From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Mar 22 00:38:55 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 AAA02596 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 1998 00:38:54 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id AAA29967 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 22 Mar 1998 00:33:34 -0600 Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 00:33:34 -0600 Message-Id: <199803220633.AAA29967@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 #688 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 Sunday, March 22 1998 Volume 01 : Number 688 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution Re: IN> Anti-Puritans IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. Re: IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Re: IN> IN Slang IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores Re: IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> IN Correspondance IN> Ancient Angels? IN> Metatetron? Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution Re: IN> Metatetron? Re: IN> Ancient Angels (and other thoughts) Re: IN> Metatetron? Re: IN> Ancient Angels? Re: IN> Metatetron? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 00:53:57 -0500 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Walter Milliken wrote: > > >> For example does anyone else have a real issue with the renaming of > >> Dulles Airport? > > Actually I thought it was Washington National that was causing problems, > not Dulles. Sorry you are correct. My bad, but the point is still valid. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 02:10:07 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans > > No wonder God called him back, no matter how the trial went it would > > have been bad, if they had ratified him he would have gone on to greater > > extremes and Fallen, if deemed guilty, he would have gone renegade an > > eventually Fallen, God did the best thing calling him back. > > First, the obvious. Uriel cannot Fall. David cannot Fall. > Laurence cannot Fall. They are all three Malakim. Malakim cannot > Fall. Hmmm - I wonder. Laurence and David I won't dispute, but Uriel I might. After all, Uriel is the *source* of Malakim infalability; the other's get their purity from him. He doesn't appear to have any external purity, which means that he might very well be able to loose his purity and Fall. Which may be why God called him back; he was in danger of falling, which would have made Malakim vulnerable to falling, if it didn't cause them to fall en mass. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 02:10:07 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans > Okay, I guess this was a little harsh in its preconception, but I > was just trying to get my point across. Ummm - maybe it's just me, but I think you've just pretty well outlined the consensus the list had reached a while ago about Uriel... (Don't feel too bad - I did the same thing with the Janus/Valefor thing, when I actually took a second to compare their attunements. It's something to think about before you post, though; are you preaching to the choir?) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 02:10:07 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution > In a sense, as a GM, it doesn't really matter how much XP you give > out, because you can always beef up the bad guys accordingly. You > could give out 30 points a session if you multiplied the bad guys by > 5 every session. The only problem with this solution is that if you make advancement too fast, you will be forced to break the believability of the world to produce opponents dangerous enough. This is the problem that showed up with comic books, especially Marvel; to keep people interested, they had to come up with more and more powerful characters. These characters needed more powerful enemies. Soon every few issues involved a villian trying to destroy the universe... What I would love to do is totally remove game statistics from the players' sight. Make all of the actions descriptive, and do all the rolling and number crunching myself (probably with a computer program handy), including for the character advancement. That would make the emphasis almost entirely on the story, and not on character advancement. The two hurdles I can see are having a system that I can run well enough, and having players who would let me do it... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 04:21:15 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Simon Hailes wrote: > > At 06:25 PM 20/03/98 +0000, you wrote: > >At 12:11 20/03/98 -0600, you wrote: > >> > >>> The Crusade was an unprecedented and extreme aspect of his > >>> Word, but it is hardly an atrocity comparable with the Holocaust. > >>Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, and > >>100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two events do > >>not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy of the two. > > > > > >No offence intended to anyone but do you think we could leave this stuff > >out, or at least offlist? >sorry about the Jews remark, it was just an example meant to drive my > point home, being an anti-nazi, and pro all races and religions I used > something I relate to, but if that riled you, don;t by any means read > Stephen King's Summer of Curruption, or watch Romper Stomper (the >story was > disturbing, I hated the movie). I mean no disrespect whatsoever to any > individuals of the Jewish faith on list, or any other members of other > faiths. Agreed. Believe me, with my maternal greatgrandparents having been chased from Imperial Poland at the beginning of the century, I do understand where Jo is coming from. Yet, the Holocaust and other such events [PolPot, the Khmer Rouge, Stalin's Purges, just to name a few] are the only RL events that come even close to matching the totality and effectiveness of Uriel's Purge. I apologize to Jo and anyone else who was hurt by the reference, but we have da*n few benchmarks to compare anything like this to. In all seriousness, is there an unoffensive benchmark we can use when referencing a widespread deathdealing like this? I thought just *now* of using the dinosaur extinction, but it is, IMHO, too remote and disconnected to have the right sort of impact; and Auks, Dodoes, and Carrier Pigeons just don't work--they don't feel comparable, that is, to even one Unicorn, much less the whole race. Suggestions for alternative mass-slaughter benchmarks, anybody? Apologies again to anyone who was offended. tom timberlake, who could have been a Polish-born Dychtwald, in a better world. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 06:21:11 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns >And what unholiness attaches to the Unicorn? It was rather known for its ability to remove all taint, all uncleanness, all poison and evil from what it touched. Yet even this symbol of Uriel's own Word was destroyed. "Only the unclean and unholy", indeed!< Not that I really want to get into this silliness, but just a comment from the sidelines: the image of unicorns as symbols of purity and goodness is a relatively recent romanticization. The original unicorn legends depicted them as thoroughly nasty and vicious beasts, anything but benevolent. - -David (who thinks Uriel is way cool, but probably not someone you'd want to have over for dinner) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 06:27:05 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. >These were living, corporeal creations of God (and it pissed Jordi off a great deal when Uriel slew them). I believe in the intro to the Marches he (Uriel) gave his reason for destroying them, but i don't remember it now. < Basically, Uriel claimed that they were _not_ creations of God, but the result of celestials and ethereals meddling with natural creatures to create magical beasts. Jordi may in fact have been one of the culprits. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 13:33:00 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns At 06:21 21/03/98 -0500, you wrote: > >-David (who thinks Uriel is way cool, but probably not someone you'd want >to have over for dinner) > Oh I don't know. Good eating on them unicorns... 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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 06:01:40 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? > Dulles is the airport in Washington DC and Congress is currently voting > on a bill to change it to Ronald Reagan National Airport. This is incorrect. If I am not mistaken, the airport they are trying to name after Reagan is Washington National, which is both closer to the center of DC than Dulles and quite a bit smaller than Dulles. So far as I know, there is no move afoot to rename Dulles. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 11:38:02 -0600 From: rbeall@fdldotnet.com (Grim88) Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang A friend of mine and I have been working on something similar to this for a while now. The list is still incomplete, but since interest has been shown, I've decided to post it now. Some of the entries are the same as the original posters (Em?) which just goes to prove that great minds think alike. Names used when discusing Servitors of various Superiors: Formal Informal Derogatory Blandine Dreamers Sleepers Christopher David Davidians Stonies Dominic Dominicans Judgementals, 'Mentals Eli Creationists Gabriel Gabrielites Firebugs Janus Janusites Airheads Jean Techies Geeks Jordi Animists Laurence Litheroy Revealers Flashers Marc Traders Traitors Michael Michaelites Warriors Novalis Hippies Yves Librarians Bookworms Zadkiel Protectors Alaemon Andrealphus Lusties Asmodeus Pawns Baal Warriors Beleth Belethites Boojum Belial Pyros Gabrielites Fleurity Druggies Furfur Hardheads Haagenti Kobal Jokesters Kronos Lilith Malphus Mammon Nybbas Saminga Samninganites Valefor Vapula Thieves Any and all additions, comments, and even critizisms are welcome. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 10:11:46 PST From: "Chris Crowe" Subject: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores tom timberlake wrote: >And what unholiness attaches to the Unicorn? It was rather known for >its ability to remove all taint, all uncleanness, all poison and evil >from what it touched. Yet even this symbol of Uriel's own Word was >destroyed. "Only the unclean and unholy", indeed! My point exactly. 1pt >Glad am I that I am a Cherub and not a Seraph when you make such >statements as this. How many temples did the unicorns cause to be >built to honor them? How many Churches of the Griffin were >constructed at the urging of those same Ethereals? Whyfor were they >destroyed, who are/were held to be living symbols of purity, and >steadfast vigilance? Why was the Phoenix destroyed, never again to >remind Man of Good arising from the ashes of defeat, do they >[mankind] but hold the faith, believe and work towards the rebirth of >Good, then surely it will spring reborn, phoenix-like from the defeat >and vile works of the Foe. But the Phoenix is reborn no more, the >Unicorn leaves no hoofprints to inspire mortal minds, the Griffin >cleaves the air no more, reminds no man that he is watched by others >and his actions are seen, his motives known. Still my point exactly, i'm stating like this timberlake guy. make it 2 pts >Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, >and 100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two >events do not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy >of the two. Oh, no he didn't just say that. We are comparing a REAL LIFE atroscity to a GAME atroscity, there is NO comparison. back to 1pt Uriel-->[1] Anti-Puritans-->[1.5] I can't wait to see what happens next. Krowe, Malakim of Destiny, (Arch)Angel of Redemption ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 13:42:44 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans and Unicorns > And what unholiness attaches to the Unicorn? It was rather known > for its ability to remove all taint, all uncleanness, all poison > and evil from what it touched. Yet even this symbol of Uriel's own > Word was destroyed. "Only the unclean and unholy", indeed! The claim of holiness by something that *isn't* may be the reason they were hunted in the first place. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 13:56:49 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores > >Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, > >and 100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two > >events do not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy > >of the two. > > Oh, no he didn't just say that. We are comparing a REAL LIFE > atroscity to a GAME atroscity, there is NO comparison. Am I the only one who isn't going to start getting all righteous because Tom compared the Holocaust and the Purge? Everybody is implying that Tom is saying that they compare outside the game, which I don't think he is at all. He is simply saying that, in the context of the game, the Holocaust, though nasty, had nothing on the Purge. And given his arguement, I agree. In the game, saying that the Holocaust was worse implies that the mythical creatures have less 'value' than Jews do. If that is true in your game, than the Holocaust was worse. I'd worry about a mindset that places different values on sentient life, myself. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.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: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 15:20:42 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 2 scores Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > > > >Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, > > >and 100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two > > >events do not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy > > >of the two. > > > > Oh, no he didn't just say that. We are comparing a REAL LIFE > > atroscity to a GAME atroscity, there is NO comparison. > > Am I the only one who isn't going to start getting all righteous > because Tom compared the Holocaust and the Purge? > > Everybody is implying that Tom is saying that they compare outside > the game, which I don't think he is at all. He is simply saying > that, in the context of the game, the Holocaust, though nasty, had > nothing on the Purge. Exactly my point. My grasp of reality is a little too solid to let me, IRL, think that an _imaginary_ event could possibly compare to having my RL great-uncles, -aunts, and cousins of whatever degree slaughtered and cremated en masse. That is why I signed it with my in-game persona, Felix, Cherub of Jordi [from the Eternal Dawn PBEM]. Also keep in mind, this was being said from the perspective of one of Jordi's [imaginary--in-game only] Servitors, so the perspective is a bit...off, compared to RL perspective. tom timberlake ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 19:31:41 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, tom timberlake wrote: > Glad am I that I am a Cherub and not a Seraph when you make such > statements as this. How many temples did the unicorns cause to be built > to honor them? The last time I checked? None. Unicorns caused no temples to be built to honor them. Furthermore, what if they had? Unicorns causing temples to be raised to honor unicorns are part of the *problem* that caused the Crusade. > Whyfor were they destroyed, who are/were held to be living symbols of > purity, and steadfast vigilance? Why was the Phoenix destroyed, never > again to remind Man of Good arising from > the ashes of defeat, do they [mankind] but hold the faith, believe and > work towards the rebirth of Good, then surely it will spring reborn, > phoenix-like from the defeat and vile works of the Foe. But the Phoenix > is reborn no more, the Unicorn leaves no hoofprints to inspire mortal > minds, the Griffin cleaves the air no more, reminds no man that he is > watched by others and his actions are seen, his motives known. Because they did not give the glory to our Lord, that is why. Had they been willing to do so in the first place, we would not have been forced to confront them. Their attempts to connect their pagan symbolism with the word of God came after the Crusade began, and was a rather cynical and self-interested atempt to avoid deserved destruction. Do not forget: the Ethereals were never creatures of our Lord. They were creations of *mortal* dreams. Whey they forgot this and attempted to rule over the mortals, they earned our emnity. They must not be allowed to return, because they would try it again. > Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, and > 100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two events do > not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy of the two. Again, the creatures you name were Ethereals, created by unbelievers and filled with the symbolism of pagans. They were destroyed because they drew the hearts of mortals to seek after the Ethereal pretenders to the Throne of God. They were never holy creatures. And again, had they been willing to depart when it was decided to end their influence on the mortal realm, they would have been spared. They chose to fight, and to defy Heaven. > And what unholiness attaches to the Unicorn? It was rather known for its > ability to remove all taint, all uncleanness, all poison and evil from > what it touched. Yet even this symbol of Uriel's own Word was destroyed. > "Only the unclean and unholy", indeed! Indeed. Archangel Uriel chose not to accept the cynical attempt at homage from a creature of pagan origin, who only chose to serve Heaven to save it's own skin. It's associations with God only begin after the Crusade. > Focused mind or narrow mind--I think my previous comment about > destroying the living embodiment of Uriel's Word carry some weight here; > how to explain it? Simple: it was Ethereal--Uriel, personally or > through those he commanded, killed it. No. It was Ethereal. It has meddled in the corporeal realm. It has accepted mortal worship in the stead of God, or it has drawn the hearts of mortals away after other Ethereals to serve them instead of God. It has not departed from the corporeal realm, nor has it ceased to have contact with the corporeal realm, even after our warnings. It's existence and it's actions are a burden and a disturbance in the Symphony. For the good of the Symphony it must be eliminated. > I am minded of the Nazis at Nuremberg: "I was just doing my job, following > orders". Phawww! [spit] I am minded of a different quote: "All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." Rich Gant Malak of Uriel, in service to Eli ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 19:40:05 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Chris Crowe wrote: > Damn Gant, > that was one hell of a counterstroke if I must say (and I must). > One point for the Malakim of Purity. Uriel->[1] Anti-Puritans->[0] [Stepping out of character here, and being me] Thanks. > I must point out, however, (and I don't have my books here, so excuse > missquotes) that some of the targets of the Crusade were not Ethereals. > Rather they were creatures "of myth", such as dragons, griffons, and > chimera. These were living, corporeal creations of God (and it pissed > Jordi off a great deal when Uriel slew them). I believe in the intro to > the Marches he (Uriel) gave his reason for destroying them, but i don't > remember it now. I was working under the theory that dragons, griffons, chimers, et al *were* Ethereals. Possibly with some version of the Bound Discord, but still Ethereals. I figured that since they were creatures of myth, they would be creations of the human imagination (i.e. from the Marches). Out of curioustiy, am I right? Canonically, were they Ethereals or Corporeal creatures? It could make some difference to this discussion... > I do like the point about God's choice to "pull up" Uriel. It DOES make > sense. Because.... > > >First, the obvious. Uriel cannot Fall. David cannot Fall. Laurence > cannot Fall. They are all three Malakim. Malakim cannot Fall. > Then why is there such a big deal about the Fall of the Malakim? :) Remember, that first post was in character. As a character, I would have had no way to know about the upcoming Fall of the Malakim book. So it only makes sense to argue that way. Furthermore, I don't think Uriel could Fall, really. I find it much more likely that his Word would destroy him, first. > But spiritually and conceptually, they CAN. A Malakim could become quite > selfish and decide to no longer serve Heaven, though he would not serve > Hell either. > Call it extremely Outcast if you want, but to me it's still Falling from > grace. Good point. But see above for Uriel going Outcast, tool > I'll consider that a half-point. So.... > Uriel-->[1] Anti-Puritans-->[.5] I'll concede that one. > Come on Gant, I know you can do better. I wanna see a 10 point spread by > this time next week. :) Ooh, a challenge... Rich Gant Out of character, so no special titles ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 20:03:49 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans First, I hope I didn't sound like I was flaming you. I wasn't. I just got into my reply. On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Simon Hailes wrote: > Okay, I guess this was a little harsh in its preconception, but I was just > trying to get my point across. I accused Uriel of narrow mindedness > because he could not accept that the Ethereals had a place in the Symphony, > he could not accept anything accept his clean, sterile and 'perfect' > symphony, I guess that's one way to look at it. My way of looking at it was that the Ethereals had no place in the Symphony. They were created by mortal dreams (which of course is not an automatic disqualifier, because God may have wanted them to be able to do that) and were not part of the original creation. As long as they were discrete, they were allowed to exist. When they became loud and obnoxious, they were driven out or destroyed. > I have thought about his side of the story, that is what i always > do, sorry If I left it out of the Post, but you see, Uriel justifies it by > saying he leaves only God and his angels as the worshipped and as the only > supernatural beings interfering on Earth, Quite all right. There is never a requirement to point out arguments for the other side. Unless you want to demolish them in advance, that is. > I don't know about you but that sounds fascist to me, it sounds a lot > like fascism, I don't believe the God of In Nomine is that fascist, or > anywhere near that fascist, IMO God is present in all religions, even > the Pagan ones, all those who promote positive ideals and the belief in > Higher Powers work for God no matter if they think they don't. I think it does work that way in the game. Remember, uriel had no problem with them being worshipped, just with them trying to take all the credit. If they had directed some of the worship toward God, things would have been fine. (Actually, this makes Uriel sound like the chief "collections agent" in a Celestial protection racket, doesn't it?) > You say Uriel's word resonate Holiness, need I only > draw your attention to the Gabriel incident, and indeed the actual > descriptions of Superiors, they are fallible beings! Uriel more so then > others because he cracked and called on a war, when others merely plot and > play the averages. Uriel's a Malak. He doesn't *like* plots or playing the averages. He prefers direct action. Sure, he is a bit of a loose cannon. I don't think he "cracked", though. > Purity is important, yes, but let us just think about > what Purity means, and just how we should go about achieving it! Good idea. I agree. Rich Gant still out of character ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:07:18 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> IN Correspondance At 11:38 AM 21/03/98 -0600, you wrote: >Firstly, I am officially disbanding the Anti-Puritans, not because I accede to anyone's point but because Blandine herself has assured me that there will be no repeat of the Crusade. Which brings me to Blandine, Heaven's own lip stick lesbian, oh I know Celestials don't really have genders but Blandine is as feminine as an Arcangel can get, so, the title sticks. In Nomine is in fact the only game I know of that doesn't dodge around the topic of sex, I mean, they had the word orgasm in the rule book! Plus they have a Prince of Lust, and one of Eli's rites (an angelic rite no less) is to have consensual sex, and then we have Lauren the demon of Strippers. Which brings me to the final part of this post, I know that it would be inappropriate to post In Nomine Erotica to the list (I already got on peoples nerves with the anti-puritan thing, I now know that propaganda is not acceptable anywhere) but is there anyone who does publish it? would Derek Pearcy and the other In Nomine big boys, look down on such a thing, even though they have included it in the game? Just wondering, I'm not perverted or anything, but even if I was, wouldn't I fit just right in. Simon, Demon Prince of naughty topics and titles "We're not going to be sleeping but can you still keep it down?" Joey, Friends ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:54:02 -0500 From: Soviet Subject: IN> Ancient Angels? Ok my question is this are all Celestials been there since the begining of times or have some new ones have risen through the ages? If they have always been why do they have so little knowledge(A.K.A. skills and songs)? If they are new, how does this happens?is it when a celestial dies a new one rises to take its place? This question came up during character creation and sadly I was at a loss to answer it....... - -- "I want that power. By right, it is mine. For ultimate power is the ultimate destiny of Doom." Spectacular Spider-Man #159 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:56:03 -0500 From: Soviet Subject: IN> Metatetron? Okay has anyone heard of this Angel? I found its name on a old Theology spanish book, his names is supposed to mean "Word of God"...any Ideas? - -- "I want that power. By right, it is mine. For ultimate power is the ultimate destiny of Doom." Spectacular Spider-Man #159 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:10:55 EST From: SienarFLT Subject: Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution In a message dated 98-03-21 02:17:29 EST, you write: > What I would love to do is totally remove game statistics from the > players' sight. Make all of the actions descriptive, and do all the > rolling and number crunching myself (probably with a computer > program handy), including for the character advancement. That would > make the emphasis almost entirely on the story, and not on character > advancement. The two hurdles I can see are having a system that I > can run well enough, and having players who would let me do it... Bravo! This is in fact, just the thing I did recently, getting my gaming group to try (finally!) In Nomine. I told them a few basic things about the background of the game, handed them player vignettes I had written up for them, and then "wind em up and watch em go." A great time was had by all. No one had to worry about number crunching this, or rules lawyering that. Just good ole roleplaying for a change. Now, of course, they're all chomping at the bit to make their own characters, and jump into session two. -- Thom Dawson (reply to SienarFLT@aol.com) Impudite of Peanut Butter in service to Haagenti, or ... Mercurian of Lost Endings in service to Yves ... I just haven't made up my mind yet! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:19:13 -0500 From: Doctor TOC Subject: Re: IN> Metatetron? Soviet wrote: > > Okay has anyone heard of this Angel? I found its name on a > old Theology spanish book, his names is supposed to mean "Word of > God"...any Ideas? > I brought up the subject of the Metatron a while back (before you joined the list I think). It's a fascinating entity, but I think the answer to my inquiries was that the APG says he's dead. Of course that might not mean a lot to a being of Archangel level power or higher... Doctor TOC - -- The Reverend Doctor "The Other Chris" "The pen is mightier than the sword...especially when shot from a high powered air-rifle" UIN # 4814586 URL: http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/wilhelm/148/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:52:44 EST From: SienarFLT Subject: Re: IN> Ancient Angels (and other thoughts) In a message dated 98-03-21 22:05:09 EST, you write: > Ok my question is this are all Celestials been there since the > begining of times or have some new ones have risen through the ages? I'm not sure what canon states about this (if it does so at all). From the small bit of digging I've managed to do, different biblical/gnostic/et al sources give varying opinions about when exactly angels were created. Some state that they have always existed, others state that God created them on the second (or subsequent) day to aid in the Creation. BTW is anyone familiar with Adoil(s) mentioned in the second book of Enoch? I think this would make a wonderful adventure seed. An Adoil was an angelic being sent by God prior to Creation to "detonate" itself, thus expiditing the whole Creation process. What if there were more of these? Perhaps not necessarily an angelic being, but perhaps some kind of artifact designed by Eli. The storylines and plots involving this are too numerous to go into, but imagine that all celestials believed the Adoil to be unique, only to find out that, oops Eli actually created another, and it has fallen into Diabolical hands. A second creation in the image of whichever DP happened to obtain it... or an angel on the verge of falling? Hmm, there was talk about alternate IN realities and worlds recently? > If they have always been why do they have so little > knowledge(A.K.A. skills and songs)? If they are new, how does this > happens?is it when a celestial dies a new one rises to take its > place? In my campaign, one of my players is running a Kyrio of Judgment who is quite old, but has spent it's entire existence in the Council Spires of Heaven. Once getting the chance to go to Earth, it didn't have very many "human" skills, but being the great and wonderful researcher that it was in service of Dominic, I ruled (after the player had made this mistake during character creation) that it would make sense to have a number of songs that it researched, but only at very low levels. The skills that this character does know, all reflect it's extensive Researching experience. Hence the Kyrio might not know very much about legal tender, but would have a very easy time looking it up and studying theories of economics if it went to a library. As to the last part, Superiors create new servants whenever the need for a new one arises IMO, not necessarily when one dies and there is a vacancy that needs to be filled. -- Thom Dawson (reply to SienarFLT@aol.com) "Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a god Superior to themselves. Most gods have the Manners and morals of a spoiled child." -- Lazarus Long. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 23:30:45 -0500 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Metatetron? Soviet wrote: > > Okay has anyone heard of this Angel? I found its name on a > old Theology spanish book, his names is supposed to mean "Word of > God"...any Ideas? Often translated as the Voice of God. According to canon he is dead but this doesn't mean much if you like the idea... Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 23:49:01 -0500 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Ancient Angels? Soviet wrote: > > Ok my question is this are all Celestials been there since the > begining of times or have some new ones have risen through the ages? > If they have always been why do they have so little > knowledge(A.K.A. skills and songs)? If they are new, how does this > happens?is it when a celestial dies a new one rises to take its > place? > > This question came up during character creation and sadly I was at a > loss to answer it....... Many Celestials are created as needed, and I believe that the number of Angels total has probably increased over time. It is possible to look at all PC Angels as these newly created and thus less skilled Celestials. As far as canon goes players may play Angels that are more ancient than recorded history. This would be extremely difficult to RP but might make an interesting diversion from teh norm. The truth of character is that these elder Angels would not have any more skills than other Angels. How can this be handled in the game while still amking it make sense? You have a few options I will give a list of those that come to mind. Ignore it (not a good one, but still valid). Allow elder Angels to purchase any resource that they wish with no questions asked and limit younger Angels to one or two at most (not including skills). This will make elder Angels have fewer skills but have a much greater range of roles/artifacts/songs/etc. The skill deficiency can easily be explained by saying that even having been alive for thousands of years they have not had time to learn many modern skills (haven't been to earth recently). Also the GM will have to give players some lattitude with historical knowledge without requiring the character to purchase the skills. Use the canon method which is to explain it away by forgetfullness and/or losses of forces through Celestial combat/trauma/punishment of superiors/etc. The Angelic Players Guide talks about the fact that despite living forever barring some intervention Angels have no better memory than normal humans. After a while they just start forgetting stuff. Perhaps they ask theirsuperior to purge their memory from time to time. That's all I can think of for now. I hope some of it was helpful. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 22:25:28 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Metatetron? >Okay has anyone heard of this Angel? I found its name on a >old Theology spanish book, his names is supposed to mean "Word of >God"...any Ideas?> Metatron is the voice of God. Basically, kick in a copy of Dune, the movie. When you get to the part where the guild navigator enters (the worm thing); think of him as God. Then, there is the guys that translate for him. They are the Metatron. Kinda of one entity acting as the extension of another. Armand ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #688 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.