From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Apr 25 14:38:23 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 OAA32047 for ; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:38:22 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id OAA17779 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:43:50 -0500 Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:43:50 -0500 Message-Id: <199804251943.OAA17779@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 #729 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 Saturday, April 25 1998 Volume 01 : Number 729 In this digest: IN> The rules of the Game Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: IN> Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements IN> Gamers in Portland IN> The Hell/Heaven (im?)balance IN> 3 questions Re: IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements IN> Hmmmm....tastes like chicken... Re: IN> Origins '98 Re: IN> Defending Michael Re: IN> Hmmmm....tastes like chicken... Re: IN> Defending Michael Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) Re: IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) Re: IN> 3 questions IN> Malphan philosophy? IN> Players wanted - South Korea Re: IN> 3 questions Re: Michael take a Qualude (was Re: IN> Fuzzy?) IN> Habbalah ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 17:43:48 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: IN> The rules of the Game Some thoughts on the nature of the Game, in the form of a recruiting letter from a Game demon to a new-fledged Lilim. The Game is the secret police of Hell, but I don't know that they think of themselves that way. I see them as being philosophically more like Blake or Nietzsche, rather than fascist. Fascism (and communism, for that matter) has too much of an emphasis on subsuming yourself in the greater whole to really appeal to a strongly self-willed demon. (Though I can see them encouraging fascism in mankind just to prove how stupid and weak humanity is...) - -*-*-*- My dearest Attai, I have been advised that you may one day inherit some small measure of your Mother's skill at the Game, who is overmatched only by its very Prince and the master of the Pit himself. Therefore you intrigue my master sufficiently that he bade me to explain the rules of the Game to you, so that you might be persuaded to lay aside your prejudices and grasp the opportunity he sets before you. The rules of the Game may be summarized in three words: don't get caught. This is the whole of the Game, with all its subtlety and misdirection. But no doubt the Cunning Prince desired that I be less elliptical, and explain the nature of the Game to you with paragraphs rather than aphorisms. I think it would be useful to clear up some misconceptions about the Game before I elaborate on the strategy involved. The first, and most simple-minded, misconception is that the Game is somehow the law of Hell. It is an understandable misconception -- every soul in Hell plays the Game, and anything with a reach that universal has a more than passing resemblance to the works of the Tyrant. But it is misconception nonetheless. The Game is not a law. Law is one of the works of the angels; it bears all the marks of their obsession with principle, consistency, and "objective" truth -- they are so blinded by the burning light of the Enemy that they cannot see anything but His will. This is clearly not suitable for demonkind. We are vigorous, dynamic, unique and ever-changing; none of us will permit ourselves -- our very selves! -- to be trapped in some narrow conceptual geometry. Indeed, soon after the Revolution began, the Prince of Darkness asked my lord Asmodeus to find the infernal legions some defense against angelic law. The prince of dark wisdom created the Game, and such was his success that the Shining One made it his word. The Game pits the subtle and recursive strength of the subjective against the bright and brittle crystal of the law; it makes us powerful, proud, strong and alone; it is defined by us in order to define ourselves. The angels worry endlessly about what actually is; the strength of the Game comes from abandoning "is" -- with all the ontological difficulties it brings -- in favor of "seems." Appearance is more important than so-called fact when playing the Game. You are not caught unless people with both the power and the interest to defeat you are convinced you are caught, and you have the opportunity to convince them otherwise. In addition to the lovely freedom this idea affords us, it is advanced beyond the angelic notion of law in yet another fashion: it does not threaten our self-definition. Players of the Game are who they are believed to be, free of the tired and restrictive notions of morality and consequence the angels peddle. Is it any wonder that humans labor endlessly to convert everything that Heaven has given them into a version of the Game? I am sure that you are eager to learn the rules of play -- formally, that is. I have mentioned that everyone in Hell plays the Game, but it is true that the more skillful players are the ones that know they are playing. A few words, then, on how to play the Game. This is not the whole of it, or even an important part of it, as that is something that can only from the Dark Prince's lips. But what I tell you is not widely know in systematic form save by a few, which should convince you of his generosity. Control of information and the appearance of information are some of the most potent tools that a player of the Game can control. Remember that others make decisions based on what they know, and if you can manipulate their knowledge you can manipulate their decisions. This is more than simple disinformation; the Game is played on the surfaces, and the surfaces can reflect reflections. Your score at the Game is whatever you convince people that others think it is. Appearance, and appearance -- if people act as if you are strong, then you /are/ strong, no matter what "truth" or "reality" might say. The angels say that we are broken, but do the Princes seem weak to you? This is only one tiny example of how information is part of the Game. For another, consider the reputation of my Prince. He is widely believed to be a mannerless thug, who sends stormtroopers after anyone who crosses him. This makes the weak and gullible fear him, and so they are inclined to obey him. But the cunning know that he is the Prince of the Game, and that his craft is without peer. Therefore his brutal image exists for his own ends; one of which is clearly to encourage his enemies to make straightforward plots against him. So they realize that if they make an obvious plot, then their treachery will be redirected and forced to serve my Prince's aims. Thus they decide to make twisty plans, and so are forced to play against the Lord Asmodeus's greatest strength! Of course this is a dramatic oversimplification, but you begin to see why the Jews called the demon of wisdom. He tells me he is willing to teach you, and I should think that the power and knowledge he offers sufficient incentive to become one of the players of the Game. Attested by my genius, Ahian - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 23:19:31 +0100 From: "David Chart" Subject: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: IN> Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) - --On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 5:20 pm -0400 "Elizabeth McCoy" wrote: > --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html So I went and looked. Fun. But... > Knight of Nitpicking > > This distinction is always granted to a Servitor of Beth who manages to correctly nitpick either a > Seraph or an Elohite in pedantic mode. It grants technical excellence in all works; any "soul" to > the work will have to be supplied by the Knight. (Game mechanics: for a technically perfect > creation, roll against a target number of 11. How "moving" it is depends on if that roll *also* > succeeded at the *true* skill level!) Even non-creative works may be written -- technical writing, > for instance -- but if the true skill is too low, the work will be dry, disinteresting, and complex. Surely this should be "uninteresting". A low skill would not give the demon the ability to write a piece that deprived the reader of all bias concerning the subject. Besides which, "to disinterest" is not, as far as I am aware, an English verb. David Chart ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 18:39:50 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) At 11:19 PM +0100 4/24/98, David Chart wrote: >--On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 5:20 pm -0400 "Elizabeth McCoy" > wrote: > >> --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking >> http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > >So I went and looked. Fun. But... > >> Knight of Nitpicking [...] but if the true skill is too low, the work will be dry, >disinteresting, and complex. > >Surely this should be "uninteresting". A low skill would not give the demon >the ability to write a piece that deprived the reader of all bias concerning >the subject. Besides which, "to disinterest" is not, as far as I am aware, >an English verb. - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 17:48:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Dataweaver Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 11:19 PM +0100 4/24/98, David Chart wrote: > >--On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 5:20 pm -0400 "Elizabeth McCoy" > > wrote: > > > >> --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > >> http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > > > >So I went and looked. Fun. But... > > > >> Knight of Nitpicking > [...] but if the true skill is too low, the work will be dry, > >disinteresting, and complex. > > > >Surely this should be "uninteresting". A low skill would not give the demon > >the ability to write a piece that deprived the reader of all bias concerning > >the subject. Besides which, "to disinterest" is not, as far as I am aware, > >an English verb. > > Interesting; it seems that Princess Beth just fouled up. The article critiqued by David Chart was written by Princess Beth; as such, David did _not_ just "manage to correctly nitpick either a Seraph or an Elohite in pedantic mode", the requirement for the Knight of Nitpicking Distinction. Rather, he "managed to nitpick a Superior and gotten away with it" (assuming that he's a Servitor of Nitpicking; and if he's not, he shouldn't be receiving _any_ Nitpicking Distinctions to begin with), which is the qualification required for Baron(ess) of Retroactive Editing. - -- Dataweaver, Impudite of Nitpicking. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:15:46 +0100 From: "David Chart" Subject: IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements Taking advantage of my new distinction... Right of Passage (Yves Attunement in Heaven and Hell) seems, on my reading, to be pointless. The way I read it, this attunement allows you to spend 6 Essence to ascend to Heaven from one particular location. Not a big bonus... Also, this appears entirely due to the last sentence of the write up. Without that sentence, the attunement lets you spend 6 Essence to cross the world from library to library: very useful, and just the sort of thing that would be a rare attunement. Have I misread this horribly? (If not, I'll probably ignore the final sentence, and keep the attunement away from Ofanim.) Also, just to clarify: I think a Celestial cannot (normally) take Choir/Band Attunements from Superiors that they do not serve. Is this right? If so, what's the justification for the difference in game? (If this is in the APG, I apologise, as I don't have that one yet...) Oh, and the fourth point of the FAQ question on this subject has "reprecussions" instead of "repercussions". (-:[ David Chart Balseraph Knight of Nitpicking Seraph Servitor of Destiny ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 16:42:35 -0700 From: Bart Hammerly Subject: IN> Gamers in Portland Anyone up for gaming In Nomine in the Portland OR area? - -- Bart Hammerly "Time is the fire in which we burn." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 19:43:08 -0400 From: Stacy Stroud Subject: IN> The Hell/Heaven (im?)balance Simon Hailes wrote: >In Revelations: Heaven and Hell, in three places it basically says that >the War is fated. The first is in the description of Heaven in which it >says it had no boundaries and when the Final Judgment is passed it will >have no boundaries again. Thesecond is the descrption of the Eternal City >where it dexribes its walls as a symbolic ward against the Hordes of Hell, >and that once lucifer is defeated they will disappear, that one annoyed me >the most, when Lucifer is defeated? how about if? These could just be taken as the Heavenly point of view, if you so choose as GM. We are also told that the pagan gods, and some demons, believe God Himself to be merely a pumped-up Ethereal rather than the One Above All. And the arbiters of canon have assured us that that dispute will never be officially resolved one way or the other. > When it describes the Angels of Final Judgment and how they can't be >moved it says that this is a reminder of Heaven's soveriegnty over Hell. Now, see, I differ with you in that I like things like this. It's true to the mythology/theology on which the game is (mostly) based. Except for Zoroastrianism (which is, admittedly, the original source of the whole angel/demon business), the religions that hold to the idea of the War between Heaven and Hell see it as a decidedly unequal struggle. I think it was fellow list-member Earl Wajenberg who first proposed the following analogy, so I hope he doesn't mind too much if I swipe it. Lucifer is not a king battling a rival king over neutral territory, but an upstart crimelord who has taken over part of the king's kingdom. Of course, you don't have to play In Nomine in line with the actual beliefs on which it is based. But I'm rather glad that canon IN stays at least that true to the traditional source material. I was rather afraid the game would be extremely dualistic in tone (w/ Heaven and Hell as two equal and opposed forces). I was pleasantly surprised to find that angels and Heaven are generally treated as the norm, and demons/Hell as an inferior deviation from that norm. Note, though, that even in that case, the demons are neither clearly wrong nor clearly fated to lose. They are rebels against the status quo, and underdogs, but many worthy movements among humans have found themselves in that position throughout history. (Not that I consider the Infernal cause a worthy movement, but they're not bad *just* because they're non-conformists.) Well, those are my thoughts on the matter. Later. Stacy Stroud sstroud@uky.campus.mci.net ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 19:57:31 -0400 From: Richard L Thomas Subject: IN> 3 questions 1) Is Lucifer still an Archangel? Personally I think he is even though he is a demon, I don't think the Seraphim Council has the "juice" to strip him of this "rank", and being that God is no longer participating.... Just a thought 2) What happened to Habbalah? The IPG has completely hamstrung and castrated this band. What used to be done is now done with a penalty and not even that well? Who play tests this stuff? And what kind of Celestials do they go up against? 3) Almost every one I meet LOVES Malakim. What gives? Do Malakim get more points at character creation? IMHO Malakim are not that formidable, or scary, in fact they have to be somewhat combat oriented just to survive their oaths. Malakim are not anymore fearsome than another choir of Angel. In fact I think an Ofanite of War is the most Deadly (Angel that is). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 19:10:48 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements On Sat, 25 Apr 1998, David Chart wrote: > Also, just to clarify: I think a Celestial cannot (normally) take Choir/Band > Attunements from Superiors that they do not serve. Is this right? If so, > what's the justification for the difference in game? (If this is in the APG, > I apologise, as I don't have that one yet...) Oh, and the fourth point of > the FAQ question on this subject has "reprecussions" instead of > "repercussions". (-:[ I believe that Celestials can take Choir/Band and/or Servitor Attunements from Superiors they do not serve, but that (1) Superiors are unlikely to grant such attunements unless they owe the Celestial a *big* one or think they'll benefit from that Celestial's aid in the future, and (2) the Celestial's own Superior is likely to object unless it gives permission beforehand. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 18:04:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: IN> Hmmmm....tastes like chicken... - ---Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > Graveyard Greg wrote: > > > Anyone here wonder what Kobal's BIG GAG will be? I think it's going > > to be Redeeming himself...One heck of a punchline, yes? > > > > Too bad he'll get eaten by his 'brother', Haagentii > > A, but first there's the warm-up gag wherein he feeds Haagenti > to himself and so disposes of him. > > Earl > But will anyone get the joke? ;) Besides Kobal, that is... Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 18:06:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: IN> Origins '98 - ---Walter Milliken wrote: > > >> jason, wishing sj would show at origins... > > I suspect the story with Origins is similar to the one with GenCon -- > Andon (WotC) runs both. See http://www.sjgames.com/ill/ill-feb98.html > and look down near the bottom for the Feb 4th entry. > > I *was* going to be at GenCon this year, running several IN games, but I > canceled out; Elizabeth and I are going to WorldCon instead. With any > luck, there'll be some IN games running there. I'll probably do a > couple, if I can set it up. And WorldCon will probably be more > generally interesting than GenCon, too. > > > ---Walter > Yah, GenCon never tweaked my interest. And I guessed that since WoTC was running Origins, that SJ Games wouldn't show up...Who can blame them? They've got their reasons. Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 21:02:34 -0400 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Defending Michael I think Michael is scared out of his mind for Laurence, myself. Think about it. You are the second oldest creature in the universe, literally older than time. You are second only to God in mind and power. You see with eyes that see only truth, and you have witnessed the entire history of the universe. You remember the pre-Fall Heaven. Glory upon glory, beauty and wonder undimmed with evil. You remember this, and your truth will not permit you to forget the beauty that was lost. You remember friends being turned into mockeries of what they were, horrors beyond imagining, that saw the universe and the people in it as toys for their pleasure. You remember with a mind that will not forget, a mind that cannot take away the sharp edges of remembrance. You remember being forged by God into his champion, transformed from witness into His personal champion, the perfect warrior, as unstoppable and inevitable as His will. You know the power and insight the Lord gave you, but you know what you have lost. Rest and ease are lost to you, slaughter and death your permanent companions. And you go into battle willingly, to serve your God and win mankind and the angels another day of freedom from the rule of Hell. You have seen fatally-wounded soldiers crawl across battlefields to guard their dying friends from the vultures, and where others see horror you Him. The Lord is as terrible and wrathful as He is merciful and gentle, for He is a God of love, and none knows this better than you. Now, into your world this comes Laurence. Other people see only his power and authority, his perfect courage and perfect honor, and his skill at arms. You see these things too, and you see more. You are the Lord's champion, but this young angel will be His *general*, the perfect captain of the Host. Your eyes see the possibility of divine light shining upon him, see him perfect in his duty and perfect in his love. But your eyes see truth, and no one knows better than you that sometimes even beautiful swords break when they are tested. You know that when he fails, it is because he treats his soldiers like pawns rather than people. And in this you see a mirror of the sins of the Fallen. And you feel a desperate, burning fear. You cannot chastise him, for he is a general and you are a soldier, and it is the duty of the general to close his ears to his soldiers' pleas and send them to their deaths. And he would never willingly fail in his duty. But you chastise anyway, and hope that he learns before it is too late, and sometimes in the dark and rainy nights where you fight for him, you pray for him too. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 22:01:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Hmmmm....tastes like chicken... > > > Anyone here wonder what Kobal's BIG GAG will be? I think it's going > > > to be Redeeming himself...One heck of a punchline, yes? > > > > > > Too bad he'll get eaten by his 'brother', Haagentii > > No no no no. I figured it out today. Kobal's final joke is when he pulls out this odd little red stone out of his filing cabinet in his private office, and start's editting the rules of the Shadow. "It was getting boring anyway, all this War business...." - - Em Current Quote: "You roll a 666. You don't just find a coffee shop. You find a bagel shop. They don't serve coffee, just damnation!" - an Allen and Jason tagteam. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 22:16:48 -0400 From: Doctor TOC Subject: Re: IN> Defending Michael Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > > I think Michael is scared out of his mind for Laurence, myself. > Neel, I worship at your knees I recently checked the directory where I save stuff from this list, and the majority of the stuff I keep is yours. Just thought you should know. Doctor TOC (AKA Caustiel, Angel of Irony) - -- The Reverend Doctor "The Other Chris" "God does not play dice with the Universe; He plays an ineffable game of his own devising, which might be compared, from the viewpoint any of the other players (i.e. everyone), to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who *smiles* *all* *the* *time.*" - "Good Omens" Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman UIN # 4814586 URL: http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/wilhelm/148/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 22:51:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Dataweaver wrote: > > > > Interesting; it seems that Princess Beth just fouled up. The article > critiqued by David Chart was written by Princess Beth; as such, David did > _not_ just "manage to correctly nitpick either a Seraph or an Elohite in > pedantic mode", the requirement for the Knight of Nitpicking Distinction. > Rather, he "managed to nitpick a Superior and gotten away with it" Your logic is severely flawed. Just because a distinction is always granted to a certain class of servitors does not mean that it is ONLY granted to that certain class. The only thing Princess Beth could do to "foul up" would be failing to give that distinction to a servitor who managed to correctly nitpick either a Seraph or an Elohite in pedantic mode. Even then, she can do it, because she's a Superior and they can change the rules any gosh darn time they feel like it. > (assuming that he's a Servitor of Nitpicking; and if he's not, he > shouldn't be receiving _any_ Nitpicking Distinctions to begin with), which Incorrect. Page IN106, fourth paragraph under Distinctions, "A Prince is free to grant his Distinctions to any demon he pleases, including servants of other Princes...." > is the qualification required for Baron(ess) of Retroactive Editing. Change that to "is ONE OF the qualificationS" and you're correct. (Hmmm...maybe I should apply for service under Nitpicking....) Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 22:55:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Right of Passage and Choir/Band Attunements On Sat, 25 Apr 1998, David Chart wrote: > Right of Passage (Yves Attunement in Heaven and Hell) seems, on my reading, > to be pointless. The way I read it, this attunement allows you to spend 6 > Essence to ascend to Heaven from one particular location. Not a big bonus... > Also, this appears entirely due to the last sentence of the write up. > Without that sentence, the attunement lets you spend 6 Essence to cross the > world from library to library: very useful, and just the sort of thing that > would be a rare attunement. Have I misread this horribly? (If not, I'll > probably ignore the final sentence, and keep the attunement away from > Ofanim.) Ignore the final sentence, and it makes perfect sense. Therefore, I say ignore the final sentence! > Also, just to clarify: I think a Celestial cannot (normally) take Choir/Band > Attunements from Superiors that they do not serve. Is this right? If so, > what's the justification for the difference in game? (If this is in the APG, > I apologise, as I don't have that one yet...) Oh, and the fourth point of > the FAQ question on this subject has "reprecussions" instead of > "repercussions". (-:[ Normally, no. But a Superior *can* offer just about anything to just about anyone, when it comes down to it. Novalis may request a favor of some PCs some day, and pay them off with her appropriate choir attunements; it makes as much sense as bestowing a Distinction upon another celestial, after all. Just look at free Lilim for an example...they can wheel and deal an attunement out of a Superior in return for services rendered...so why not other celestials? Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 20:15:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) - ---Pee Kitty wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Dataweaver wrote: > > > > > > > > Interesting; it seems that Princess Beth just fouled up. The article > > critiqued by David Chart was written by Princess Beth; as such, David did > > _not_ just "manage to correctly nitpick either a Seraph or an Elohite in > > pedantic mode", the requirement for the Knight of Nitpicking Distinction. > > Rather, he "managed to nitpick a Superior and gotten away with it" > > > Your logic is severely flawed. Just because a distinction is always > granted to a certain class of servitors does not mean that it is ONLY > granted to that certain class. The only thing Princess Beth could do to > "foul up" would be failing to give that distinction to a servitor who > managed to correctly nitpick either a Seraph or an Elohite in pedantic > mode. > > Even then, she can do it, because she's a Superior and they can > change the rules any gosh darn time they feel like it. > > > (assuming that he's a Servitor of Nitpicking; and if he's not, he > > shouldn't be receiving _any_ Nitpicking Distinctions to begin with), which > > Incorrect. Page IN106, fourth paragraph under Distinctions, "A Prince is > free to grant his Distinctions to any demon he pleases, including servants > of other Princes...." > > > is the qualification required for Baron(ess) of Retroactive Editing. > > Change that to "is ONE OF the qualificationS" and you're correct. > > (Hmmm...maybe I should apply for service under Nitpicking....) > > > Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian > Meow! > And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ > anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ > /_( \__/ )_\ > \__U_/ > > Hmmm.....I see a Demon Princess is gathering a lot of servitors...Better tell Yves about this...not that he doesn't already KNOW this! ;) Nahtaivel Angel of Watching, but isn't above tattling sometimes... _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:23:55 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Richard L Thomas wrote: > 1) Is Lucifer still an Archangel? Personally I think he is even > though he is a demon, I don't think the Seraphim Council has the "juice" > to strip him of this "rank", and being that God is no longer > participating.... A few flaws with your argument. God was still participating when the Fall occured (witness the malakim). Bad Lucifer, no Archangel status. Furthermore, angels lose their Words when they fall. Without a Word, you can't be an Archangel. Bad Lucifer. No Word. > 3) Almost every one I meet LOVES Malakim. What gives? Do Malakim > get more points at character creation? IMHO Malakim are not that > formidable, or scary, in fact they have to be somewhat combat oriented > just to survive their oaths. Malakim are not anymore fearsome than > another choir of Angel. In fact I think an Ofanite of War is the most > Deadly (Angel that is). True. I never figured that one out myself. I ultimately decided that it's because of that uncomprimising "do not suffer an evil to live" attitude that makes them frightening. With any other choir, you might have a chance to talk your way out of it. With a malak, you have to fight. Malakim are fearsome because of their behavior, not because of their capabilities. Rich "Mr. Uriel" Gant ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 01:35:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Doubting Eric Subject: IN> Malphan philosophy? (pre-comment: This was not written with Malphas in mind. This was not even written with In Nomine in mind. In fact, all I knew about the game when this was written [9/96] was a T-shirt I saw. However, when I was digging through my hard drive, I ran across this and thought it might be a workable example of how a Servitor of Factions might view his job.) The Webs of Society The society that we live in today, as well as almost any society that has existed in our history, is a complex construction, made up of a tremendous number of people, all interconnected in various and convoluted ways. The best analogy for this phenomenon is that of a spider's web, albiet an irregular pattern, instead of the orderly pattern of the natural web. The purpose of the spider's web is to cover a wide area efficiently, in order to capture prey and to allow the spider to survive. The webs of a society fulfill a similar purpose, spreading to encompass as many people as possible, providing its members with a sense of connection, a sense of belonging to something larger than themselves. The spider's web is spun of silk, delicate-seeming, yet one of the strongest materials in the natural world. A society is held together by strands of diverse types, and like silk, they are deceptively strong. However, in both cases, what affects one strand of the web sends repercussions throughout the entirety of the web, changing the nodes and possibly effecting a change in the overall pattern. If one was to touch a single strand of a spider's web, the web itself will reverberate, alerting the spider itself to the disturbance. If you begin to touch upon the strands of society, there are also reverberations, although they are not as easily detectable, for most societies have no weaver, instead being the result of chaotic and random connections between its members. Therefore, anyone who spends enough time watching a particular society assumes the role of the spider, watching the entire web for disturbances, and tracing them back to their cause. The understanding of the underlying connections grants the observer the ability to not only predict the most likely result of any actions within the web, but also the ability to manipulate these connections to their own ends. They can become the master of a particular society, merely by plucking at particular strands, and if necessary, severing them. This is not a simple task; It requires an in-depth understanding of human behavior, as well as an almost unearthly patience. There is one simple premise, however, that provides a starting reference, a path that leads to a greater understanding of the human mind, and a glimpse at the countless threads that link a society together. People, for the most part, desire acceptance. There are very few true loners in any society, and since these are disconnected from the web, they cannot truly be considered a part of the society at all. The majority of humankind, however, feels a constant need for reassurance, to feel accepted among the people of their choice. This desire has led to the increasing pigeonholing of society, as people will voluntarily label themselves in order to fit into their chosen niche easier. This is also an aspect of human nature that can be manipulated. As society becomes more stratified, the varying strata become more and more specific, to the point where it is a simple matter to define any given group with a remarkable degree of accuracy. Having accomplished this, it is possible to adapt your own external persona to the point of acceptance, which allows one the ability to not only observe a sub-society firsthand, but also to manipulate it from the inside. Given the time, anyone skilled in touching the strands of the web can assume nearly any position they want within a society, through judicious alliances and carefully considering the repercussions of their words and actions. Once in the desired position, these same skills can be turned towards bending the web, driving it in the direction desired, and achieving one's eventual goals. There are two dangers in these practices. The first and most obvious is humankind's innate resentment towards being manipulated. If one's actions and motives are discerned, it can spell disaster, much as a severed strand can collapse an entire web. The best remedy to this is secrecy, which in turn requires a great deal of skill in deception, as well as the ability to work with all the extenuating circumstances of a situation. The second inherent problem is more serious. Manipulating the fabric of a society invariably leads to one of two things. Either one will become engrossed in a society to the point where they are no longer objective, or they will become _too_ objective, detaching themselves both from the web they are touching, as well as mankind itself. They run the risk of becoming a total observer, intent on watching the interplay of the strands, rather than affecting them. This leads to the development of a cold, aloof personality, which (apart from certain circles) is not conducive to maintaining one's chosen place within the web. The strands built over time begin to collapse, and eventually the web will reject the person, reweaving itself around them. Eric, Elohite of Orc ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 06:12:32 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Players wanted - South Korea >>>Well, might as well continue the trend then! Anyone in the Monroe County, Michigan area?<<< Hey, what the heck....if you live in the Republic of Korea and you're an In Nomine player, I'd love to hear from you! Heck, if you live in the Republic of Korea and you even know what a roleplaying game is, I'd love to hear from you! - -David (of course if you actually live anywhere near me, it'll surely be the result of a Divine Intervention, but since you probably live in Seoul with the other 90% of expats in Korea, maybe we can meet the next time I'm up there...) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:30:13 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Richard L Thomas wrote: > 3) Almost every one I meet LOVES Malakim. Well, they are kinda cool. You know, really (self-)righteous, sword-wieldin', gun-totin', bad-ass angels. Kinda like celestial rednecks. :) "Hey Theo, is that a demon I see over thar?" "Sure is, Bart. Let's go kill it." (I'm not really good at imitating southern accents in writing, but then this isn't my first language.:) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "I kick arse for the Lord!" - Father McGruder ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:45:40 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: Michael take a Qualude (was Re: IN> Fuzzy?) On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Gryph Clarke wrote: > Actually, I wonder if the differences between Laurence and Michael have to do > with different "religious" viewpoints. Laurence is Catholic to the teeth, right > along with Dominic, and neither of them are going to appreciate Michael's "Pride > and glory" outlook. (In fact, that's what Michael was tried for by Dominic.) I > don't think Laurence understands the warrior's need for war stories around the > campfire where you tell of not only your own victories, but of the victories of > those you've fought with. I haven't read it to mean that Laurence himself (should that be Himself?) is a Catholic, just that he sees Catholicism as a useful tool, and therefor promotes it. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "I kick arse for the Lord!" - Father McGruder ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 15:13:02 -0400 From: Richard L Thomas Subject: IN> Habbalah 1) In the IPG Habbalah may with a penalty on a Perception roll sense the emotions of others. Habbalah may also enhance existing emotions at a penalty equal to the targets Ethereal Forces, but the targets Will roll to resist is penalized by the Habbalah's Celestial Forces. What about when the Habbalah has already succeeded in sensing the targets emotion and knows which emotion he is enhancing? Does the penalty to the Habbalah still apply? Does the penalty to the target still apply? 2) Songs and Skills can be enchanted into objects to create Relics and Talismans. Can attunements be enchanted into objects? ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #729 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.