From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Mar 5 17:51:35 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 RAA11455 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:51:34 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id RAA12643 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:18:37 -0600 Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:18:37 -0600 Message-Id: <199803052318.RAA12643@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 #660 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Thursday, March 5 1998 Volume 01 : Number 660 In this digest: IN> Damned Message Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Re: IN> Fascism (was Re: Judaism) Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Celestials (Re: IN> Cats) FLUFF! (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Categories Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Animal Sapience Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) IN> Dru IN> The SJG Daily Illuminator for today... Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) IN> Celestial Lethe Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) Re: IN> Celestial Lethe Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) Re: Celestials (Re: IN> Cats) Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Re: IN> Celestial Lethe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:20:48 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: IN> Damned Message I must be cursed. The session crashed as I was attempting to send this message previously. Anyway, I did something very stupid recently. I sent a message to the list which I intended to send only to R. Sean Borgstrom. I'd like to ask anyone else interested in his new PBEM to ignore it, or else concoct a suitable rationale for your character knowing about it and get him to approve it. Either way is fine. I'd also like to ask everyone else to ignore it on the grounds that it's crap, and I can genuinely do much better. It's really just a framework. Now to remember the virtues of using forwards, cut-and-paste, or changing the recipient field in replies. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 12:33:20 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) > Well, quite. Druiel is going nuts, and is well on the way to Falling. > David has (almost by definition) been the same for millenia. Granted he > can't Fall, but we can probably assume at least canonically that he is not > Discord ridden because he supports fascism and by association the evils > done in its name. I will say, -again-, that I do not support the concept of Malakim Falling. I believe it is a serious cop-out to the one firm unchanging stance in the soucebook, and it ruins what made them so special in the first place. I do support that there are, on the other hands, fun ways to drive one all the way over the edge to insanity. Just the right person in the right place, and you'll be amazed what you can do. But this is beside the point. I think this standpoint on David's Fascist Stance is being taken a little too far. Let's not forget who is behind extreme clannishness and White Supremicists and Neo Nazis - Malphas. One would think that David would spend much of his time trying to support a 'community', while using his Mercurians (remember them?) to remind the humans that they need each other, and that adding more to the community supports it and makes it stronger, without trying to destroy other communities of humans. Malphas on the other hand, happily supports fascist dictators, racial hate, divisions between races, and all the assorted business. David encourages people to stand together. Malphas encourages people to fight among themselves while LOOKING like they are standing together. David does not support an 'evil' or 'bad' Word. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 12:36:37 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Fascism (was Re: Judaism) >Even Dominic realised eventually that the more >extreme methods of the Inquisition were a Bad Thing. I read an interesting article recently that suggested that by enforcing the social structure of the time, the Inquisition stopped revolutions and as a result, may have -saved- lives. Archangels are alot smarter than us, I bet they take the long view. I could easily see why Dominic would allow the death of a token number of people in order to save society and the lives of men from the chaos caused by Janus's and Malphas's servants. The same could be said about David supporting Facists because the end result would be good. Yes, many of the methods of the inquisition were over the top, but Archangels, esp. Dominic, should be more concerned with the good results of actions than a few ugly acts. I could see Dominic viewing the earthly inquisition as saving society, at the cost of a few lives. - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 12:59:10 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) The book says: "His Servitors encourage people to join together in strength for mutual loyalty and protection, even to the point of forming street gangs and militias. They proudly count skinheads among their followers. Some angels think the servants of David are too brutal, but they themselves wonder if they're brutal enough. David's followers are blindly loyal, and do not tolerate anyone questioning their master's decisions." To me, it's fairly clear that David's Word, on the metaphorical level, is "loyalty." This is definitely a virtue, but as the write-up shows, it can be a very dangerous virtue unless tempered by others. Courage is likewise a dangerous virtue. Starting from the raw concept, I think David could be much worse that Dominic. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 12:59:20 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) >I will say, -again-, that I do not support the concept of Malakim Falling. >I believe it is a serious cop-out to the one firm unchanging stance in >the soucebook, and it ruins what made them so special in the first place. Well Em, unless you have seen a preview of Fall of the Malakim we don't have that much proof that the Malakim fall. It could be a hoax or a teaser. I am with you, though. I don't like the idea of Malakim falling. - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 18:53:17 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 12:59:20PM -0500, Jesse wrote: > Well Em, unless you have seen a preview of Fall of the Malakim we don't > have that much proof that the Malakim fall. It could be a hoax or > a teaser. I am with you, though. I don't like the idea of Malakim falling. > > -Jesse I, on the other hand, do. I think that the idea of the Malakim being unable to fall devalues them. What special merit is there in not falling if you're incapable of doing so? I have a much higher esteem for Cherubim who don't fall than for any Malakite. After all, dissonance for Cherubim is tighter, as they may not betray their friends, their Superiors, or their beliefs. They're also bound by the spirit of every commitment they make. Can you seriously argue that that is less honourable than the Malakim? That is not to say that I prefer playing Cherubim to Malakim, but I think that their devotion is more impressive. In addition, it certainly erodes the idea of Free Will. While I personally don't have a difficulty with this, in that I believe Free Will is very malleable in the right hands, I'm fairly sure that a lot of people aren't very comfortable with that idea. As for Fall of the Malakim itself, I hope it isn't some sort of teaser. I think that it will provide great roleplaying opportunities if some Malakim do fall. Having fundamental parts of your belief system overturned at a stroke is surely very traumatic, especially if friends of yours are involved. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 13:38:59 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Celestials (Re: IN> Cats) At 8:50 PM +0000 3/4/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >The reasoning behind my initial remark, incidentally, was partly due to >meditations on one of my characters. But it came down to this. Seraphim >are stereotypically aloof, obsessed with cleanliness, and neat. As are >cats. Curiosity may also be a shared trait, but I think that might be >pushing the stereotype of cats too far. (Is it?) And it's possible that >there are some Seraphim out there without curiosity of any description, >though I think it's unlikely. Also, traditionally neither cats nor >Seraphim have a good opinion of humanity. Cats are curious -- but in certain ways. If something is threatening, they hide. If something sounds like it might be prey or territory, though... Of course, the stuff about learning behaviors got into a long discussion with my spouse about emotions, hardwiring (emotions are not logical, and humans tend to react in similar ways -- the things that we say define us from machines may *be* hardwiring!)... And what emotions celestials have. What kinds of hardwiring a non-evolved species would have. Cherubim are easy -- they have the "Parental Love" emotion as their main drive; they protect and nuture. Mercurians are social creatures (put them in solitary confinement and they start breaking), while Ofanim are embodiments of drive and urges to *do*. Then we started talking about how critters functioned in Limbo -- a Mercurian starts going stir-crazy (no one to interact with!), as do Ofanim (NO MOVEMENT!!!!). Cherubim get twitchy because they have nothing to protect. Malakim go perhaps distressingly introspective, but they rarely show up there anyway since they have to be Heartless to get there (or go there deliberately). Seraphim veg out -- no truth, no lies, nothing but self-knowledge. Elohim love Limbo. No distractions from intellectulizing and thinking and following the paths of actions down like a chess-program. Those Kyrios who can create vessels also just veg, probably. Habbalah, however, don't do well in Limbo -- no one to punish but themselves! Impudites have no one to admire them. Djinn like Limbo just fine. They don't *have* to care. Calabim may get self-destructive. Balseraphs self-resonate, and we all know how dangerous *that* is. Shedim don't get vessels, so that gets rid of them. And Lilim get bored out of their little green skulls -- but at least they *are* getting Essence (for practically free, even!). - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 13:55:59 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: FLUFF! (Re: IN> Cats) At 1:48 PM +0000 3/5/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 08:26:44AM -0500, David Edelstein wrote: >> Granted, that's an interesting question (and more pertinent to the list >> ), but I _was_ talking about the real world.... >> >> -David > >Beth, I hope you're properly ashamed of yourself. How dare you talk about >In Nomine on the list when David is talking about the real world? I'm a Superior. I can dare much. Besides, it *is* the IN list, right? Therefore talking about IN is perfectly canon. And what are you doing in human mode, my Servitor? Shouldn't that be just a vessel, or has my former Prince granted you his Humanity attunement for some reason? And what would that reason be? - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 13:58:48 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Categories At 10:21 AM -0500 3/5/98, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >I notice that, among the Archangels, we have: >animal (Jordi), vegetable (Novalis), and mineral (David) >and >earth (David again), air (Janus), and fire (Gabriel) >Is or was there a canonical Archangel of Water that I missed? He's dead. (Heaven & Hell, p. 77, if I recall correctly without looking at it. I think it's a FAQ! He may be mentioned in an upcoming book, as well.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 13:44:40 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) At 3:25 AM +0000 3/5/98, Jo Hart wrote: >Given that the average human has an intelligence of about 3, which is half >as intelligent as the average celestial, I think its fair to say that the >difference in brightness is a lot smaller than between humans and animals. >Its probably closer to the difference between a bright adult and a bright >10-year-old (although I'm sure one of the psychologists can correct me on >this) -- especially given that an .. err.. intellectually underendowed >celestial will not be any brighter than the average mortal, but can still >perfectly well do its job (there aren't special schools for celestials with >2 forces in ethereal ;) ), and a bright mortal can be as intelligent as an >average celestial. So it is quite possible to have a soldier who is your >intellectual equal. Yes, it is -- but check out Dogs -- they have Int of 1-3 themselves! This is scary. p. IN191... So if the average dog has 2 intelligence, then the difference between a dog and a human is actually *smaller* than a human and an Intelligence 6 celestial... Ow. I think my head hurts. >Would be difficult to argue that they weren't sapient though (Star Trek >bedamned, the word sapient just makes me think of the luggage ;-) ). ( Does anyone want to tell the Luggage that it's not a person?) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 13:53:50 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Animal Sapience At 8:26 AM -0500 3/5/98, David Edelstein wrote: [Re: IQ tests] > Gorillas being a good example; is a gorilla really "as smart" as >a retarded human? In many ways, the human is probably smarter, and yet the >human is defective and probably could not function on his own, whereas the >gorilla is a fully functional gorilla who is able to interact with her >_natural_ environment much more effectively than can the human. Giving an >IQ test designed for humans to an animal will only prove that animals don't >have human thought processes. What about "wild children," who somehow survive in a non-human environment? They were obviously surviving well enough in a "natural" environment... A retarded human might be able to function perfectly well in a very simple environment -- they just can't interact with more socalized humans. (And a feral child apparently doesn't have very "human" thought processes, from what I recall of the matter -- after a certain age, language is harder to learn, for instance. And sensibly, they don't think clothing is very comfortable.) Animals definitely have more hardwiring for the basics of their lives (a cat will pounce and bite, though they usually have to learn how to kill effectively). And that hardwiring is the "adult survival" stuff, most of the time. But if you can sort out what's hardwiring and what's actual learning/reasoning....? (Humans have hardwiring too. We just don't notice, 'cause we all have it. Celestials, on the other hand... "Why are you doing that?" I *gotta* do a newborn Seraph someday.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 19:18:15 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) On Thu, Mar 05, 1998 at 12:59:10PM -0500, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > Starting from the raw concept, I think David could be much worse > that Dominic. > > Earl Indeed. Personally, on the concept level, I also find Janus very scary. His Word, metaphorically, seems to be disruption. His Servitors destroy bonds in ways very similar to Malphas. The four initial invocation modifiers involve theft, lies, and destruction. There is no concept of beneficial change presented in the main rulebook as far as I can tell. I've just finished playing Demon Prince of Rock & Roll with a Seraph of the Wind as my protagonist. Looking back, I see that many of the actions she took which were actually beneficial to people went against the nature of her Superior's Word. And that frightens me tremendously. Looking ahead, I can't imagine her staying in the service of the Wind in the long term, because she simply isn't ruthless enough to act without caring who it hurts. Dominic, on the other hand, while he certainly isn't the easiest boss in the world, has policies that I admire. It's dissonant for his Servitors to inflict a punishment greater than the crime, and one of the rites involves defending innocents in court. And he doesn't restrict himself to looking at dissonance and complacently assuming that if it's absent, all is well. He cares about the idea that Heaven should be doing good, and that Words should be pursued with _good_ in mind, rather than simply the Word. While it might be argued that his dealings with Asmodeus belie this, I think that a simple truth is being ignored here. Most Renegade demons aren't interested in redemption, and may in fact be worse threats than Bound demons. As for David, I can't seriously imagine him telling his Servitors to go out and stop people joining the Komsomol or the Hitler Jugend. Hasn't it been said that he believes that suffering toughens people? It reminds me of Michael's suggestion in the Marches that Nightmares would be better for Heaven's cause than Dreams. His thinking, to my mind, is warped, because as far as I can see, he elevates strength above virtue. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 14:19:42 -0500 From: bruce dykes Subject: IN> Dru >> I agree. The "worst" angel is still "better" for humankind than the >> "best" demon. >> >Far be it from me to disagree with received wisdom, but I'd like to >mention Druiel here. I'm sure it won't take too much effort to find demons >who don't do as much harm as he does. Note that I'm not talking about the >entire history of Druiel's life or of the demon's life, but more about the >present and the future. After all, angels Fall and demons Redeem. Allow me toplay Angel's advocate here for a moment. 1: as mentioned earlier, Dru is well on his way towards Falling. 2: We haven't been given any details about Dru's victims. If they're all innocent teenagers, then Dru is bad, very bad. But maybe they're not, maybe he's looking for the school drug dealers and bullies. He could actually be performing service to Judgement as well, pulling such already sinful individuals from the Symphony before they can start consorting with demons...remember, angels are able to take a very long term view of things, though not necessarily a broad view... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 14:36:00 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> The SJG Daily Illuminator for today... "March 5, 1998: Did someone jump the gun on Liber? All our new releases have "release-by" dates. The distributors are not allowed to ship them before this date. The intent, of course, is to let us ship out our books early enough that everyone can get them on time, without offering an unfair advantage to those distributors who are closer to us. We have reason to fear that one distributor ignored the release date and shipped Liber Reliquarum early. It should have shipped FROM the distributors YESTERDAY. So if you saw it in a store before TODAY, March 5, there's a problem. (If you see it in a store today, that's still probably a problem.) If you saw Liber in a store on or before today, March 5, please drop e-mail to Woody Eblom (woodysan@io.com). This does *not* create trouble for the retailer; retailers have no way of knowing they were shipped early. But if a distributor really jumped the gun, we want to know, and we want to have a talk with them, in fairness to the other distributors. - -- Steve Jackson" (So it's good news and "bad" news.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 19:58:10 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) At 12:33 05/03/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >I will say, -again-, that I do not support the concept of Malakim Falling. >I believe it is a serious cop-out to the one firm unchanging stance in >the soucebook, and it ruins what made them so special in the first place. All I can say is that if a Malakite can fall then I hope Vapula's cloning tanks are finally going to successfully turn out a Lilim ;-) (After all, they've turned out lots of other interesting things .. such as my boss) 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: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 15:09:30 -0500 From: Pete Overton Subject: IN> Celestial Lethe Hello. :) Freshly subscribed to the list, your dashing young hero posts already after having extensively read the FAQs, websites, and archives! What a silly, silly boy! Firstly, let me state that the ideas below are derivative of two other sources, Precedence's Immortal (whom I owe the term Lethe to) and Kult (for the general concept). I submit this to the list for opinions, since I could not find any reassurance elsewhere. :) Lethe, for those of you who do not know, is the (generally) willful supression of personality, thus allowing a "new" personality to be developed. This is done (in Immortal anyways) to defeat the tragic and terrible ennui and boredom that develops for living over a long time. Obviously in IN terms, this is not a very likely case scenario because Celestials would not be overly thrilled to lose their sense of selves and their connection to their Supreme Being. However, if you toss in a dash of Kult theory, things become rather interesting. Lethe might because something of a reflexive defense against a Dark IN world in which the angels are losing. The profound despair that angels might experience could trigger it on an extreme and essentially make them "forget" they are angels, dispersing their angelic essences into a vessel of some sort and taking on a permanent corporeal form. Reviving an angel from Lethe would be as simple as reintroducing the poor person to the vessel with the essence in it and consuming it in some form, or interacting with it at least under the gentle hand of another angel. Okay, so I'm not so good at systems. ;) This serves two main purposes. First, it is a great little device if you have a favourite mortal/Soldier character and feel the dire need to take them to the Celestial level. A quest (literally) to find their vessel (hidden well if they are at all intelligent) and transform back into the angel they once were, "remembering" their previous Celestial life. The second main thing this serves is my personal fetish for the normal-turned-supernormal characters that I so love, which are canonically impossible in general. This is not overly munchkin if used properly and sparingly (note the latter) and it is almost certainly something that no angel would voluntarily enter except under the most dire circumstances. While it is a great way to duck out a horde of demons (they are winning, remember?), it is not a practical method since you can't just submerge and surface like a submarine, because once you submerge all traces of your angelic past are gone. It is a gamble, thus, because there is a very real chance that they could literally die as a mortal, and never regain their Celestiality! Not something to be taken lightly at all, believe you me. ;) The vessel is the important part of this equation. It can be anything but most typical are pieces of jewelry or stationary objects (natural formations). Because they are imbued with Celestial essence, they are slightly above your standard items/places, but not overly so in the grand scheme of things, because it is "dormant" as opposed to "active." The practicalities of this should be fairly obvious. Many of the older angels who were never mentioned in the game or were mentioned fleetingly or you felt you wanted in your game can be brought back in this manner (possibly with the PCs help!). A friend of the PCs disappears suddenly and they find no trace of him -- the investigation of that could last for a few sessions alone and they finally start to put the pieces together when they find the vessel, only to lose it to Infernal forces or worse, mortal fanatics who think they have a miraculous item. It is also an obvious place to start a campaign from, a collection of mortals who are reunited with their vessels for whatever reason and are returned to Celestial glory, much to their surprise! This too adds to the fire of the Free Will debate, because a great many angels have tried to voluntarily enter Lethe and could not do it, while others slipped into it without wanting to or trying to. It seems the angels have to truly, truly need it before it happens, and it is by no means a certain thing. As I said, I am horrible at systems so I will not create one (it should be dramatic anyways ;) but you can derive it if you so desire. Well, there. My first post. I am really heavily biased towards the Angelic side, as you can probably tell. So be really mean and vicious. ::smile:: Pete E-Mail: pover@golden.net ICQ#: 2192976 "A game about angels and demons? Come on, how munckin can you really get, sheesh!" -- A Naive Me ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 20:06:37 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) At 13:44 05/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 3:25 AM +0000 3/5/98, Jo Hart wrote: > > >Yes, it is -- but check out Dogs -- they have Int of 1-3 themselves! > This is scary. p. IN191... Good grief! Sharon (Malakite of fire, personification of Gods wrath etc etc) only has Int 3. Dogs must be cheaper to create and easier to control than celestials are... I think Gabriel should be told! (and that should get errata-ed. On a scale of 2-12, Dogs do NOT have intelligence > 1) > So if the average dog has >2 intelligence, then the difference between a dog and a human >is actually *smaller* than a human and an Intelligence 6 celestial... Which is the difference in intellect between an average human (3) and a bright human (6) [I'd say genius level is higher than 6] Scary thoughts. But dogs can't be trained to do the washing up! 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: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:20:30 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) > >I will say, -again-, that I do not support the concept of Malakim Falling. > >I believe it is a serious cop-out to the one firm unchanging stance in > >the soucebook, and it ruins what made them so special in the first place. > > > All I can say is that if a Malakite can fall then I hope Vapula's cloning > tanks are finally going to successfully turn out a Lilim ;-) (After all, > they've turned out lots of other interesting things .. such as my boss) > I agree! I agree! If any old Demon Prince can have Malakim, then any old Demon Prince can have Lilim all to themselves. Bring on the cloned sheep! Bring on the symmetric armies of identical celestials! Woo hoo! To hell with Lilith! To hell with exclusivity! And I _know_ we have some Vapulans who work here. :) - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:41:00 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) > I, on the other hand, do. I think that the idea of the Malakim being > unable to fall devalues them. What special merit is there in not falling > if you're incapable of doing so? There's all sorts of fun to be had. For normal angels, if they go raving insane (take Druiel as an example, since he's being bantered about on the List) then they really do have an out. They really can change their natures, they really can Fall, and they really can live with themselves once again. Falling is terrible, horrible, mind bogglingly bad, but it is a cosmic 'out' for those who can't take it anymore. Malakim get to go raving insane... and then live with themselves. Forever. For eternity. Normal Angels Fall, Malakim break. Maybe I'm much crueler then other people, which is entirely possible, but this appeals to my sense of aesthetics. Taking a Malakite and slowly breaking it over years and years of certain sorts of moral abuse seems exactly why they take oaths to kill demons in the first place. Taking a Malakite and twisting it until it says "Uncle" and then watching it Fall is no fun. Anyone can do that, with any angel. Taking a Malakite and twisting it until it says "Uncle" and ending up with an insane angelic killing machine is much more appealing. There's all sorts of interesting things that can be done with insane murderous oath bound killing machines that cannot Fall to relieve their mental pain. Otherwise, why hasn't Vapula, or Asmodeus, or Saminga, or ANY of the other Demon Princes done this? It's not like it's impossible (or even hard) to capture a Malakite. Why hasn't one young Malakite gone running off to some hidden corner of the planet and tried this on his own? What was that being yelled about persistent universes? Hello? > In addition, it certainly erodes the idea of Free Will. While I personally > don't have a difficulty with this, in that I believe Free Will is very > malleable in the right hands, I'm fairly sure that a lot of people aren't > very comfortable with that idea. Free Will is Free Will. This is about a choir who takes Oaths to make sure they have as little of it as possible. Malakim don't have a choice about becoming 'evil'. They'll explode on their own Oaths. Can you just see one running around trying to kill itself, because it believes it's done something dishonorable? Just imagine - the Malakite has an oath to destroy evil. And then he does something dishonorable. He resonantes on himself, and he finds, in his own view, that HE is becoming Evil. But it's dishonorable to commit suicide, so he starts to freak out, and he does more dishonorable acts... Now, if a Seraph lied, and freaked out, and got confused, he'd fall like a stone. The Malakite just freaks out, period. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 21:12:01 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) At 15:41 05/03/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >Maybe I'm much crueler then other people, which is entirely possible, but >this appeals to my sense of aesthetics. Taking a Malakite and slowly >breaking it over years and years of certain sorts of moral abuse seems >exactly why they take oaths to kill demons in the first place. > You can actually break demons in the same way, if you can stand the company ;) You probably have to be a not-nice person in the first place to want to do this. I suppose eventually they just curl up and turn into pools of dissonance. Demons, I mean. 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: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 16:39:14 -0500 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) Jo Hart wrote: > > > Scary thoughts. But dogs can't be trained to do the washing up! > Neither can many humans... - -- Mark McKenzie E-mail: markadv@kinekom.com ICQ 7946364 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 16:39:46 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) > >Maybe I'm much crueler then other people, which is entirely possible, but > >this appeals to my sense of aesthetics. Taking a Malakite and slowly > >breaking it over years and years of certain sorts of moral abuse seems > >exactly why they take oaths to kill demons in the first place. > > > > You can actually break demons in the same way, if you can stand the company > ;) You probably have to be a not-nice person in the first place to want to > do this. > > I suppose eventually they just curl up and turn into pools of dissonance. > Demons, I mean. *nodnodnod* As a matter of fact, there HAS been some experimentation done with this. Mainly, I think first _by_ me, and now, _on_ me. Pools of dissonance are fun! Really! Honestly! Bah. Redemption. Who needs it? :) Hey, can I add that society to my .sig? :) - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 98 16:41 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Lethe A somewhat interesting idea.... I should point out that for taking human characters to the celestial level, there are already two outs: Saints (in Night Music) and children of the Grigori(in the core rules; they are celestials, but often think themselves to be human). Saints have most of the same abilities as angels, except they don't have servitor attunements or get dissonance. When they re-enter the corporeal, they are stated to lose their knowledge of their full nature, until at some point they remember. Children of the Grigori get a tiny mention in the core rules, but it sounds like they grow up human (with maybe some weird abilities), but are essentially celestials. There are also Remnants, who are crippled celestials living as humans, without many of their celestial abilities; there is at least some possibility that they can be restored, though there's nothing yet in canon on this, one way or the other. So the notion of deliberate corporeal incarnation as "normal humans" by angels isn't too far-fetched. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 16:55:56 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> David (re: Judaism) On Thu, 5 Mar 1998, Jo Hart wrote: > All I can say is that if a Malakite can fall then I hope Vapula's cloning > tanks are finally going to successfully turn out a Lilim ;-) (After all, > they've turned out lots of other interesting things .. such as my boss) Good point. If one absolute rule of the setting ("No Malakim Falls. Ever.") can be broken, so can another. Will we ever see a book with a title like "Creation of the Lilim"? Rich Gant ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 16:00:30 -0500 From: "Da' Dude" Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) >(and that should get errata-ed. On a scale of 2-12, Dogs do NOT have >intelligence > 1) No way dude! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 22:27:02 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Royal Association for Promotion of Cruelty to Demons (or Malakim) At 16:39 05/03/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >Hey, can I add that society to my .sig? :) > You can be a founder member if you like! We can put out monthly newletters and everything ;) Membership and subscriptions at a special reduced rate for the first quarter... jo join up now and get your free tattoo-removal kit - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 98 17:41 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: Celestials (Re: IN> Cats) >Those Kyrios who can create vessels also just veg, probably. Or spend a lot of time in idle conversation with themselves.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 18:14:06 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: Celestials & "pets" (Re: IN> Cats) At 8:06 PM +0000 3/5/98, Jo Hart wrote: >At 13:44 05/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >>At 3:25 AM +0000 3/5/98, Jo Hart wrote: >> >> >>Yes, it is -- but check out Dogs -- they have Int of 1-3 themselves! >> This is scary. p. IN191... > >Good grief! Sharon (Malakite of fire, personification of Gods wrath etc >etc) only has Int 3. Dogs must be cheaper to create and easier to control >than celestials are... > >I think Gabriel should be told! (Only Intelligence 3? Personification of God's Wrath? Hm. What does this say about the virtues (pun intended after the fact) of Wrath, anyway?) >(and that should get errata-ed. On a scale of 2-12, Dogs do NOT have >intelligence > 1) I may bring this interesting little thing up with folks... (I can see dogs having a decent Perception, since they sniff things out and hear better and all, though.) >> So if the average dog has >>2 intelligence, then the difference between a dog and a human >>is actually *smaller* than a human and an Intelligence 6 celestial... > >Which is the difference in intellect between an average human (3) and a >bright human (6) [I'd say genius level is higher than 6] Soooo.... Operating by those rules, humans are pets... Sounds good to the demons! >Scary thoughts. But dogs can't be trained to do the washing up! Darn!! I'd get one if they could! - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 18:09:01 -0500 From: Pete Overton Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Lethe >I should point out that for taking human characters to the celestial >level, there are already two outs: Saints (in Night Music) and children >of the Grigori(in the core rules; they are celestials, but often think >themselves to be human). Well, I have to admit somewhat embarrassingly that my major source of funding ran out after I bought the Core Rules and the Angel Player's Guide so I am limited to what I find on the Net as a rule. But I was sort of hoping more along the lines of a mortal finding out that they are in fact an angel who dissolved their Celestial essence to avoid whatever it was they were hiding from. The obvious question is what do both sides think about this. My character went through this and when she had found the vessel, an interesting point was brought up that her personality and sense of self may be obliterated in the process! Ironic that the angel takes a leap of faith in entering Lethe but the mortal must take one to become an angel again. She of course did take the leap and as it turned out she kept her major personality although sometimes deals with "echoes" of her previous angelic self and has a whole whack of memories that are not hers. ::smile:: She deals with them daily. >Saints have most of the same abilities as angels, except they don't have >servitor attunements or get dissonance. When they re-enter the >corporeal, they are stated to lose their knowledge of their full nature, >until at some point they remember. But do they have the cool wings? ::grin:: >Children of the Grigori get a tiny mention in the core rules, but it >sounds like they grow up human (with maybe some weird abilities), but >are essentially celestials. I wish they had expanded more on them actually, it was a pretty nebulous deal we got on them, which is not necessarily a bad thing but I hope we learn more of them, because they fascinate me to no end as the penultimate mortal/angel story. >So the notion of deliberate corporeal incarnation as "normal humans" by >angels isn't too far-fetched. Nah. But most of them don't stay that way, and I wanted.. well, a character who did not know everything about Heaven and Earth (so to speak) and maintained a strong sense of humanity and had to deal with a sudden revealation, and deal with it she did, for there were a lot of issues she had to ponder including the last moment personality question. But Claire, well, she's a unique one and dealt with it and emerged as Clarielle. She has a sideline in helping other angels who suspect they lost friends to Lethe, but it is not really a primary thing, instead serving the Archangel of Death. Pete E-Mail: pover@golden.net ICQ#:2192976 "The world had Moved On." -- Stephen King, "The Gunslinger" ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #660 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.