity. I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is the extent of "evil" of the demons. I mean, many of the angels (i.e. Malakim, David, and Dominic) are not what I would personally consider "good," more resembling fanatic terrorists. However, none of the demons so far really seem as questionable. They all seem pretty evil. (Keep in mind, I'm only going off the main book, no supplements). The text says they are not all what we would consider "evil," just devoted to selfishness of some sort. More to the point, it seems they would prefer to enforce their own will over the Symphony rather than go with God's plan (sort of jazz it up a bit). While "evil" is kind of a relative thing, I'm not so sure this really necessarily sounds that bad per se. What if the demon wants to "improve" on the Symphony, and not necessarily at the expense of others? Enlightened self-interest is a valid moral system that is actually usually not at odds with divine command forms of ethical systems. You don't have to search very hard to find reason why killing, stealing, etc. are not necessarily good things that don't involve anything other than self-interest. I wonder if enlightened self-interested demons are at all possible. Since not all angels are kind, do all demons have to be cruel? Greg Jensen http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gjensen/gregpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 00:45:32 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Greg Jensen wrote: > I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is the extent of "evil" of the > demons. I mean, many of the angels (i.e. Malakim, David, and Dominic) are > not what I would personally consider "good," more resembling fanatic > terrorists. Personally, I'm not so sure I agree with the list you have. David *has* always bothered me (even more so since "Fall of the Malakim", where his Word appears to have been redefined as "Dumb As A Bag Of Rocks" instead of "Stone"), but the others really depend on how they are played. > The text says they are not all what we would consider "evil," just > devoted to selfishness of some sort. More to the point, it seems they > would prefer to enforce their own will over the Symphony rather than go > with God's plan (sort of jazz it up a bit). While "evil" is kind of a > relative thing, I'm not so sure this really necessarily sounds that bad > per se. What if the demon wants to "improve" on the Symphony, and not > necessarily at the expense of others? My approach to that is based on what I understand from the Tao Te Ching. Evil happens when people reject the Tao ("The Way", which doesn't really translate well into english; it's rather like the natural order of the universe. I'd quote the section I'm thinking of, but I can't find the book.). Demonic selfishness, whether done for seemingly good or bad reasons, brings evil because it is in opposition to the way of things. (I'll try and expand on that if it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to you.) > Enlightened self-interest is a valid moral system that is actually > usually not at odds with divine command forms of ethical systems. You > don't have to search very hard to find reason why killing, stealing, > etc. are not necessarily good things that don't involve anything other > than self-interest. Very true. Divine fiat could be invoked here to explain why it is wrong ("It's wrong because I said so, and I'm God"), but I find that to be a cop-out. > I wonder if enlightened self-interested demons are at all possible. > Since not all angels are kind, do all demons have to be cruel? Probably not. Many are, but it's not exactly a requirement (unless the Game is watching, and then only if the Gamester thinks it is required). Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 22:31:26 -0500 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN At 4:27 PM -0800 11/29/98, Greg Jensen wrote: > Greetings! > > I'm new to this list, having just read In Nomine. I wanted to ask what the > opinion is about atheism in In Nomine. I mean, the dichotomy seems to be > (I know it's actually a bit more complex, but basically: for God, and > benevolent; or against God and selfish/evil. Now what about an atheistic > humanist? They certainly wouldn't be following the will of God. The implication in the books seems to be that God doesn't give a hoot whether you believe in him or not. God seems to go for warm fuzzies, and doesn't care if you're Catholic or Protestant or Bhuddist or Atheist. However, the Heavenly Host does in general, as the current poolicy is for theological sanctions against Ethereal Dieties. And certain Archangels in very particular. Khalid, Laurence, and Dominic come to mind. If you're a nice person, and you achieve your Destiny during your life, you're likely to wind up in Heaven when you die. If you're an utter bastard, and you achieve your Fate, you're likely to wind up in Hell. You also might be reincarnated, or just go poof. It happens. Statements in Rev 2: The Marches also seem to imply that, even if you worshipped a Pagan god in life, your soul will eventually gravitate out of the ethereal realm and into Heaven or Hell, so there's no real escape there. > I also > don't think you could really call them selfish, and definitely not evil. > What would happen, for example, if a demon truly wanted peace and > prosperity for others, but thought that religion interfered with that goal, > and therefore was opposed to faith in God? Would he become renegade, or > even ascend? Or is this a legitimate (albeit not selfish or evil) goal for > a demon? If he's not sufficiently good at acting, and subliming his desires, you get a Renegade Demon. If the Gamers find out, things don't look good for Mr. Peace N. Prosperity. Spontaneous Redemption is very, very rare, most likely, his best bet is to find an Archangel who's not heavily into religion, and attempt to make contact. Atheist Angels might be possible, but they're probably likely to be Outcasts; there are too many Seraphim running around heaven who have met Him in the past, even if He doesn't make much of a showing nowadays. In something like Redneck Gaigin's Dark Victory setting, a "God is dead, but we still care" mentality might work out. > On a related note, is there any source (or plans for such) to introduce > Grigori PCs (the ultimate humanists). No source yet, though I've hear some likely unfounded, and months out-of-date rumors that Grigori might be covered in the next Cycle. ===== ><{{"> =================================================== <"}}>< ====== Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Trudy, Impudite Captain of Gluttony, the Demon of Popcorn nofori@pop3.utoledo.edu | Homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh maltesh@usa.net | In Nomine: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh/T317 ===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:08:34 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN On Sun, Nov 29, 1998 at 09:26:09PM -0800, Greg Jensen wrote: > I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is the extent of "evil" of the > demons. I mean, many of the angels (i.e. Malakim, David, and Dominic) are > not what I would personally consider "good," more resembling fanatic > terrorists. I think David's behaviour is questionable, to say the least. But I don't agree about Dominic or Malakim in general. The thing to remember about Dominic is that it is dissonant for his angels to inflict a punishment greater than the crime. Clearly, Dominic attempts to find perfect Justice, and to err on the side of mercy where error is inevitable. This is in lots of ways quite scary*, but it isn't wrong. As to it being dissonant to ignore heresy, note that the action they need take isn't specified. They can report it, or have a quiet chat with the person in question, or subtly steer them away from bad influences. The fact that Dominic prefers that matters be reported to superiors is, arguably, a protection for non-Dominicans from Dominicans who might let their own personal prejudices interfere with their judgement. After all, the superiors were promoted because of their good judgement. The other thing to remember is that his Triads almost always find the Truth. When they act, they tend to have good reason. And of course they watch everyone, after all, the Fall proved that trusted angels, even Superiors, were not incorruptible. If I were Dominic, I'd monitor everyone for fear of the consequences of not doing so. *If I were to pick an example from 'A Bright Dream' of something that an angel of Judgement might regard as reprehensible which others might regard as trivial, it's the bit where Nicole expects her Soldier to do her laundry. Angels, especially Mercurians, are supposed to be helping humanity, not using them as unpaid servants. It betrays an attitude of mind I'd expect from an Impudite. I'll followup to the rest of the post in a while. I must go. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "Warfare is the Tao of deception. Thus although capable, display incapability to them. When committed to employing your forces, feign inactivity. When [your objective] is nearby, make it appear as if distant; when far away, create the illusion of being nearby." -Sun Tzu, the Art of War. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 03:02:55 PST From: "Casey Eayrs" Subject: IN> Oops It sure didn't like my last message... Bloody Netscape... Ahhh welll... All's better :) Patrick O'Duffy Wrote: "Ah, no. Bear in mind that Celestials ARE NOT HUMANS AND HAVE NEVER BEEN HUMANS (is that too much emphasis? Sorry) - they are a separate_ 'race' to humanity (as are Ethereal spirits). Soldiers have an extra Force bestowed upon them by their Superior (and rare humans are born with a 6th Force naturally), but this does _not_ mean they are Celestials. Humans don't _ever_ become Celestials. They _can_ become Saints or Undead, which are 'super-humans', but still aren't Celestials." Really??? Somehow I got the impression that once a human dies he/she is basically asked if they want to spend eternity (or until Demons get there) in upper heaven or else join the ranks of servitors. At first as a Reliever, Imp or Gremlin until they earn their 'Wings' and then they become full Celestial Servitors... I though I developed this POV when I read through the main book but I'm not sure, as I've looked and can't find any arguments for or against it... If what Patrick says is true could someone please tell me where it talks about this, and in which book (Currently I have IN and The Marches) so I can become re-acquainted with that section? Actually my first game I was planning to run (Tomorrow... Ahhhh CRAP!!!!!) is based on a bunch of mundanes becoming Soldiers, then Relievers, and then eventually Angels... Looks like that one's shot to pieces... Ahhh welll... Maybe it can be a sort of house-rules type game... :) Also Saints are something I know nothing of... Damn it I need more books!!! :( Casey, Demon Prince of the In Nomine deprived (Not A word, but hey...) P.S. I'm writing up a Demon Prince which I think I might run past you guys... Should be up on my site soon... http://welcome.to/RealmOfKhaos ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 08:29:15 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Oops > Really??? Somehow I got the impression that once a human dies he/she is > basically asked if they want to spend eternity (or until Demons get > there) in upper heaven or else join the ranks of servitors. At first as > a Reliever, Imp or Gremlin until they earn their 'Wings' and then they > become full Celestial Servitors... > > I though I developed this POV when I read through the main book but I'm > not sure, as I've looked and can't find any arguments for or against > it... If what Patrick says is true could someone please tell me where it > talks about this, and in which book (Currently I have IN and The > Marches) so I can become re-acquainted with that section? > > Actually my first game I was planning to run (Tomorrow... Ahhhh > CRAP!!!!!) is based on a bunch of mundanes becoming Soldiers, then > Relievers, and then eventually Angels... Looks like that one's shot to > pieces... Ahhh welll... Maybe it can be a sort of house-rules type > game... :) For the record, I too had gotten that impression from the original source book when I first read it, a year and a half ago. Additionally, one of my players had _also_ gotten that impression, and had created a character [Maxwell, Cherub of the Sword] who had been a Soldier, then Sainted, and then finally an Angel in the modern day. I'm not entirely sure of the page reference anymore, but I know that it is in there somewhere. I'm not entirely clear if it spells out anywhere that Relievers do _not_ come from human beings - or, at least, as one of their sources. Canon or not, it's your game. It's not a game dictated by the writers of In Nomine. If this is how you want to progress, go for it. - - Em Current Quote: Daimon intones some stuff and makes some handwavings. Daimon contacts the demiurge! Demiurge says "I AM HERE." Demiurge says "WHAT DO YOU DESIRE, MY SERVANT?" Daimon says "I DESIRE A COPY OF FF8 IN ENGLISH." Demiurge says "Sorry, no can do." Daimon says "Damn. What good are you?" Demiurge can condemn your character to eternal torment, baby. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 09:23:49 +0000 From: Peter Witney Subject: Re: IN> Films and angels At 03:50 AM 11/30/98 , J. Michael Neal wrote: >I haven't seen the move, but without more info, I suspect the inspiration isn't >very Menunite like. Just having the character walk by quoting one line from >"The Odyssey" without saying anything else isn't going to be all that >photogenic. If he really _does_ inspire the lead like a Menunite would, I >might have to track this film down. My mistake. I forgot the distance of Menunim. The actions would probably be closer to Mercurian, but either way, the results of the inspiration are (as is true in movies) way out of proportion to the natural input of one human. ...and it's a good movie. Pete Peter Witney peter.witney@kobal.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:06:50 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN > I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is the extent of "evil" of the > demons. I mean, many of the angels (i.e. Malakim, David, and Dominic) are > not what I would personally consider "good," more resembling fanatic > terrorists. Well.... no. There are three here, so this is easy to take apart. Keep in mind that angels are not humans and do not have human systems of morality. * Malakim are hard wired into _honor_. If you have not gone out of your way to do dishonorable things, then you'll never have a problem with a Malakite. To a demon's point of view, the Malakite is a mad, fanatical, frothing beast who lives bathed in blood and always hunts them to the very end. From the angel's point of view, a Malakite lives to make the world a safer place so that other angels and good humans can get down to doing the work they were sent to do. How would you feel if you were a Mercurian of Flowers who was trying to do good on the Earth and your work kept getting trashed by a few demons who thought it was Funny? How about when said Funny demons find it entertaining to blow up the ER of a hospital and kill dozens of people? * David is fanatical to a point. While he supports skinheads and Nazis, it's much further beyond that point. He supports the building of communities, the acts that bring people together, the stone of the hearth, the warmth of the close family. This is hardly a demonic concept. * Dominic is misrepresented - you've been reading too many Holy War logs. :) Keep in mind that Dominic is _also_ subject to his dissonant conditions. He cannot judge and pass sentence beyond what is deserved. Dominic might not be emotional, he might not be cuddly, but he's always _FAIR_. He upholds the Law of Heaven. This does not make him everyone's favorite being. The Game is not fair. Demon Princes are not fair. Dominic is fair. Dominic is Good. Dominic speaks the Truth because he is a Seraph and cannot do it any other way. And if you deserve death, then he will kill you. None of these are fanatical terrorists. Sometimes it takes more then just the sourcebooks to really start understanding some aspects of the game. It takes some solid GMing for a period of time. > However, none of the demons so far really seem as > questionable. They all seem pretty evil. (Keep in mind, I'm only going > off the main book, no supplements). The text says they are not all what we > would consider "evil," just devoted to selfishness of some sort. More to > the point, it seems they would prefer to enforce their own will over the > Symphony rather than go with God's plan (sort of jazz it up a bit). While > "evil" is kind of a relative thing, I'm not so sure this really necessarily > sounds that bad per se. What if the demon wants to "improve" on the > Symphony, and not necessarily at the expense of others? Enlightened > self-interest is a valid moral system that is actually usually not at odds > with divine command forms of ethical systems. You don't have to search > very hard to find reason why killing, stealing, etc. are not necessarily > good things that don't involve anything other than self-interest. I wonder > if enlightened self-interested demons are at all possible. Since not all > angels are kind, do all demons have to be cruel? << Keep in mind that my take is that demons are, in fact, evil. While I like fluffy demons to a point, I believe in very mean, nasty, dark demons which are grossly underrepresented in the source material. >> You're a little off on your thinking here. For an angel, they believe in the will of the "Us". They are part of the Symphony and the Symphony is part of them and it is all something bigger then themselves which they glory in. All angels share one single Symphony, and they can see all creatures as being a part of it. So if one part needs improving - or someone is wiping out a part of it - they go to town. For a demon, they believe in the will of the "I". They listen only to their own personal Symphony, and it is all that exists in the universe. For them, it is the most important thing in the entire universe, and as such, it should become that way. They should kill, maim, destroy, and harm everyone who stands between them and making their own personal Symphony that #1 theme in the universe. _That_ is the essence of selfishness, and from that rises acts of great evil. Murder? Rape? Torture a few humans? Kill their bosses, massacre their coworkers - it's all in an effort to get ahead and make sure that they become more important. Not all demons are cruel, but not all demons are sent to Earth, either. Only about 1% of all demons are sent up, and these are the ones who, through backstabbing, lying, and deceit have snagged the eye of their Superior and he believes they are just loyal enough to not run off and just nasty enough to get the job done. A demon cannot be trusted, because it will do what is in it's own best self-interest. A demon cannot love, because it will not accept someone else into their own personal Symphony. Some demons might be as nice or nicer then people you know. And then they take your essence and you have a bad hair day. When a demon starts to improve the world for others, he is admitting that there are others who are just as or more important then himself in the universe. This does not jive with basic demon instincts, and that's the fast track to Redemption. - - Em Current Quote: On the general subject of madness, incidentally, someone - I forget who - - came up with a useful easy definition for clinical paranoia. You can think that every single person in the world is out to get you and not be paranoid. If you think that even one table lamp, or piece of Stilton cheese, is out to get you, then you are. - (Dave Stone) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:42:44 EST From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Pagan Soldiers >G'day. > Looking through The Marches recently, I found a bit that... doesn't >sit well with me. Pagan Soldiers (that is, 6-Force humans in service to >an Ethereal God), get to use Ethereal Songs and the 3 versions of the >Song of Dreams. > I dislike that for a number of reasons. It makes Pagan Soldiers >more versatile and (sometimes) subtle than normal Soldiers (since the >Ethereal Songs are often a bit less obvious and direct than Corporeal >versions), and it doesn't make much sense under the IN paradigm. What about Ethereal Soldiers' Essebce supply? Rather than getting Essence for doing things to serve their superior, they lose it, sending Essence to their superior. (Right?) That's a Definite Minus. Also, Ethereal Soldiers work for Ethereals, who, in Canon, just don't have much power. A Soldier of God or Hell has back-up, a very powerful patron. An Ethereal Soldier? Hardly, the Ethe Soldier's boss, if s/he shows up at all is most likely going to get their butt thumped, too. > I guess what I'm wondering is, how do others treat Pagan Soldiers? Contempt and fear. - -Perry, KFC Perry M. Lloyd (spook_number_six@hotmail.com) "Remember, false hope is still hope." -Dilbert ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 98 12:15 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> !! Wanted Home Product Assemblers !! >Hunt these people down and destroy them. That's what Malakim of Marc are for.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 98 12:29 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN >On a related note, is there any source (or plans for such) to introduce >Grigori PCs (the ultimate humanists). Plans, yes. No specifics yet, though. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 98 12:50 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN >I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is the extent of "evil" of the >demons. I mean, many of the angels (i.e. Malakim, David, and Dominic) are >not what I would personally consider "good," more resembling fanatic >terrorists. However, none of the demons so far really seem as >questionable. They all seem pretty evil. Well, the *Princes* are pretty much uniformly so. Lilith and Nybbas are probably the least evil, in canon descriptions, but Lilith is more variable than most DPs in some ways, and Nybbas is relatively new to Princehood, and was probably fairly young when he was promoted. On the other hand, the lesser demonic characters in canon (mostly in the Revelations Cycle books) are more ambiguous. None of them is precisely what one would call "nice", but you might not mind having them as neighbors.... Partly what's happening here, I think, is that to reach the top of the hierarchy in Hell, you have to lie, cheat, and backstab with the worst of them. If you're not so ambitious, you don't need to be as nasty -- just bad enough to survive in Hell. > More to >the point, it seems they would prefer to enforce their own will over the >Symphony rather than go with God's plan (sort of jazz it up a bit). While >"evil" is kind of a relative thing, I'm not so sure this really necessarily >sounds that bad per se. Which is partly how Lucifer pulled off the rebellion.... > Enlightened >self-interest is a valid moral system that is actually usually not at odds >with divine command forms of ethical systems. You don't have to search >very hard to find reason why killing, stealing, etc. are not necessarily >good things that don't involve anything other than self-interest. On the other hand, if everyone *else* believes that, you can advantage yourself greatly at their expense. I suspect that most enlightened self-interest philosophies are predicated on most people subscribing to them, that the promotion of the masses is the best way to improve their own position, long term. Sort of "trickle-down philosophy".... I'll leave it to Em to pick the holes in this argument (or even support it) - -- I'm hardly well-read in philosophy and ethics. > I wonder >if enlightened self-interested demons are at all possible. Since not all >angels are kind, do all demons have to be cruel? Yes, they are. And no, they don't. Elizabeth actually has a (non-canon) theory that Lilim may be slightly prone to enlightened self-interest, but they're a bit more group-minded than most demons, and still quick enough to take advantage of people by snaring them into debt. Demons don't really have to be cruel, as long as they're advancing the aims of Hell and their Prince. A lot of times, cruelty is an easy way to do that, though, especially for Words like Fire and the War. Possibly a simpler way to look at it is that demons aren't particularly cruel, per se, as much as they are insensitive and un-empathic. They really don't care what happens to other people, especially lower life forms (like humans and any demon weaker than them). If the quickest way to achieve their goals is to blow up a building full of school kids, sure, no problem. If it's funding a relief agency (to ensure that the workers in the cocaine fields don't die off, say), then sure, they can do that, too. All they really care about is the ends (improving their own situation), and they're *totally* indifferent to the means. That leaves a lot of scope for variations in visible behavior. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 98 12:52 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Atheists in IN > Spontaneous Redemption is very, very rare, As far as I know, it's totally unknown in canon, though not explicitly forbidden. (I've got some plans in my own game that it might happen as part of the Millenium.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 98 13:05 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Oops >Really??? Somehow I got the impression that once a human dies he/she is >basically asked if they want to spend eternity (or until Demons get >there) in upper heaven or else join the ranks of servitors. At first as >a Reliever, Imp or Gremlin until they earn their 'Wings' and then they >become full Celestial Servitors... Nope. Canon (though not maybe in the main book) is quite clear on this. It's certainly been made clear to the writers, at least.... >I though I developed this POV when I read through the main book but I'm >not sure, as I've looked and can't find any arguments for or against >it... I don't think there's anything in the main book to support it. But there's not much to deny it, other than by omission. It does say, I think, that celestial spirits are created by celestials, and I'm sure it doesn't imply they're recycled human souls. > If what Patrick says is true could someone please tell me where it >talks about this, and in which book (Currently I have IN and The >Marches) so I can become re-acquainted with that section? There is one (erroneous) statement in Night Music, I think, which says that human souls can become demons. It's since been errata'ed. I'm not sure there's an statement anywhere that humans never become celestials, in so many words. Might be something in the APG or IPG. There is some stuff in the forthcoming Tether book that distinguishes human actions from celestial ones a bit more clearly, in regards to Tether formation. But it doesn't really touch on the possibilities of promotion of humans to celestials. >Actually my first game I was planning to run (Tomorrow... Ahhhh >CRAP!!!!!) is based on a bunch of mundanes becoming Soldiers, then >Relievers, and then eventually Angels... Looks like that one's shot to >pieces... Ahhh welll... Maybe it can be a sort of house-rules type >game... :) You can certainly do it as house rules, and I don't think you'll run into too much trouble. As far as I know, the main reason for separating humans from celestials is a meta-game reason of not wanting IN to look too much like Just Another Superpowered Humans game. So writers are supposed to keep this in mind -- i.e., celestials are *alien*. >Also Saints are something I know nothing of... Damn it I need more >books!!! :( Saints are very close to angels in game mechanics, just slightly weaker, and the fact they tend to "retire" to the higher Heavens after a few deaths. There is no real demonic equivalent. Saints are described in Night Music. - ---Walter ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1027 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.