From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Aug 4 16:22:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28588 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:22:55 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id QAA20673 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:12:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:12:26 -0500 Message-Id: <199808042112.QAA20673@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #897 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 Tuesday, August 4 1998 Volume 01 : Number 897 In this digest: Re: IN> Acting Dissonant -- Why celestials don't Re: IN> How to Document Existence IN> Role summary (hopefully useful) Re: IN> Roles Re: IN> How to Document Existence Re: IN> Mercurians identifying roles IN> Seraphim and logical statements IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... Re: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... Re: IN> How to Document Existence RE: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... Re: IN> roles and paperwork IN> Lost Words? IN> Night Music treaty again Re: IN> Shedim Problem (Re: Why not spread the Word) Re: IN> Greg's Shedim problem Re: IN> IN- Why not spread the Word (was RE: Roles and what to do...) Re: IN> Night Music treaty again Re: IN> IN- Why not spread the Word (was RE: Roles and what to do...) Re: IN> Kobalites? Re: IN> roles and paperwork IN> Musings on Magog and just a Braindump Re: IN> Night Music treaty again Re: IN> Bluffing Seraphim Re: IN> Kobalites? Re: IN> Shedim Problem (Re: Why not spread the Word) Re: IN> Greg's Shedim problem Re: IN> Angels going to GenCon IN> ADMIN [Security alert] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 10:53:29 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Acting Dissonant -- Why celestials don't David Edelstein wrote: > But if a Cherub, for example, was _planning_ an action that would > result in an object of his attunement being harmed, the planning > itself would not cause dissonance, but it would definitely be acting > contrary to his nature, and I'd say he was skating on thin ice. A > Seraph who doesn't actually lie, but deliberately comes as close as > he can to lying without going over the edge, is acting contrary to > his nature. Right. As I said in an earlier post, I think the dissonance mechanics work best when viewed as a correlary to roleplaying a feature of the celestial's personality. Dissonance is the "psychosomatic" damage taken as the result of an emotional stress. Doing something dissonant should generally produce an "Oh, my God, what have I *DONE*!" reaction. (Re-phrase as appropriate for infernals.) Even if the dissonant action was the right thing to do, it was still like shooting a beloved pet to put it out of its misery, or some similar trial. Dissonance is the celestial version of post-traumatic stress disorder. In this way, dissonance mechanics are like the Sanity mechanics in "Call of Cthulhu." It's a mechanic giving quantitative representation to an article of roleplaying. You should lose sanity points when you experience something really awful. You should feel yourself teetering on the edge as you begin to run out. Or, if you don't, it's because something especially insidious is happening. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 08:13:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Jayson Howell Subject: Re: IN> How to Document Existence - ---Eeyore wrote: > > You think it's harder than that? Somehow... I seem to collect a > > steady paycheck... > > Ah, yes. But do you collect a paycheck as a member of a big city police > force? No I don't, nor did I contend that this was a solution for any role which involves any sort of extensive background check or security clearance. >Eileth, from Feast of Blades, does. ... > The simplest thing to do might be is get a big warning label on her that > she shouldn't be used as an example (why is it always the Lilim that end > up in this situation? Just what kind of Needs did the people at SJG have > to get Geased into allowing their write-ups to be extra-powerful?) But > until we get some sort of explicit statement along these lines, your > insistence that you get no paperwork with s Role strikes me as being quite > implausible in canon. Does it? I never said that she wouldn't need the paperwork. I said that paperwork alone doesn't establish a role, and that a role doesn't provide the paperwork through some miraculous retroactive change in reality. I'll reiterate. A role doesn't give you a background, and a background alone won't give you a role. You must "become" the role you want in every sense of the word. If there are contradictions to your role, they must be removed. If documentation is needed, it must be provided. These steps alone, merely ensuring that background checks don't reveal you, is not sufficient to provide a role. Period. And going to your Superior to ask for a role won't suddenly alter the memories of everyone around you to the point they think you've been there all along. I've no problem with instant roles, I'm not sure why people are inferring I do. I have a problem with the whole "mess with their minds" theory of role development. The more people are affected by the creation of a role, the more leg work has to be done. As to Ms. Kale - (GM Pack, p.26) "she has a *lot* of 'friends'." A lilim, striking deals left and right with a large support network? I don't see why that's hard to follow at all. -Jayson _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:57:19 +0100 (BST) From: Steve Jessop Subject: IN> Role summary (hopefully useful) On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Walter Milliken wrote: > >My take on the role is that it works like a Jedi mind trick. > > That's one approach, but a) it doesn't really match the ways Roles are > described in canon, and more important, b) it doesn't explain why the > *Symphony* accepts you as the Role How about this: a Role can be created when a Superior waves its hands and says 'hey, Symphony, gimme a break, pretend Bobiel is really Bob' (or whatever Supes do). The Symphony agrees. Possibly records, and perhaps even a few human memories are altered (depending how blatant you want the effect to be), and someone hands you your (perfect forgery) birth certificate and drivers license, and an American Express card taken out in you name. (A servitor of Jean fiddled your credit ratings). Relievers of Yves take a short trip through the Library's (direct) connection to Smallsville public record office, or imps of Kronos or Asmodeus do their jobs. The Superior then does a 'memory dump' into the Celestial (I think it is canon that this can be done) to cover the basic details of what Bob knows that Bobiel doesn't, and the 'role skills' required. Another method for role-creation is to actually live the whole thing from birth: either a baby vessel left at an orphanage, soldier parents, divine tinkering in the womb ('you were lucky to avoid a miscarriage'), immaculate conception, or the old hospital switcheroo. All these tactics have been used. Finally, depending on the GM, it may be possible to build your own Role into the Symphony over time. This might lead to people thinking they have known you longer than they really have, but cannot conjure papers. For those who don't like major alteration of the Symphony, or Jedi mind tricks on a grand scale, the first method may only work for low-level Roles. To keep up a role, however, takes additional work. A 'Political Advisor' needs to read the papers, an 'Attorney' needs to take cases, else their knowledge will get outdated and their paper trail will become less convincing. 'Hmm, Mr. Iel, you graduated from MIT in Comp. Sci. five years ago, haven't worked since, and have never heard of Java. Riiiight.' (CV hits bin). For game effects, perhaps the GM could ask for (Intelligence+Role Level) to remember details about something the Role should know, that the celestial never actually encountered. Assume that documents exist, that records tally, and (if you like the idea) that humans 'vaguely remember old Bob' if they fail some roll or other (Will-RL would work except that humans Will is paltry. Maybe Will+Intelligence-RL.) If at any point the GM thinks the Celestial isn't doing enough work, either penalize memory rolls for recent events, or just drop the role level as the Celestial starts to 'tear loose' from that piece of the Symphony. Apologies if this is largely a summary of past ideas, but firstly I think it is probably worth it after over a week of posts, and secondly I think this scheme ought to please most of the people most of the time. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 12:02:54 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Roles David Edelstein wrote: > >Now, in previous centuries, it might have been quite possible to "start" >someone as an Archbishop and make him Pope...it was probably a lot easier >for celestials to insert themselves on thrones in the old days. No way. I would suggest that it's much /easier/ to create a Role in the modern day than in traditional societies, because so much more data is held in books and computers rather than in human minds, and because it is much easier to be anonymous in the modern West. If you want a Role as a miller in a 13th century French village, not only do you have to have the entry in the reeve's book, but you need to have had the right set of grandparents and parents and uncles and cousins and friends and connections. Now -- think how many more people have to know who the archbishop is, and the number of connections quickly becomes staggeringly huge. If you want a Role as a Unix consultant in the modern US, you just need to fake up some documentation, and be "new in town." Much easier, because anonymity is much less unusual in this society. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 98 12:24 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> How to Document Existence >Ah, yes. But do you collect a paycheck as a member of a big city police >force? Eileth, from Feast of Blades, does. You may recall that she went >Renegade a little less than a year ago, and set up the Role as Amanda Kale >just prior to that. It is only a Role/2, but the write-up does say that >she has access to resources as a member of the force, certainly implying >that she does more than wander around the city a pretend to be a cop while >not actually having a connection. > >There really is no way to get from a documentless beginning, such as you >propose, to being an established cop in a major US city in a year. Well, >I suppose that if you have a lot of friends forging the paperwork and >providing references, it might happen, but this is a Renegade. A Renegade *Lilim* -- all she needed to do was call in a few favors, or do a few for the right people. As a Lilim of Secrets, she also has that nifty blackmail capability.... > In >addition to the oft mentioned background check, these kinds of police >forces generally require at least a two-year degree in crminal justice and So she shows them her (forged) degree, and has someone plant the right papers, plus maybe a reference to a teacher at a university that owes her a favor. >previous experience in either a small town force, the MPs, or some sort of >armed security. There are other ways to make it, but they require at >least as much background prep as the standard method. So she presents documentation that she was a cop in Chicago for the past few years, and gets to the right people to make sure that a check on her paperwork will back her up, plus another reference or two on the force there. (How hard is it to blackmail a Chicago cop or two, especially if they're a Soldier of Hell?) >Granted, this whole character throws a wrench into most of the proposed >ideas of role creation. It didn't involve her Superior (who doesn't know >about the Role). It doesn't involve the participation of a large network >of demonic buddies (it says she has plenty of connections in Alaemon's >court still, but they can't go too far out on a limb to help a Renegade). She's a Lilim, and a fairly powerful one (as I recall, she's got a first- or second-level distinction) -- it's to be expected that she's got her own support network of favors owed. In a similar vein, any demon needing this kind of help without telling his boss can always find a friendly Lilim willing to do him a few favors (possibly by calling in others). But he'll owe her.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 98 12:28 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Mercurians identifying roles >The way I've been deciding what information the mercurians get on other >celestials is that it depends entirely on what the celestial in question was >doing when it was resonated. If it was doing something purely related to >maintaining its role, then he gets role-information. If it was doing >something related to its celestial function then he gets celestial >information. If they were doing both, then it probably depends on the level >of the role and the check digit. The general idea is that if you keep your >head down and stick tightly to your role, it will protect you. That sounds like a good way to handle it. Mercurians see the connections among people as they interact; if the interactions he's seeing are the "in-Symphony" ones, he should get the Role data. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 17:35:07 +0100 (BST) From: Steve Jessop Subject: IN> Seraphim and logical statements On Mon, 3 Aug 1998, Kevin Walsh wrote: > The Seraph can say "Stop or I'll shoot" without meaning that the Seraph > will shoot the friend. I have a Seraph character IMG who is a bit hazy about language: he knows a lot about English, and is aware that particular words can mean different things to different people. He does not, however, have much experience, and has resigned himself to the situation while he learns more. Sometimes he is accidentally misunderstood, sometimes he deliberately makes himself misunderstood. He might well speak the above words meaning "You will stop or I will shoot you", since he knows that saying those words will make the friend stop. He made a prediction, and it was right, so what he said was true. The bit after "or" could be absolutely anything. (Short-circuiting logic statement, for servitors of Jean.) Logical connectives ('if...then' and 'or') are often ambiguous in English. I rule that Seraphim can use them, provided that one of the meanings is true, but that it is uncomfortable for them to deliberately mislead in this way (cuts out their Resonance for a start). In this case I would only give dissonance if he didn't know that it would work, or if the friend didn't stop and the Seraph didn't shoot him. I think a common Seraph evasion would be 'If I am right about that duck, it is a servitor of Baal'. The Seraph isn't right, so the logical statement he made is true, but there is a different idiomatic meaning of the sentence. Serves you right for expecting a Seraph to use idiom. However, most Seraphim on principle will not deceive in this way. An even better one: 'If I may say so, that duck is Baal'. The Seraph may *not* say so, because it would be lying, and his Superior always told him never to lie... Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:02:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... Is there an Archangel of Love? I don't remember reading in the APG of one, but I could have missed it. Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:26:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Jayson Howell Subject: Re: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... There *was* an Archangel of Love. His name was Andrealphus. Three guesses as to why he's not around in Heaven anymore. (IPG p.12) Currently, there doesn't seem to be anyone who's taken the post in Andre's wake. -Jayson - ---Graveyard Greg wrote: > > Is there an Archangel of Love? I don't remember reading in the APG of > one, but I could have missed it. > > Graveyard Greg > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 18:29:14 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> How to Document Existence At 12:24 04/08/98 EDT, you wrote: > >She's a Lilim, and a fairly powerful one (as I recall, she's got a >first- or second-level distinction) -- it's to be expected that she's >got her own support network of favors owed. > > What I'm not sure about is whether this would stop any of the people who helped her by (illegally) forging documents from blackmailing _her_ afterwards. (Unless she has high enough geases on them to make sure that they never tell anyone). I assume lilim/ Lilith will need special treatment in the tethers book too, if only to explain how a demon prince who has no principality and no permanent servitors can have tethers or seneschals at all. I agree that the special treatment gets a bit tiring. Equal rites for other bands! :) jo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:42:02 -0700 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... I haven't mentioned this in the month of August, so I'll allow myself the leisure: Andre's former word is documented at http://www.serv.net/~srf/index/byname.html#20, and the Words of all known Angels who have fallen are listed at http://www.serv.net/~srf/index/fallen.html . The home pages of the INdex is at http://www.serv.net/~srf/index , if you want to start from the top. If you ever _can't_ find this information on the INdex, _easily_, please mail me. I'd love the suggestion. steve -----Original Message----- From: Jayson Howell [mailto:querent@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 1998 10:26 AM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> Looking for Love...Archangel, that is... There *was* an Archangel of Love. His name was Andrealphus. Three guesses as to why he's not around in Heaven anymore. (IPG p.12) Currently, there doesn't seem to be anyone who's taken the post in Andre's wake. -Jayson ---Graveyard Greg wrote: > > Is there an Archangel of Love? I don't remember reading in the APG of > one, but I could have missed it. > > Graveyard Greg > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 19:01:16 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> roles and paperwork On Mon, Aug 03, 1998 at 10:04:18PM -0400, eswhanu@juno.com wrote: > I played a Servitor of Jordi that had no problem getting into a > erasing their records on the computer before my character killed him (STR > 9, Vessel 5). > A Servitor of Jordi with computer knowledge? How did that character come by it? Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "Yet it cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire, but not glory." Machiavelli, the Prince. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 11:03:44 PDT From: "Doug Muir" Subject: IN> Lost Words? >>H'm. That argument would apply to pretty much every form of technology, >from flint hand-axes to slide rules. So, if we take your position, >technological Words are left empty, or only filled by stupid angels. >Ditto for words representing political entities, corporations, etc. < > >Lets see Technological or Political Words that should endure until the >apocalypse is over. Some of these are arguable but: Interesting list. I submit, though, that I could come up with ten (or fifty) fairly important Words that _would_ be temporary, for every one of these "long-term" or "permanent" Words. >Storage Media Granted. But every individual _form_ of storage media, from papyrus scrolls and clay tablets to eight-track tapes and CDs, is temporary. >Lightning* Canon; granted. But, again, there are lots of subordinate Words that won't be so tenacious... Vacuum Tubes, for instance, and Fission Power. >Steam >Powered Vehicles >Flying Vehicles >Cloth More technological Words... and, once again, these are exceptions; all have closely associated Words that are fading or altogether gone (steam trains, steam boats, steam-powered mills, steam heat, coal-powered vehicles, steam-powered vehicles, etc., etc.). Note that all of these are (in the celestial scheme of things) _young_ words. The first three are only from the last century or two, and Cloth only dates back to the late Stone Age. The constant creation of new Words strongly suggests (to me, at least) that celestials must at least occasionally be cutting loose from old ones. >Freedom >Oppression >Totalitarianism >Justice >Equality >Small c conservatism >Little Englandism >Millsian Libralism I'm not *quite* sure that all of these are sure bets for long-term survival. Totalitarianism, for instance, is having some problems at the moment; the real thing has been reduced to a few nasty corners of the world like Iraq and North Korea. Millsian liberalism, well... But, okay, granted that there are "permanent" political Words. But I'm not sure what the point is. I never claimed that there weren't thousands of Words that would last forever or as good as. I do say, though, that there are many more thousands, _of equal importance_, that are temporary. >Mining >Farming >The Scientific Method >Networks* All young words; see above. Note that a sufficiently advanced technology could conceivably do away with Mining or Farming (hey... Hunter-Gathering is pretty much finished, and who expected that in 10,000 BC?). A technological _collapse_ could kill off The Scientific Method, at least for a while. >Communications Sure. >Marketing >Advertising >Documentation Oh... okay. >Boats There are a zillion kinds of boats that are no longer made, from Ambatches (Egyptian reed boats) to Galleons. Absent the occasional Thor Heyerdahl, these guys are gone forever. So whither the Angel of Longships and the Demon of Triremes? >Pollution A sufficiently advanced technology... okay, it would have to be a _really_ advanced technology. >Facism Depends on how you define it. If classically, it's already gone. If broadly, okay, doing well. Let's not revisit this thread... Looking at your list, it occurs to me that most of these things are pretty big words... Freedom, Justice, Communication. Some would be suitable for Archangels; most would require a fairly powerful celestial. But I think it gets trickier as we descend from the broad Word to subordinate Words... particular _kinds_ of boats or powered vehicle. The more specific, the more likely the Word is to be temporary. Just for grins, here are some big Words that must necessarily, eventually, disappear. Any political entity (The Soviet Union, the Roman Empire, the League of Nations. Also the United States, Great Britain, the European Community). Any political party. Yeah, yeah, you can argue that the Whigs turned into the Liberals and the Federalists into the Republicans, or whatever. But eventually, they all die... there are no more Jansenists or Chartists. Any corporation. Hey -- many corporations have been far more important than most countries. Think of Krupp, the Hudson Bay Company, United Fruit, or the East India Corporation. And don't you just know that Microsoft has a Word-bound celestial already? Almost every _specific_ technology. "Networks" may have staying power, but "Ethernet" is on its way out. "Weapons", yes; "Catapults", no. Literary and artistic movements. Yeah, people still look at Pre-Raphaeilite paintings, but nobody's painting them any more. Diseases. Eventually, we're gonna cure 'em. Yah, new ones will appear, but we're going to cure the ones we've got now, sooner or later. In the longest run, almost all species. I could come up with *lots* more, but you get the point. Doug M. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 13:25:28 -0500 From: The Bard Subject: IN> Night Music treaty again O.K. I'll try again. I am starting a game in Austan VERY soon and I can't get the book for another couple of weeks. I need to know the terms of the treaty and just a couple of Teathers. I am NOT tring to get out of buying the book I just need the info sooner then I will be able to buy the book. I would like you to send the info directly to me as not to bore the list. Now this is the second time I tried this so help would leave me very greatful. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 14:58:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> Shedim Problem (Re: Why not spread the Word) > > So, what else do you want to know about them? prizewinning Inner Shedite> > How to present them with any challenge whatsoever. The Shedite P.C.s in my game are taking over whoever they want, doing whatever they wish, and then vanishing again at the slightest hint of repurcussion. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 15:00:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> Greg's Shedim problem > > And most importantly, can anyone help with my Shedim problem? :) > > How did that go on Saturday, by the way? :) > They stomped all over everything, produced some truly amazing atrocities, and had next to no trouble doing it. My players had a *great* time, but I can't imagine that their enjoyment can last without *some* problems to overcome. :/ Greg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 15:07:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> IN- Why not spread the Word (was RE: Roles and what to do...) > > > > If people choose to be good because they know that it'll get them > > into Heaven and being bad will send them to Hell -- not just believe, > > but *KNOW* this will happen -- then are they really choosing to be > > good? Or are they being bribed for goodness and punished for badness? > > The problem is, that this *is* the essential kernel of Christian morality. Is it? It is true that virtue is rewarded and evil punished, but that doesn't mean tha tthe *reason* to be good is to gain rewards and avoid punishments. If it were, how could we make sense of Christ who took punishment instead of reward out of his sense of goodness. > Virtue will be rewarded, and evil punished, in the next life. The question > Elizabeth asks here, carried to its logical extreme, would ask people to > be good *for no reason whatever* -- which is preposterous. That would seem to me to be the kernal of *all* morality. Well, not that you be good for no reason, but that you be good because it is good. The world has plenty of atheists who live like that, and has had for longer than there has *been* Christianity. > > unselfish people are > those who take pleasure from helping others. Although the suffering they gain may be much greater. A truly good person might endure torture so that the Nazi's don't capture a hundred others, but this episode in their life is a dreadful one. > There is, ultimately, no way > to divorce actions from personal motives -- if you don't want to do > something, and have no reason for doing it, you don't do it. > I will agree on that one. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:19:51 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN> Night Music treaty again >O.K. I'll try again. I am starting a game in Austan VERY soon and I can't get >the book for another couple of weeks. I need to know the terms of the treaty >and just a couple of Teathers. I don't own Night Music either, but instead of depending on others; make it up. If your Austin Treaty isn't the same as canon, then you can either change it to suit canon or play your own version. Just my theory. Armand ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 15:26:00 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> IN- Why not spread the Word (was RE: Roles and what to do...) Gregory Littmann wrote: > > The problem is, that this *is* the essential kernel of Christian > >morality. > > Is it? It is true that virtue is rewarded and evil punished, but > that doesn't mean tha tthe *reason* to be good is to gain rewards > and avoid punishments. I, too, would say that this is not the kernal of Christian morality. That kernel consists of the two commandments, "Love God above all" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." No "reason" is given for them -- they're just a summary of what virtue IS. And you do virtue because it's the right thing to do; you've backed up to the ethical equivalent of axioms; there's no further back to go. "Virtue will be rewarded" might be regarded as the kernel of Christian (and Jewish and Moslem) *eschatology*. I'm not sure. But not ethics. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 15:54:59 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Kobalites? At 6:17 PM -0700 8/3/98, -=|horsefly|=- wrote: >On Mon, 3 Aug 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > actually, let me get to that presently: what the smeg is a >redeemed Kobalite??? Currently, Daimon, Bright Lilim of Creation, former Dark Lilim of Kobal, from Fiat. (http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/fiat.html) Since he has Geases upon him, still, it is easy enough to acquire them and send him up to abuse annoying angels (if it was an angel) in Trauma. He can also be given celestial tattoo kits... The reason to call upon Kobalites is because it is always possible that the subject might wake up in the middle, and be annoyed, and do damage to the demons giving the swirlies -- therefore, using someone else's Servitors is better for that. (As for how to get the cooperation of these Kobalites? Simple. Guess who holds the records? The Princess of Nitpicking. Guess who can hand records of treason over to Asmodeus . . . Now, isn't cooperation so much more healthy?) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:36:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Jayson Howell Subject: Re: IN> roles and paperwork I imagine either in Heaven or on Earth. Where's the problem? Let's assume you've a lawyer on retainer from the parks department who specializes in insuring that natural wetlands be preserved in future developments? What about that planning commisioner who wants to increase the size of the zoo to make a more natural environment that's less constrained? That philanthropist who donated $100,000 to the aquarium for the marine mammal rehabilitation facility that reorients captive marine mammals to the skills needed for wild life? Who's word exactly do you think they're serving? -Jayson - ---Kevin Walsh wrote: > A Servitor of Jordi with computer knowledge? How did that character come > by it? _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 12:40:08 PDT From: "Doug Muir" Subject: IN> Musings on Magog and just a Braindump Hey Em -- FWIW, I loved your long piece on Egyptian gods. I actually wrote a longish reply, but it got lost when my piece-of-crap Wintel box threw a freeze last night... but I liked it & agree with much of what you say (like, Egyptian religion was _really_ weird and alien, and most of it has been comic-booked into a more digestible form today). Hope you're better. Doug M. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 14:35:10 -0500 From: The Bard Subject: Re: IN> Night Music treaty again If your Austin Treaty isn't the same as canon, then you can either > change it to suit canon or play your own version. Just my theory. I would do that but I hate to change things in the middle of a game and I hate to run things outside of canon when I don't have to. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:01:44 -0700 (PDT) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: Re: IN> Bluffing Seraphim On Tue, 4 Aug 1998, David Edelstein wrote: [snip] > Considering that Seraphim can't even "lie" about their identity when > maintaining a Role, the above example ["Stop or I'll shoot"--Seraph > shoots something else to avoid Disturbance; is that Dissonant] is > clearly stretching the truth more than any non-dissonant Seraph can > manage. > > One thing that should make Seraphim a little scary is that they _don't_ > bluff.... i like that idea, and it works without Disturbance cropping in just fine within Celestial and Etherial circles, but among the Corporeal, i get the impression from the above text that your supposition is that Disturbance is preferable to Dissonance. with all the discussion about Dissonance, how painful it is and how each choir/band avoids it for this reason, i don't want to get into it again (and i think the thread's still alive, anyway). however, Disturbance can be mighty noisy, and shooting a fleeing human in the cited example, even if it only wounds to disable rather than kill, would certainly alert local Celestials of a human's unnatural injury. where stealth is required, would Celestials bite the bullet and take Dissonance rather than spook The Other Side? -=|horsefly|=- "Back off, preacher, I don't care if it's Sunday. I ain't no angel, but I never felt better!" --FREEDOM, Alice Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:12:50 -0700 (PDT) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: Re: IN> Kobalites? [explanation of Kobalites snipped] my! let me just say that when the Demon Princess is feeling evil, she's Feeling EVIL . yesterday's public near-execution should serve as a wonderful example and reminder to all of us of that fact. -=|horsefly|=- "Back off, preacher, I don't care if it's Sunday. I ain't no angel, but I never felt better!" --FREEDOM, Alice Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:18:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: IN> Shedim Problem (Re: Why not spread the Word) On Tue, 4 Aug 1998, Gregory Littmann wrote: [...] > > So, what else do you want to know about them? > prizewinning Inner Shedite> > > > How to present them with any challenge whatsoever. The Shedite P.C.s in > my game are taking over whoever they want, doing whatever they wish, and > then vanishing again at the slightest hint of repurcussion. Vanishing how, to where? The usual constraint on extravagant celestial antics is Disturbance; this presumes, of course, that somebody who cares is within perception range. AFAIK all the ways Shedim can "vanish" make heaps of Celestial noise. Of course, if you're not using the IPG rule (superseding the core rulebook) that says Shedim *do* make noise when they swap hosts, unless they do it slowly and carefully while maintaining physical contact, they have a somewhat easier time of it -- just jump silently from host to host. Using the IPG rules, though, this won't work; it's fairly easy to trail a string of level-9 disturbances. Are they bailing out and "ascending" to Hell when things get tough? Their Superior might take a dim view of this option, if overused. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Greg's Shedim problem > > How did that go on Saturday, by the way? :) > > > They stomped all over everything, produced some truly amazing > atrocities, and had next to no trouble doing it. My players had a *great* > time, but I can't imagine that their enjoyment can last without *some* > problems to overcome. :/ Were you able to get any mileage whatsoever out of the disturbance created by the body-hopping? Relevant question for Elizabeth or some such: Shedim are supposed to corrupt their hosts at least once a day. Suppose a Shedite hops into a host, and leaves it minutes later without corrupting it. Less than a day has elapsed: does the Shedite get a note of dissonance or not? - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 16:35:44 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Angels going to GenCon Shadowcat wrote: > > I will be there. I don't trust ANY of you celestials in my town. ;-) > > Shadowcat Last human preist of Bast. > > P.S. When will folks be hitting town? I'ld like for a group of us to get > tpgether at some point. I'm in on Wed night, but won't be up for anything big then (I'm meeting some non-gamers for dinner that night). My schedule is pretty free-form after that. Maybe we can get together at the Atlas booth sometime Thursday? Email me today directly if something gets decided since I'll be working until 8ish (Eastern Daylight savings Time) tonight but will be out of contact after that! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 16:18:15 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> ADMIN [Security alert] Okay, here's what seems to be a real, honest to goodness, Warn Everybody About A Virus alert. (Or maybe it's About A Trojan. Discussions of this off-list, please.) If you're using Netscape Communicator to read Email, then you can get more data over at Netscape's homepage. (You may want to poke around Internet Explorer's homepage too, since I have heard that there is a problem with them, too, which is similar.) If you're using Eudora, you're fine, go ahead and delete this. (I'm copying some stuff that my spouse sent me, since it will be clearer than me trying to decipher all this computerstuff.) >Long Filename Security Issue in Netscape Communicator >----------------------------------------------------- >Late last week, a serious vulnerability was discoved within Netscape >Communicator. Security could be compromised when newsgroup users select to >view attachments with very long filenames (200 characters or more). > >In one scenario, email and newsgroup attachments with very long filenames >were automatically executed on computers even though they were never opened >by the user. >Until a patch is available from Netscape, you can configure Communicator so >that you will not experience any problems. > >1. Open up Communicator and select "Collabra Discussion Groups" from the >"Communicator" pull down menu, select any newsgroup and any message. > >2. Select View (pull-down menu) -> Attachments -> As Links. > > >If you select to view attachments "As Links", you will ensure that >attachments cannot execute automatically on your computer. If you have an >attachment with a very long filename (over 200 characters), treat it as a >malicious program and do not attempt to run it. You may want to talk to your ISP's support people, and ask if there's anything you should do about it. (They may want to know where it came from -- the Received headers, etc., as if it were spam.) >For more information >-------------------- >To read more about the long filename security issue from the source, please >refer to the following Netscape web page: > >http://home.netscape.com/products/security/resources/bugs/longfile.html For us Eudora users, here's what QUALCOMM has said: >"[Eudora Pro Email, Eudora Pro CommCenter and Eudora Light not susceptible >to buffer overflow security problem] > >QUALCOMM rigorously tested its line of Eudora email software after becoming >aware of the buffer overflow security problems recently found in Microsoft >and Netscape email programs. QUALCOMM is pleased to announce that its >Eudora email products are not susceptible to the types of attacks that can >harm the computers of users of these other products. > >QUALCOMM tested Eudora Pro and Eudora CommCenter versions 4.0, as well as >Eudora Pro and Eudora Light versions 3.0 on both the Windows and Macintosh >platforms. In all cases, Eudora does not allow any unauthorized programs to >be automatically executed on a user's system." - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #897 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.