From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Sep 8 06:57:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA17221 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 1998 06:57:45 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id GAA20057 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 8 Sep 1998 06:39:02 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 06:39:02 -0500 Message-Id: <199809081139.GAA20057@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 #940 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, September 8 1998 Volume 01 : Number 940 In this digest: Re: IN> When an Archangel Falls... IN> Flowers of the Fall (Was Falling Archangels) Re: IN> Flowers of the Fall (Was Falling Archangels) Re: IN> Changing Sides IN> Undead (was Re: IN> Changing Sides) IN> Choir/Band Attunements Re: IN> Undead (was Re: IN> Changing Sides) Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Balseraph of Fate / Malakite ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 06:22:55 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> When an Archangel Falls... At 23:50 06/09/98 -0500, you wrote: > > Marc has tripped, and it won't be long before the Demon Prince of the >Art of the Deal decides to wreck havoc on the world's economy... > > ...Surprise, surprise. > Hee. One of the premises of my Victorian game is that Marc came quite close to tripping during the last century. jo ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 23:14:20 PDT From: "David Streeter" Subject: IN> Flowers of the Fall (Was Falling Archangels) I reckon a more surprising archangelic candidate for falling would be Novalis. What Demon Princess would Novalis turn into? Novalis is a Cherub, right? So she'd turn into a Djinn. Demon Princess of Compromise? Demon Princess of Passive-Aggressive behaviour? Demon Princess of Surrender? David ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 04:20:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Doubting Eric Subject: Re: IN> Flowers of the Fall (Was Falling Archangels) On Sun, 6 Sep 1998, David Streeter wrote: > > > I reckon a more surprising archangelic candidate for falling would be > Novalis. > > What Demon Princess would Novalis turn into? > > Novalis is a Cherub, right? So she'd turn into a Djinn. > > Demon Princess of Compromise? > Demon Princess of Passive-Aggressive behaviour? > Demon Princess of Surrender? > > David Novalis, Demon Princess of Annoyance (Can you tell I don't like her much?) Eric ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 01:56:59 -0400 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides At 5:43 PM -0400 9/4/98, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 2:51 PM -0500 9/4/98, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >>Undead are typically suckered into this >>by not having the mechanics explained clearly to them, or >>by persuading themselves that they will never physically die. > >Or they say, "Lemme get this straight -- I live forever, I get >cool powers, I do what I want, and I *DON'T* go to Hell to be >a demonic playtoy afterwards? COOL!" Works in reverse, too, in a setting like Redneck Gaigin's "Dark Victory", a setting I'm a foot and a half away from running a campaign in. (Anybody still have that big old list of 'What happened to City X'?) For some reason, killing and/or remnantizing all my current characters appeals to me. Go figure. At any rate, in that setting, dead Humans go to Hell. Period. And however bad Hell's going to be, it's going to be that much worse if someone keeps track and discovered you helped the Other Side while you were alive. Makes it difficult to hire new Soldiers if you're not going to lie to them. Imagine an small pack of Mummy and Vampire soldiers, who fight against the overwhelming forces of Hell because it's the right thing to do, and because the only thing they have to lose is their lives. Enter the "Knights of the Living Dead." Allright, officer, I'll go quietly now... \|=) ===== ><{{"> =================================================== <"}}>< ====== Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Senaieas, Shedite Baron of Lust, the Demon of Voyeurism nofori@pop3.utoledo.edu | Homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh maltesh@usa.net | In Nomine: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh/T317 ===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 16:11:06 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: IN> Undead (was Re: IN> Changing Sides) >> Is it canon that there is no Heaven or Hell in their future? > >IIRC, canon is that all undead acquire their unnatural >vitality by having their soul fused into their body. The >result is that, when the body finally dies, the soul is >also destroyed. Undead are typically suckered into this >by not having the mechanics explained clearly to them, or >by persuading themselves that they will never physically die. > I know that its canon, but for what its worth I never liked the fact that undead experience true death upon destruction of their corporeal body. I should think that DPs etc. would think twice about offering eternal life in the first place if they weren't guaranteed your immortal soul at the end. They may be spreading evil in the short term, but are denying themselves a valuable resource in the long. Besides, there are too many examples in literature where bargainers have sought eternal life of some kind only to find out that it is not all that its cracked up to be. At the end of the story, they often ironically set about ending it themselves, and the demon who traded it in the first place is always excitedly awaiting for their arrival in his realm... So. Maybe there is something about the undeadification process where the soul is treated 'differently'? One of Saminga's little secrets perhaps? For example, the undead might have their soul bound within something similar to a celestial's heart. It sits in Hell, on a shelf, until the corp. death of the undead. Then it breaks and the demon's fun can really begin }:> You could even use this for the Hollywood schtick of explaining why undead don't have shadows/reflections etc, because their core 'essence' ain't there. > >Canon does not say (that I recall) if a soul can be separated >out again and un-undead-ed. Canon *does* say that Superiors >can do things lesser beings cannot, and normal rules don't >apply to them. > >Earl > What you said Earl. Everybody should get a shot at redemption. It may be harder for some than others but... - -- Julian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 16:55:32 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: IN> Choir/Band Attunements Is it canon that *choir/band* attunements are only granted by Superiors, or do lesser beings such as Dukes, Arch-Dukes, Colonels, etc, have the ability to grant their own? - -- Julian jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 12:20:01 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: Re: IN> Undead (was Re: IN> Changing Sides) > Besides, there are too many examples in literature where bargainers have > sought eternal life of some kind only to find out that it is not all > that its cracked up to be. At the end of the story, they often > ironically set about ending it themselves, and the demon who traded it > in the first place is always excitedly awaiting for their arrival in his > realm... FAUST, for one. Or, if you're into plays, The Tragedical History of Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlow (which I've always found easier reading.) This is one of those cases of "to hell with canon". It becomes hard for me to justify giving a sorcerer eternal unlife and lich-ify them if they know they aren't ever going to Hell. It has always struck me more terrifying if said undead knows absolutely they are going to Hell, and what's more, they know absolutely what is in store from them once they get there. No redemption, no running, no hiding, no nothing. Take for instance the very rich old tycoon who has access to a private library of Bad Books. He learns how to summon a Demon of Death, and the Demon of Death agrees - he will make the old man into undead, and grant him eternal life. And when the demon leaves, the old man is now a mummy. Except there's one hitch - the old man's body continues to age, then die, then decompose. The old man is now a living consciousness trapped in a decaying corpse. He has an unlife, and it may go for years after his death while he slowly rots, then becomes as bones, and then finally crumbles to dust, but he knows that as he decays he is becoming closer and closer to final death. He tries to apply makeup, he wraps his limbs in special wraps to keep them longer, his body becomes a mad dance of preservation and desperation, but it's inevitable. And when he finally crumbles to dust, quite insane and centuries later, the original demon of fate gets the old man's soul to torture for eternity. In IN canon, instead, the undead gets to be alive (totally unjustifying Saminga's research into the corpse preservation technics of the Egyptians) and they don't go to Hell. One would think how Saminga is designed, that he would make every effort to ensure those who received his gifts would definitely one day join him in Abaddon to become another stripped soul and a worm crawling through the soil. *shrug* - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 18:02:25 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides > >I'm mostly working here from the short discussion of undead in the core >rules. I'm still not clear myself on how anyone but Saminga makes >undead (or why they'd bother). > Kronos - as a way to cheat Time? Asmodeus - as a way to circumvent the Rules? - -- Julian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 12:36:55 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Balseraph of Fate / Malakite On Thu, Sep 03, 1998 at 07:22:48PM -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 5:46 PM -0500 9/3/98, Elizabeth Bartley wrote: > >The imitation Malakite must have four oaths, including the standard > >Malakim oaths: > > Fortunately, according to the IPG, they *don't* have to have > the standard 2, though they may have the "Never surrender or > allow oneself to be captured by the Enemy" one. Just defining > "Enemy" differently. > It would be funny to redefine the word evil too, though. You could define it to mean kindness, generosity, courage and so forth. Most angels would possess those attributes in spades, and would thus be evil, and would have to be redeemed (made to Fall) or killed. If you want a psychopathic Balseraph, it could define the universe as evil. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "We have been fortunate enough to live to a time when virtue, though it does not triumph, is nevertheless not always tormented by attack dogs." Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the Gulag Archipelago. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #940 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.