From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Sep 17 17:52:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (root@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06129 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 1998 17:52:55 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id QAA20171 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:49:13 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:49:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199809172149.QAA20171@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 #949 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Thursday, September 17 1998 Volume 01 : Number 949 In this digest: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) IN> Seeking information IN> Book of Tethers: Up for Playtest! IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Seeking information IN> RE: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) IN> Titanic? No, no no... IN> City of Angels Re: IN> City of Angels Re: IN> Seeking information Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods Re: IN> Seeking information Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods Re: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods Re: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods IN> Re: IN- Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 13:40:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Bowman Subject: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >Question: Can Krono's Fated Future attuenement be used on Celestials? > > This and Divine Destiny are both iffy. In our game, we decree that > Fate is Falling/becoming a Prince while Destiny is redemption/becoming > an Archangel. (Or Wordbound, or maybe even 'loyal Servitor of x'.) But Divine Destiny says you can see a *human*'s (or perhaps mortal's) destiny and fate in his face. I've assumed you get nothing when using it on an ethereal or celestial (and in fact have been using it as a human/non-human detector sometimes). Michael ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 17:26:13 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) At 1:40 PM -0700 9/16/98, Michael Bowman wrote: >On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> >Question: Can Krono's Fated Future attuenement be used on Celestials? >> >> This and Divine Destiny are both iffy. In our game, we decree that >> Fate is Falling/becoming a Prince while Destiny is redemption/becoming >> an Archangel. (Or Wordbound, or maybe even 'loyal Servitor of x'.) > >But Divine Destiny says you can see a *human*'s (or perhaps mortal's) >destiny and fate in his face. I've assumed you get nothing when using it >on an ethereal or celestial (and in fact have been using it as a >human/non-human detector sometimes). Which is nearly the same thing, really -- if you get a binary Heaven/Hell thing, then you can spot the celestial. It's true that you then have to decide what to do with ethereals... (Mind you, that's just in our game, not nec. canon...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 98 18:39 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) >>What could cause dissonance for an angel or a demon except their >>choir/band restriction and the word of their archangel/prince? > > Their Superior. Directly. Their Superior can also quite easily >inflict Discord as a punishment, usually something appropriate and >mean. Merciful on an angel who's been naughty in killing things, for >instance. Also anything the GM thinks is really inappropriate for the nature of the celestial. There are a few examples in canon, such as starting a fight in Heaven, an angel using the demonic tongue, and similar sorts of things. The players should be warned by the GM out of character first, though, so they know they're asking for trouble if them continue whatever action they're doing. > Another point: Killing people is NOISY. REALLY REALLY NOISY. That's a >TEN point gong in the symphony, per body. *plus* the human's total Forces, *plus* an additional level of noise for each 4 points of damage done to corporeal objects (including the human's body) during the fight. So it's even *more* noisy.... > Cherubim: Definitely can't harm their charges. Most Cherubim tend >toward seeing themselves as humanity's protectors, and would regret >having to kill a human under most circumstances. They really only focus on guarding their *charges*, and someone who's threatening their charge with harm might easily get beaten on, and even killed, if that's what the cherub thought was necessary to protect it. Though most Cherubim probably wouldn't consider harming a human *unless* they were threatening their attuned. (Gabriel's are a different story, though....) > Elohim: Any Elohim on a killing spree is close to getting tattoos >and calling humans "weaklings." There are few reasons other than "I >have orders to do this" that are objective, to kill humans off. Actually, I think that Elohim are *quite* likely to kill when it's for the greater good of the Symphony. But I agree they'd better be considering other alternatives first. The life of one human is *also* part of the Symphony, and killing them is doing *some* harm to the Symphony as a whole, so they'd better have a significantly greater good that was only acheivable by that humans' death, or their definitely headed for a Fall. Note also that killing humans merely because it's convenient (or because they're annoying) is *definitely* a subjective act, and hence dissonant. > Kryiotates: Shouldn't involve their host in fights if they can help >it. It can get the host killed or seriously injured (dissonance). There are cases where the host isn't really at risk, though. But Kyrios are more likely than most angels to empathize with the victim, so they're probably not inclined to kill without serious need. > Dominic's servitors gain dissonance for inflicting a punishment >greater than the crime, and on actual INNOCENTS, >any< punishment is >greater than the crime. Remember that an angel may not view death as a punishment, especially if it's quick, and the victim is likely to wind up in Heaven. Death is merely a transition that humans go through.... Sending humans to Hell is iffier -- though it could be argued that God puts souls where they deserve, so anybody who dies and goes to Hell *must* deserve that. Hence there's no real logical argument here against killing humans for Judgment Servitors. > Ditto for Jean. Can't imagine many situations where killing people >is the best way to support the word of Lightning, ot the work he >does with technology. Being an Elohite, though, he's a pragmatist. If the human is carrying around knowledge he shouldn't have, and is likely to use it, Jean will probably approve of any solution that ensures that the knowledge is contained. That may not require death, though.... > I can't imagine the word or spirit of Laurence's angels containing >the idea "Go kill several humans." Only in fair an honorable combat, anyway -- and duelling has fallen out of favor in most places.... > Djinn can't actually kill their attunements (unless they're >Saminga's, but even Sammy-boy's get dissonance for harming and >not< >killing an attunement). Most Djinn also can't be bothered enough to >care about people to see killing them. Though anyone who gets in their way, or annoys them, may be in trouble. But they aren't likely to go out of their way to kill people.... > Habbalah could probably get away with it, too, but it's not >as easy to rationalize as part of their "mission from God," IMHO. >Then again, "Gee, he was so weak, I didn't really MEAN to break it," >might work just fine. There's also the "kill him and let God sort it out, if he's truly deserving, then he'll go to Heaven, so it's OK" trick, more or less like I mentioned for Dominic's Servitors. But Habbalah are more likely to kill random people -- Dominic's are more likely to just not worry too much about innocent bystanders who get in the way of getting rid of an angel gone bad. > Andre's dissonance restrictions would seem to support killing as >all right, as long as you don't CARE. Reemember, though, that dead >men have much fewer lusts, and don't support the Boss's Word much >at all. He wouldn't be amused. Though snuff films are fine things, from his point of view. Otherwise killing is pointless.... > Asmodeus' demons have better things to do than worry about humans. But they aren't going to worry much about killing them, either, other than it's too likely to alert their quarry. > Beleth's demons should be promoting fear. Dead men don't fear much >anymore. But a truly *nasty* death, that's well-publicized, can give thousands of humans nightmares for weeks. I'd put Beleth's Servitors high on the list of candidates for the title of "nasty serial-killer of the decade". Random, more-or-less normal killings aren't useful, though. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 98 18:41 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) >Question: if a Balseraph attempts his Resonance on a target and that >target successfully resists, do they realize anything's happened? > >I figure for mundanes, they have no idea anything's happened. For >angels... maybe a perception roll in is order or would it be automatic? >Is there anything canon concerning this? I thought there was a statement somewhere that stated that anything resisted could be noticed. I know GURPS includes such a rule, and I thought there was one in In Nomine. - ---Wlater ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 19:52:43 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) At 6:39 PM -0400 9/16/98, Walter Milliken wrote: >>>What could cause dissonance for an angel or a demon except their >>>choir/band restriction and the word of their archangel/prince? >> >> Their Superior. Directly. Their Superior can also quite easily >>inflict Discord as a punishment, usually something appropriate and >>mean. Merciful on an angel who's been naughty in killing things, for >>instance. > >Also anything the GM thinks is really inappropriate for the nature of >the celestial. There are a few examples in canon, such as starting a >fight in Heaven, an angel using the demonic tongue, and similar sorts of >things. Right. Starting a fight in Heaven (as opposed to consensual sparring or self-defence) is dissonant. *Lying* in the demonic tongue is dissonant, as is *learning* the demonic tongue. [As a note, it depends on the Archangel, if the redeemed ex-demon remembers demonic. The GM may choose to charge points for Helltongue, either as Language: Helltongue, or 5 points to just know it.] >The players should be warned by the GM out of character first, though, >so they know they're asking for trouble if them continue whatever action >they're doing. (Or, if you want to be in-character, the GM says, "You can feel the tingling of impending dissonance, and know that what you are doing/not doing is *wrong*...") >> Dominic's servitors gain dissonance for inflicting a punishment >>greater than the crime, and on actual INNOCENTS, >any< punishment is >>greater than the crime. > >Remember that an angel may not view death as a punishment, especially if >it's quick, and the victim is likely to wind up in Heaven. Death is >merely a transition that humans go through.... Sending humans to Hell >is iffier -- though it could be argued that God puts souls where they >deserve, so anybody who dies and goes to Hell *must* deserve that. >Hence there's no real logical argument here against killing humans for >Judgment Servitors. Actually, I could see it either way -- especially depending on the pain of the killing. I mean, you're separating someone from their friends and family... It's at best like locking someone in solitary confinement. (If it's an evil human, that's different, yes.) Not to mention inflicting harm on innocent bystanders -- like those who depended on the now-dead human. Even if there isn't dissonance there, remember Dominique's weekly visit! If the angel is getting out of hand with casual killings, Dominic will know the TRUTH... (Asmodeus, likewise, will be annoyed if someone is threatening their cover by too freely killing.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 18:30:54 -0400 From: Stacy Stroud Subject: IN> Seeking information The "Holiest Man in the World" bit in _Final Trumpet_ (which I picked up from SJG at Dragon*Con) reminded me of a bit of folklore (Jewish, I think, or possibly Muslim; maybe both faiths have versions) that I think has come up on this list before. Isn't there something in the folklore of one of the aforementioned religions about a small, finite number of truly "righteous" or "just" people, for whose sake God maintains the world in existence (or something like that)? Can anyone fill in the gaps in my knowledge? This struck me the other day as something that could easily be mined for an In Nomine plot seed. Stacy Stroud sstroud@uky.campus.mci.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 18:24:38 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Book of Tethers: Up for Playtest! Mind you, you have to have a Pyramid subscription to access and playtest these files, but Pyramid is $15 a year, gets weekly updates, and is generally cool. (You also get to log onto their chat-M**, where I'll be chatting from time to time, live!) http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/about.html I anticipate a couple of weeks or so of playtest. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 19:39:32 EST From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) >At 11:28 PM -0500 9/15/98, Perry Lloyd wrote: ^^^^^^^^^^^ Hey! That's me! >>Good day all, >> >>Question: if a Balseraph attempts his Resonance on a target and that >>target successfully resists, do they realize anything's happened? > >If mundanes, nope. If Aware... probably give a Perception roll, >yes. (Sorta like for Impudites.) Err... ok. I can live with that. >>Is there anything canon concerning this? > >I have this sinking feeling that the answer is: Not Yet. Oh dear? >>Question: Can Krono's Impudite of Fate choir attunement be used on >>Celestials? > >It's the past -- I'd say yes. Good. The character in group already knows the past of everyone else. Well, except for the stubborn Cherub who won't let him touch her. :) >>Question: Can Krono's Fated Future attuenement be used on Celestials? > >This and Divine Destiny are both iffy. In our game, we decree that >Fate is Falling/becoming a Prince while Destiny is redemption/becoming >an Archangel. (Or Wordbound, or maybe even 'loyal Servitor of x'.) Hrm... >OTOH, you could get more specific.... Yeah. "I'll take option #3 Bob!" >>Question: Can a Malakite's Resonance be used on Celestials? > >Definitely -- how else would they detect Balseraphs? Uhhh... with magnets? I don't know... :) Suppose a Malakite is Resonanting on a Balseraph of Kronos who happens to have the Resonance of a Malakite? (Not that I happen to have one in my group or anything. :) - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd (spook_number_six@hotmail.com) "Remember, false hope is still hope." -Dilbert ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 01:44:08 +0100 (BST) From: maya@tcp.co.uk (GR Cogman) Subject: Re: IN> Seeking information >The "Holiest Man in the World" bit in _Final Trumpet_ (which I picked up >from SJG at Dragon*Con) reminded me of a bit of folklore (Jewish, I think, >or possibly Muslim; maybe both faiths have versions) that I think has come >up on this list before. > >Isn't there something in the folklore of one of the aforementioned >religions about a small, finite number of truly "righteous" or "just" >people, for whose sake God maintains the world in existence (or something >like that)? I found this: There are on earth, and always were, thirty-six righteous men whose mission is to justify the world before God. They are the Lamed Wufniks. They do not know each other and are very poor. If a man comes to the knowledge that he is a Lamed Wufnik, he immediately dies and somebody else, perhaps in another part of the world, takes his place. Lamed Wufniks are, without knowing it, the secret pillars of the universe. Were it not for them, God would annihilate the whole of mankind. Unawares, they are our saviours. This mystical belief of the Jews can be found in the works of Max Brod. Its remote origin may be the eighteenth chapter of Genesis, where we read this verse: "And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes." The Moslems have an analogous personage in the Kutb. (_The Book of Imaginary Beings_, Jorge Luis Borges) - --- Maya, Elohite of Eli in service to Blandine maya@tcp.co.uk - -- "There are those who say that wizards are subject to temptations and addictions beyond the understanding of ordinary men: the addiction to shape-changing, or to meditation under the influence of certain herbs and conditions of the stars; the obsession with knowledge, and the development of power. Yet this is not so. Temptation is temptation, obsession is obsession, and choice is choice." - Isar Chelladan, Precepts of Wizardry. -- "Dog Wizard", Barbara Hambly. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 21:05:13 -0400 From: "Matthew Stein" Subject: IN> RE: Steve Marco asked: Quick Question Regarding the Cherub of Destiny theory on Jack from Titanic: Didn't he have an affair with a mortal? wouldn't that be dissonant, or at the very least grounds for trial by the Celestial Inquisition? I doubt that having an affair with a mortal would lead to dissonance; after all, that doesn't necessarily lead her towards her Fate (as would be dissonant for an angel of Destiny) and he didn't betray her (as would be dissonant for the Cherubim). Celestial Inquisition, maybe, but I'd think that Dominic would tread lightly on Yves's servants, as they are, afterall, serving the good of humanity - what they do is to bring humanity up out of the pits towards their Destiny. It's not like being heretical or what-have-you. Matt. [Angel of Weird Ideas, servant of Eli, kind of kicking it now.] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 23:00:55 -0400 From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Resonance Questions (help!) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >At 11:28 PM -0500 9/15/98, Perry Lloyd wrote: >>Good day all, >> >>Question: if a Balseraph attempts his Resonance on a target and that >>target successfully resists, do they realize anything's happened? > >If mundanes, nope. If Aware... probably give a Perception roll, >yes. (Sorta like for Impudites.) This is a bad idea, IMHO. It makes the Balseraph's supernatural ability to lie less effective than the Lying skill (which they can't take). Note that a single successful Will roll prevents the Balseraph from using its resonance on that person for /hours/, and that the Will roll merely needs to be successful -- it doesn't even need to beat the check digit of the Balseraph's roll. Adding the ability to detect its use is simply a gratuitous weakening of an already limited power. IMC, a Balseraph that sucessfully makes its resonance roll seems completely sincere and convinced of what it says. This means any Detect Lies check will automatically fail -- the Balseraph really believes what it says. If the victim fails his or her roll, then she will also believe what the Balseraph says, even if it contradicts her own knowledge. (Bal: "He doesn't love you." Man: "But I do!" Woman: "You're just saying that...") If the victim makes his or her roll, then she is /still/ convinced that the Balseraph believes what it is saying -- but she can judge the statement normally, based on her own experience. (Bal: "Aliens control the stockmarket." Woman: "What a sad little man -- he actually seems to believe that.") - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 22:32:44 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: IN> Titanic? No, no no... This post has an In Nomine point, but it'll take me a moment or two to get to. The main impulse is to point people in the direction of the right Leonardo DiCaprio movie; I thought _Titanic_ was really bad, but then I like a movie with characters rather than cardboard cut-outs. On the other hand, _Man in the Iron Mask_ was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. It didn't get a single good review, but the arguments leveled against it missed the point of the film to trash DiCaprio. It also died a quick, fast death. So, I take every chance I can to recommend it very highly. But, to get to how this relates to the _Titanic_ thread, it's also a much better movie if you want to watch a Cherub of Destiny in action. Gabriel Byrne's D'Artagnan fits the description perfectly. It even provides an explanation for why he sticks by Louis for so long. Louis and Philippe probably have the same Destiny/Fate, so it gets confusing. Besides, Byrne's performance is the triumph of a remarkable movie. There. Have I convinced anyone to rent it? J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 00:58:49 -0300 From: Felipe Pereira Subject: IN> City of Angels Problably you have talked about this subject, but I would like to know what kind of angel is in this movie?? Elohim?? I think so. thank you all for your attention. Felipe W. Pereira a.k.a. Azrael fwp@globalsite.com.br ICQ number: 2192991 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 00:46:05 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> City of Angels On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Felipe Pereira wrote: > Problably you have talked about this subject, but I would like to know what > kind of angel is in this movie?? > > Elohim?? > > I think so. I don't think so (IMHO). He seemed too emotionally involved for that. I was thinking that Seth would be (in In Nomine) a Mercurian of Destiny, or perhaps of Creation. On the other hand, he could easily have been a Grigori (along with the other angels). Even after the Choir was cast out they are still performing their function, watching the humans they love and guiding their souls along their first steps to Heaven. The weight of watching and not acting became too great for Seth, and he made the choice that only Grigori can make: he sacrificed some of his Forces (primarily Celestial, lowering his Perception to the point that he could dimly sense but not really see other Celestials) to become truly mortal. Richard "Mr. Uriel" Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page. The Gaming Ghetto, at In Nomine: The Last Days, at Walking the Planes, at - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 07:08:41 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Seeking information At 01:44 17/09/98 +0100, you wrote: > > > There are on earth, and always were, thirty-six righteous men whose mission >is to justify the world before God. They are the Lamed Wufniks. 'Lamed Vav' means 36 in Hebrew, allowing for my alternative transliteration :) ('Lamed Vavnik' is a yiddish phrase meaning 'one of the 36'). So yep, it's the name they give to the (mythical) 36 hidden saints. I can't remember much more about it than that, but it's a Hassidic tradition. jo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 05:01:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Eslin Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 JackFaust7@aol.com wrote: > ,.........What are or are there differeances in favorite foods for Demons and > Angels , i think Demons would like stuff thats bad for you,fast food, spicy > food ect but does any got any ideas thanks for the time ,............Jack Demons, or so it's claimed in the introductory story, are partial to pasta. Experimentation that I can think of offhand involves a good rationale for Malakim preferring their coffee black. Ofanim probably like coffee, period. I refuse to make any kind of joke about Lightning/Technology servitors and Jolt! Cola. :) And there's at least one Cherub out there with a Need for chocolate mousse cake... -- Eslin, late night and feeling silly // Chephirah - Cherub of Destiny ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:10:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Seeking information > > There are on earth, and always were, thirty-six righteous men whose mission > >is to justify the world before God. They are the Lamed Wufniks. > > 'Lamed Vav' means 36 in Hebrew, allowing for my alternative transliteration > :) ('Lamed Vavnik' is a yiddish phrase meaning 'one of the 36'). So yep, > it's the name they give to the (mythical) 36 hidden saints. I can't > remember much more about it than that, but it's a Hassidic tradition. Oh no! Not the mysterious number 36! 3+6=9, and we all know what connentations THAT number brings. The number of the Invisibles of the Rosecrucians is 36! It's a number that can be found everywhere, and now that I know, they're going to be After Me. :) And no, I'm not currently reading Umberto Eco. Really, I'm not. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:13:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods > Demons, or so it's claimed in the introductory story, are partial > to pasta. > > Experimentation that I can think of offhand involves a good > rationale for Malakim preferring their coffee black. Ofanim probably like > coffee, period. I refuse to make any kind of joke about > Lightning/Technology servitors and Jolt! Cola. :) > > And there's at least one Cherub out there with a Need for > chocolate mousse cake... And some Angels enjoy _making_ really good marinara sauce from scratch, but oh no, some cheeky demons have to go blow up hospitals and ruin dinner. :) - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 98 11:34 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods > And there's at least one Cherub out there with a Need for >chocolate mousse cake... I created one demon character for convention games with a Need/6 for sugar. (It's only worth 1 pt/level, of course. Or maybe it was 1/2pt....) Our game also includes the notion of "celestial chocolate", which is effectively a drug for angels -- it connects them much more strongly to the Symphony, and blurs the boundaries between individuals who are nearby. (It's very popular with Creationers....) Demons find the smell of it offensive, and it's close to being a poison for them. Humans can eat the stuff, but it's *severely* addictive for them, and the purer form (the white-chocolate version) may kill them, as it draws them unnaturally towards their pure soul state. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 11:49:28 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Perry Lloyd wrote: > Suppose a Malakite is Resonanting on a Balseraph of Kronos who happens > to have the Resonance of a Malakite? (Not that I happen to have one in > my group or anything. :) Well -- not very much, in canon. The Malakim will still pick up the honorable/dishonorable things the Bal has done, quality depending on the check digit, and on a 6 will know it's a Balseraph. The oaths that the Balseraph has will count as honor for the purposes of most honorable/dishonorable thing that the Bal has done by its own standards; e.g. if the Bal has an oath never to help a human towards what it guesses the human's destiny is (guesses -> Kronos dissonance wouldn't apply) and has done so recently, the Malakim resonance would pick it up as 'dishonorable by the being's own standards.' Out of canon, some games portray a Malakim's resonance as able to pick up a being's general code of honor: whether someone thinks lying is wrong, cowardice is wrong, etc. And if you play resonance that way, it will *certainly* pick up the Malakite-type oaths the Bal has sworn, even if it doesn't pick up the Kronos dissonance condition. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 18:03:14 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods At 11:34 17/09/98 EDT, you wrote: > >the purer form (the white-chocolate version) may kill them, White?? Heresy! Everyone knows that dark chocolate is the One True Way. Get that triad round there _now_ jo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:14:55 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) At 7:39 PM -0500 9/16/98, Perry Lloyd wrote: [...] >Suppose a Malakite is Resonanting on a Balseraph of Kronos who happens >to have the Resonance of a Malakite? (Not that I happen to have one in >my group or anything. :) That's sick... Hm. Okay, the Malakite will get that the person is *VERY HONORABLE* according to their own perceptions (unless the Balseraph has been racking up dissonance for violating his oaths). However, the *actions* considered honorable may give some hints that this honorable person is not *good*. And if they get a CD 6... Hm. Technically, they should be revealed as a Balseraph, but if you could think of something else more confusing and evil, that might be appropriate. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 98 11:44 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Re: angels and demons, killing. (LONG) >>The players should be warned by the GM out of character first, though, >>so they know they're asking for trouble if them continue whatever action >>they're doing. > >(Or, if you want to be in-character, the GM says, "You can feel the >tingling of impending dissonance, and know that what you are doing/not >doing is *wrong*...") But I should point out that that's a GM call, not canon. And if/when I do it as a GM, it's always predicated that the celestial in question should *know* it's wrong. E.g., a Destiny Servitor can't use it to test whether an action will push someone toward their Fate, unless they have a good idea that it would -- i.e., it can't be used to probe the Symphony for information. And if you do something bad, which isn't apparently bad when you do it, and *later* realize it was something *wrong*, then, WHAM!, dissonance.... You don't *always* get a warning, though you should know when you're operating on insufficient information and risking future "retroactive" dissonance. >>> Dominic's servitors gain dissonance for inflicting a punishment >>>greater than the crime, and on actual INNOCENTS, >any< punishment is >>>greater than the crime. >> >>Remember that an angel may not view death as a punishment, especially if >>it's quick, and the victim is likely to wind up in Heaven. Death is >>merely a transition that humans go through.... Sending humans to Hell >>is iffier -- though it could be argued that God puts souls where they >>deserve, so anybody who dies and goes to Hell *must* deserve that. >>Hence there's no real logical argument here against killing humans for >>Judgment Servitors. > >Actually, I could see it either way -- especially depending on the pain >of the killing. I mean, you're separating someone from their friends >and family... It's at best like locking someone in solitary confinement. >(If it's an evil human, that's different, yes.) > >Not to mention inflicting harm on innocent bystanders -- like those >who depended on the now-dead human. Even if there isn't dissonance >there, remember Dominique's weekly visit! If the angel is getting out >of hand with casual killings, Dominic will know the TRUTH... True, but I was merely pointing out that Dominic's lot *can* view it as semi-reasonable, and not automatically as "punishment". I think I'd have it vary with the Servitor in question. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 98 14:41 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods >>the purer form (the white-chocolate version) may kill them, > >White?? Heresy! Everyone knows that dark chocolate is the One True Way. Get >that triad round there _now_ So who are they going to interrogate in my campaign? God...? Besides, dark chocolate is *bitter* -- it must be closer to demonic.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:28:04 -0700 From: Gryph Clarke Subject: Re: IN> Angels' favorite foods I think a Triad would do no good...while Dominic has the capacity to understand (he's Dominique every so often, so he does understand the female side of the One True Way), I think it may be beyond him. However, if you sent in Novalis, Zadkiel and Blandine - three powerfully feminine forces - then you would be forced to see that truly, the Purest of Holy Substances is dark chocolate. Now, if you want sinful...look to the Celestial Oreo. Obviously a demonic creation. - - Gryph Seraph of Dispelling All the Myths that Pregnancy is a Wonderful Thing Walter Milliken wrote: > >>the purer form (the white-chocolate version) may kill them, > > > >White?? Heresy! Everyone knows that dark chocolate is the One True Way. Get > >that triad round there _now_ > > So who are they going to interrogate in my campaign? God...? > > Besides, dark chocolate is *bitter* -- it must be closer to demonic.... > > ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:47:56 EST From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) >From: Elizabeth Bartley >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Resonance Questions (help!) > >> Suppose a Malakite is Resonanting on a Balseraph of Kronos who happens >> to have the Resonance of a Malakite? (Not that I happen to have one in >> my group or anything. :) > >Well -- not very much, in canon. The Malakim will still pick up the >honorable/dishonorable things the Bal has done, quality depending on the >check digit, and on a 6 will know it's a Balseraph. > >The oaths that the Balseraph has will count as honor for the purposes of >most honorable/dishonorable thing that the Bal has done by its own >standards; e.g. if the Bal has an oath never to help a human towards what >it guesses the human's destiny is (guesses -> Kronos dissonance wouldn't >apply) and has done so recently, the Malakim resonance would pick it up as >'dishonorable by the being's own standards.' > >Out of canon, some games portray a Malakim's resonance as able to pick up >a being's general code of honor: whether someone thinks lying is wrong, >cowardice is wrong, etc. And if you play resonance that way, it will >*certainly* pick up the Malakite-type oaths the Bal has sworn, even if it >doesn't pick up the Kronos dissonance condition. > >Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com Cool, picking up on another Malakite's code of honor? That's neat. Hmmmm... Yeah, that might not be a bad idea. Cool. :) - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd (spook_number_six@hotmail.com) "Remember, false hope is still hope." -Dilbert ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #949 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.