From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Oct 20 14:46:34 1999 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 OAA01761 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:46:34 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id OAA19709 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:44:57 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:44:57 -0500 Message-Id: <199910201944.OAA19709@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 #1368 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 Wednesday, October 20 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1368 In this digest: Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> Another question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. Re: IN> A question. IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: A question. Re: IN> A question. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 23:58:11 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> A question. In a message dated 10/19/99 9:13:08 AM Central Daylight Time, pkitty@IntNet.net writes: << > btw, IIRC mercurians gain dissonance for resorting to violence with anything > (except demons, who deserve it). so do they get dissonance for punching > fellow angels, or losing their temper and kicking inanimate objects, or > being cruel to animals? >> Oo! Oo! I've got one! A Mercurian goes into his back yard with a shovel and digs a hole in the ground. In so doing, he destroys half an ant colony and cuts a worm in two, not to mention slicing apart the root systems of many blades of grass? Is this dissonant? Reverend Brian A. Rogers of the Church of Silly yet Profound Questions. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 00:05:19 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> A question. In a message dated 10/19/99 12:02:35 PM Central Daylight Time, emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: << Check the errata. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata >> Okay! Question answered! I was always under the impression that Mercurians could not be violent against anyone but demons. Personally speaking, I'd still smack the Merc with dissonance if he bitch-slapped an angel. Rev. Brian A. Rogers of the Church of Wrong Impressions ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 22:25:06 -0700 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> A question. Walter Milliken wrote: > At 23:31 -0400 10/18/99, paranial@creighton.edu wrote: > >A Mercurian is Driving on a winter when hits an ice slick spinns out of > >control and hits, child. Does he get dissonance? > > I would think so. "Not my fault" isn't a valid defense against dissonance > (Cherubim run into that a lot). Of course, it isn't violence, per se, > but it is harm to a human that he might have avoided. (Driving too fast > for the conditions, should have gotten an Ofanite to drive, etc.) If > he didn't get dissonant, he ought to at least be *really* unhappy. That makes no sense. 'Might have avoided' by that definition might then lead a Mercurian to never leave Heaven -ever- because he -might- hurt someone. That 'get an Ofanite to drive' thing is kinda silly, too, because then should no angel -eer- drive if it's not an Ofanite? As written, it comes down to intent, plain and simple. Accidents happen, and I'm sure a Mercurian -would- feel really bad? Corp Song of Healing is probably -very- popular among Mercurians. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 22:31:47 -0700 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> A question. Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 10:31 PM -0500 10/18/99, paranial@creighton.edu wrote: > >A Mercurian is Driving on a winter when hits an ice slick spinns out of > >control and hits, child. Does he get dissonance? > > I'd give it to him, yup. (I'd give it to him if he spun out of control > and hit the Hellsworn jogger he was tailing, too.) He was driving the car. > He'd get dissonance if he was cleaning his gun and it went off to hit > his mortal servant, too. There's a direct chain -- Mercurian at wheel of > car, car hits human. So any and all accidents cause Dissonance? I'm sure any Kobalite out there can make any Mercurian he wants to, Fall pretty much at will if that's the case. Cut brake lines, hide switches connected to nasty devices where a Mercurian is sure to sit on it, drop an ice pick in the path of his car on a snowy day. If there's no intent, how does that work? If you want to follow the chain, a -lot- of actions will end up harming someone. For every Demon you kill, you might be destroying dozens of human jobs and forcing families out on the streets. Let's change the example: Mercurian kills Balseraph's Vessel. Balseraph had set up a company that employed about a dozen humans in legal work, say...they were delivery folks. They were all illegal aliens. He dies, business goes belly up, employees lose jobs, some are deported to a country where they starve, are forced into prostitution, etc. Some stay, with no jobs, they get evicted, end up on the streets. Does the Mercurian get Dissonance? It seems the same to me. 'Mercurian killed your boss, you suffer.' And before I get this response: change the boss to an evil human who dies by accident due to the Mercurian's plots or because the Merc found him out and he ditches the whole enterprise and skips town. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 02:17:45 PDT From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Another question. >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the >head? > >Ben First off, YOU FREAK! Second, No, because, as Yoda once said: "Always in motion is the future." - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com "The future isn't what is used to be, Mr. Angel" - Louis Cyphre Angel Heart ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:14:22 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> A question. > > > > -- An Ofanite is driving recklessly, as usual. Suddenly he hits an > > unexpected patch of ice. Pow, and now the Ofie is pinned in the wreckage, > > unable to move 'til a cop with the Jaws of Life shows up. Dissonance? > > (I'd say no). > > > > Ofanites don't get disonance if they can't move; they get disonance if they > don't try to move. > > (ah the rush of Nitpicking Essence) > > Trent Ofanite of Doubt > i think that was his point wasn't it? he was pointing out that just as an ofanite gets dissonance for not trying to move (rather than not being able to move) a mercurian should get dissonance for acting violently (rather than accidently causing violence) liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:20:00 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> A question. From: > > Okay! Question answered! I was always under the impression that Mercurians > could not be violent against anyone but demons. Personally speaking, I'd > still smack the Merc with dissonance if he bitch-slapped an angel. > that's the asuumption i was going along, having cunningly not checked the errata. but yeah, i'd be tempted to give mercurians dissonance for acting violent with angels. maybe just a "twinge" or two. liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:27:13 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Another question. > if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully > intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said > head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? > well, at the time he was telling the turth, sort of. i think it's the seraph's intent that's the important thing. still, you might want to suggest to the player that he make less statements about the future, something a seraph couldn't be sure of and might feel uncomfortalbe talking about. "i intend to shave your head" is better than "i will shave your head" liam (who, disturbingly, had his head shaved last weekend) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:24:18 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Another question. > >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully > >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said > >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the > >head? > > > >Ben > > First off, YOU FREAK! Second, No, because, as Yoda once said: > > "Always in motion is the future." > or as Yodiel (angel of wisdom) once said: "Always in constant bloody irritating motion is the Ofanite" liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:31:29 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> A question. From: Steel Angel > So any and all accidents cause Dissonance? I'm sure any Kobalite out there > can make any Mercurian he wants to, Fall pretty much at will if that's the > case. Cut brake lines, hide switches connected to nasty devices where a > Mercurian is sure to sit on it, drop an ice pick in the path of his car on a > snowy day. If there's no intent, how does that work? If you want to follow the > chain, a -lot- of actions will end up harming someone. For every Demon you > kill, you might be destroying dozens of human jobs and forcing families out on > the streets. yeah, that was kind of my point. like i said before, i vaguely remember a discussion about this on the list ages ago (when i was lurking with a different email address) where someone pointed out that a strong demon could pick up an unconscious mercurian and start hitting humans with them. if you follow the "not my fault isn't a valid defence" argument, then that mercurian would be racking up dissonance. which to me seems fairly ludicrous. liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 21:32:07 +1000 From: bichwa@telstra.easymail.com.au Subject: Re: IN> Another question >>if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >>intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >>head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? > >Well, no. The conditions have changed. That which is true before >skippy came in and blew the true thing up doesn't mean he wasn't >speaking the truth to begin with. If on the other hand he said it with full knowledge of what was going to happen, I'd let him have the consequences. Unless the calabim used some kind of edged weapon or lawnmower perhaps (and yes, I have seen it happen) and teh seraph had said that this was going to be a really close shave... The instant a seraph starts twisting the truth (including lying by omission) for no good reason, I'd hit him with dissonance. But then I always found Seraphs annoying smug and superlicious, so I might be a bit predjudiced. Maybe. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:55:06 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> Another question. no. their dissonance condition is for knowingly telling a lie, not for making a promise that cannot be kept, or unknowingly speaking a falsehood. - - Dennis H, Groome V "Amo Nympham" ICQ: 11430261 "I think I woke up screaming 'cause I had a dream that you still loved me" -Stabbing Westward, "ACF" - -----Original Message----- From: Ben Aldred To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 10:13 PM Subject: IN> Another question. >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? > >Ben > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 09:36:08 CDT From: "Wade Hursman" Subject: Re: IN> Another question. >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the >head? Um, no? Seraphim can't lie....or rather, they can, it just hurts. No, they wouldn't. IMO this scenario won't cause dissonance to the seraph. He/She didn't follow through with the intention because the object is now gone. On the other hand, if the was a human that was destroyed by the Calabite, I'd give the Seraph problems if he/she didn't try to save the poor person from the Calabite. Wade Habbalite of Tecnology, Demon of Telemarketers ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:46:20 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 1:25 -0400 10/21/99, Steel Angel wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: > >> At 23:31 -0400 10/18/99, paranial@creighton.edu wrote: >> >A Mercurian is Driving on a winter when hits an ice slick spinns out of >> >control and hits, child. Does he get dissonance? >> >> I would think so. "Not my fault" isn't a valid defense against dissonance >> (Cherubim run into that a lot). Of course, it isn't violence, per se, >> but it is harm to a human that he might have avoided. (Driving too fast >> for the conditions, should have gotten an Ofanite to drive, etc.) If >> he didn't get dissonant, he ought to at least be *really* unhappy. > > That makes no sense. 'Might have avoided' by that definition might then >lead a Mercurian to never leave Heaven -ever- because he -might- hurt someone. It's a matter of details that weren't in the original problem... if the Mercurian knew about winter driving conditions, and knew that there were likely to be icy spots on the roads, then I'd still claim this was an act of stupidity on the Mercurian's part, not a random act of God for which he had no responsibility. I suppose I tend toward the view that most accidents are stupidity, not faultless; it's just that it's hard to avoid being stupid some of the time. Unfortunately, angels are held to rather high standards -- much higher than humans -- so disclaiming responsibility for their stupidity isn't a Good Thing for them. Or so I interpret dissonance for angels. *Demons* of course, are perfectly free to reject responsibility for their actions. (And often do.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:15:19 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 1:31 -0400 10/21/99, Steel Angel wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> At 10:31 PM -0500 10/18/99, paranial@creighton.edu wrote: >> >A Mercurian is Driving on a winter when hits an ice slick spinns out of >> >control and hits, child. Does he get dissonance? >> >> I'd give it to him, yup. (I'd give it to him if he spun out of control >> and hit the Hellsworn jogger he was tailing, too.) He was driving the car. >> He'd get dissonance if he was cleaning his gun and it went off to hit >> his mortal servant, too. There's a direct chain -- Mercurian at wheel of >> car, car hits human. > > So any and all accidents cause Dissonance? No. But any the Mercurian was directly responsible for might. If he was careless, he's responsible, even if he didn't intend the result. > I'm sure any Kobalite out there >can make any Mercurian he wants to, Fall pretty much at will if that's the >case. Cut brake lines, hide switches connected to nasty devices where a >Mercurian is sure to sit on it, drop an ice pick in the path of his car on a >snowy day. If there's no intent, how does that work? Ah, but in those examples, there's also no carelessness, unless he notices the puddle of brake fluid/funny lump in the cushion/ice pick in the road *and ignores it*. The question in my mind is, "Could the Mercurian reasonably have expected the consequences of his action?" In the winter ice slick case, the answer is most probably yes -- it's winter, there's been a storm, it's not unreasonable to expect icy spots on the road => he should have been more careful in driving than to lose control. The gun case is similar -- he's messing with a gun, there's another person in the room, he shouldn't be pointing a gun at someone he doesn't intend to shoot. The Kobalite examples are different -- unless the Mercurian has reason to suspect his car might be sabotaged, or that a place he's sitting might be booby-trapped, he's not being careless (lack of paranoia is not *usually* carelessness). On the other hand, if he knows he's being stalked by a Kobalite, then he *should* be taking precautions. Obviously, there's a grey area in there somewhere, but as a GM, I see routine carelessness as on the darker side of that line. > Let's change the example: Mercurian kills Balseraph's Vessel. Balseraph >had set up a company that employed about a dozen humans in legal work, >say...they were delivery folks. They were all illegal aliens. He dies, >business goes belly up, employees lose jobs, some are deported to a country >where they starve, are forced into prostitution, etc. Some stay, with no jobs, >they get evicted, end up on the streets. Does the Mercurian get Dissonance? No. At least not for killing the Bal -- he did nothing directly to the other people; the damage was related to the Bal's Role. On the other hand, if he knew about the employees, and did nothing to help them, I'd be tempted to give him dissonance for *not caring* -- a decidedly non-angelic attitude, especially for a Mercurian. And if he killed the Bal *with the intent* of displacing those people, I'd probably whack him with a *lot* of dissonance. Yes, intent *does* matter, but it's not the only criterion I use. Careless disregard for others is another one. And some angels, particularly Cherubim, can simply get stuck with no way out -- a Cherub may have two of his charges in trouble at once, and simply *can't* deal with both threats simultaneously. He *still* gets dissonant, even though he didn't intend to let any harm come to either of them. The Symphony is not always fair. > change the boss to an evil human who dies by accident due >to the Mercurian's plots or because the Merc found him out and he ditches the >whole enterprise and skips town. In the former case, depending on the circumstances of the death, I *might* give the Mercurian dissonance simply for the boss -- it would depend a lot on how much of the death was *directly* related to the Mercurian's actions. If the human had a car accident while heading for the airport to skip town, no. If he committed suicide because the Mercurian was constantly hounding him, maybe. If he fell off a building ledge while fleeing from the angel in a chase, almost certainly. I think my main litmus test for things like this is whether the consequence was the result of the Mercurian's exercise of his free will, or whether it was a result of someone else's. If the choice that led to the damage was due to *his* choice, he should get dissonance. If someone else's choice was a more proximate cause, then no, he's off the hook. This explains the Kobalite cases above, too, I think -- in those, it's the choices of the Kobalite that are controlling the situation, not the Mercurian's. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:10:11 -0500 From: Kris Overstreet Subject: Re: IN> Another question. At 10:13 PM 10/19/99 -0400, you wrote: >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? > *sigh* No, because at the time the Seraph made the statement the statement was true. A Seraph only takes dissonance when lying -intentionally.- Redneck Kris Overstreet, too many websites.... http://www.detnet.com/redneck/ - Personal homepage http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/ - Business webpage http://www.antarctic-press.com/ - Someone else's page ... not enough time ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:27:13 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> A question. Ya know, this discussion of Mercs inspired me to go back and look at the books. The Merc dissonance is for violence. Not harming humans... violence. IMO this takes the Merc in the car accident off the hook; nobody would call being involved in an accident an act of violence. So, what about non-violent harming of humans? Dissonant? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:46:44 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Another question. At 22:13 -0400 10/19/99, Ben Aldred wrote: >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? Generally, I'd say no. However, I also rule that Seraphim are supposed to be careful of the truth, in my game. If one constantly makes statements that are opinion or conditional on future events, without qualifying them as such, then they're getting too careless with the truth, in my opinion, and they may get dissonance as a sort of slow decline, rather than as a single point event. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:47:58 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 23:58 -0400 10/19/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: > Oo! Oo! I've got one! A Mercurian goes into his back yard with a shovel and >digs a hole in the ground. In so doing, he destroys half an ant colony and >cuts a worm in two, not to mention slicing apart the root systems of many >blades of grass? Is this dissonant? For a servitor of Animals, probably. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:51:14 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 6:31 -0400 10/20/99, Liam wrote: >yeah, that was kind of my point. like i said before, i vaguely remember a >discussion about this on the list ages ago (when i was lurking with a >different email address) where someone pointed out that a strong demon could >pick up an unconscious mercurian and start hitting humans with them. if you >follow the "not my fault isn't a valid defence" argument, then that >mercurian would be racking up dissonance. which to me seems fairly >ludicrous. Right. But that's a different case -- the Mercurian can make no choices while unconscious. As I interpret it, dissonance is always a result of making the wrong choices, ones that are against one's own nature. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:58:24 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Another question At 7:32 -0400 10/20/99, bichwa@telstra.easymail.com.au wrote: >The instant a seraph starts twisting the truth (including lying by omission) for no good reason, I'd hit him with dissonance. But then I always found Seraphs annoying smug and superlicious, so I might be a bit predjudiced. Maybe. I believe canon allows Seraphim to lie by omission. They're probably not very comfortable with it, but it's OK. Otherwise, they're lying by omission every time they say "I am called George." Also, Seraphim of Wind can use Fast-Talk, which can only really be done by telling truths in such a way as to omit some of those bothersome little details.... (OK, they can also tell the truth in a manner such that the hearer will interpret it differently; I'd say that was also lying by omission, since the Seraph is deliberately not clarifying.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:01:21 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 8:11 PM -0400 10/19/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >>From: Elizabeth McCoy >> >>> >>> If he cut someone off in traffic during a high-speed chase, and there >>> were a pile-up behind him (the person he cut off jams on her brakes, and >>> then gets rear-ended), then that's iffier. I'd probably not give him >>> dissonance -- but he shouldn't be blase' about it. >>> >> >>but surely in a situation like that the angel would be far more to blame for >>any damage to people. he knows that if he goes hareing around in traffic >>there's a good chance someone might crash. whereas if i understood the >>previous example it was saying the incident was purely accidental. > >Yeah, I agree. Not a good example, Elizabeth. Actually, it's a perfect example. He's not to blame for _human_ reactions. Just as if he tells a Malakite, "This Hellsworn is not being reasonable. Your turn," he's not dissonant. It is when he is directly the cause of the violence. (His fist, a human face. His baseball bat, a human body. His car which he is nominally in control of (i.e., conscious and able to get to the wheel), and a human. >-- An Ofanite is driving recklessly, as usual. Suddenly he hits an >unexpected patch of ice. Pow, and now the Ofie is pinned in the wreckage, >unable to move 'til a cop with the Jaws of Life shows up. Dissonance? >(I'd say no). Potential dissonance -- if he _has_ to Do Something, and doesn't go celestial to get out. If he doesn't have a Pressing Reason to move, he can fidget. >-- A Mal of Eli has sworn to harm no human work of art. He's driving >across Daley Plaza in Chicago, hits a patch of ice, and crashes into the >Picasso sculpture. Dissonance? (I'd say no). I'd say yes. Dissonance isn't a punishment from outside, it's from within. His own _nature_ would insist on punishing him with dissonance, for it _has_ been harmed. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:04:50 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Another question. At 10:13 PM -0400 10/19/99, Ben Aldred wrote: >if a seraph were to say to someone I am going to shave your head, fully >intending to do it. Then suddenly a calabite rushes in and destroys said >head does the seraph take dissonance because they cannot now shave the head? No. The Seraph stated truth as much as he could in the human tongue. In celestial, the statement would be "Barring circumstances which make it impossible or not worth my while, I am going to shave your head." This is why many Seraphim new to Earth are pedantic, and will _add_ such qualifiers to their statements. (Even ones who are more accustomed to understanding that 99.9999% of their listeners will understand such qualifiers even when unspoken -- will sometimes say something, realize it's unclear, and instantly correct themselves so that their true meaning is conveyed. They then often mutter about how human languages are _so_ imprecise.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:09:28 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 12:05 AM -0400 10/20/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 10/19/99 12:02:35 PM Central Daylight Time, >emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: > ><< Check the errata. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata >> > >Okay! Question answered! I was always under the impression that Mercurians >could not be violent against anyone but demons. Personally speaking, I'd >still smack the Merc with dissonance if he bitch-slapped an angel. Hey, if he did that, the Dominicans land on him like a ton of bricks as soon as they find out. (And any angel who _got_ slapped around by a Mercurian, unless he was an Outcast angel, is gonna run and tell Judgment way-fast, I'd figure.) Who needs dissonance, when some Judge stares down at the Mercurian, and intones, "You are yielding to violent urges, Intercessionist, in inappropriate ways. There are no mitigating circumstances. You are hereby sentenced to the highest level of the Merciful Discord. Your Archangel will be notified that he must carry out this sentence. You will be escorted to his presence by these Warders. Judgment is pronounced." - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:16:50 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 10:31 PM -0700 10/20/99, Steel Angel wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> At 10:31 PM -0500 10/18/99, paranial@creighton.edu wrote: >> >A Mercurian is Driving on a winter when hits an ice slick spinns out of >> >control and hits, child. Does he get dissonance? >> >> I'd give it to him, yup. (I'd give it to him if he spun out of control >> and hit the Hellsworn jogger he was tailing, too.) He was driving the car. >> He'd get dissonance if he was cleaning his gun and it went off to hit >> his mortal servant, too. There's a direct chain -- Mercurian at wheel of >> car, car hits human. > > So any and all accidents cause Dissonance? I'm sure any Kobalite out there >can make any Mercurian he wants to, Fall pretty much at will if that's the >case. Not any and all, but any which the Mercurian could have theoretically prevented and _directly_ caused. His foot on the gas. His hand on the wheel. And if he gets 3 notes of dissonance, he converts it to Discord, and never comes near to Falling. He also should report all these accidents he's been having to his Superior -- he could use some backup from sabotage. (Remember the dissonance rules. Get 1 note, roll 0 or above to avoid being Outcast. Get 2 notes, roll 1 or above to avoid being Outcast. Get 3 notes, roll 2 or above -- but if you roll a 111, that's a Divine Intervention! Convert to Discord. Start over.) > Let's change the example: Mercurian kills Balseraph's Vessel. Balseraph >had set up a company that employed about a dozen humans in legal work, >say...they were delivery folks. They were all illegal aliens. He dies, >business goes belly up, employees lose jobs, some are deported to a country >where they starve, are forced into prostitution, etc. Some stay, with no jobs, >they get evicted, end up on the streets. Does the Mercurian get Dissonance? Nope. He didn't _cause_ that directly, his own hand on the button. Now, an _Impudite_ might get dissonance for it! They're not allowed to _let_ humans die if they can help it! Basically, Mercurians can't be responsible for harm that comes to humans because of their _indirect_ actions, or they could never step aside for the Malakim to take over. Their direct actions, though, where they have actual, physical contact with the instrument that harms a human -- that's where you nail them. (If a Mercurian is unconscious, I'd be a lot more lenient -- the demon who puts a sleepy-bomb in his car, causing it to go out of control while he's asleep at the wheel, will make the Mercurian feel _bad_ when he wakes up, but probably not dissonant. The Mercurian who drives drunk (if celestials get drunk), however, is a walking dissonance-bomb.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:23:52 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 12:27 PM -0400 10/20/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >Ya know, this discussion of Mercs inspired me to go back and look at the books. READ THE ERRATA. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata/ The books were unclear, and are errata'ed. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:43:21 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> A question. In a message dated 10/20/99 11:32:31 AM Central Daylight Time, douglas.muir@yale.edu writes: << The Merc dissonance is for violence. Not harming humans... violence. >> Again... check out www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata Rev. B. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:44:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Gant Subject: Re: IN> A question. On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Actually, it's a perfect example. He's not to blame for _human_ > reactions. Just as if he tells a Malakite, "This Hellsworn is > not being reasonable. Your turn," he's not dissonant. It is when > he is directly the cause of the violence. (His fist, a human face. > His baseball bat, a human body. His car which he is nominally in > control of (i.e., conscious and able to get to the wheel), and a > human. But the "Malakite example" can easily be construed the same way: His baseball bat, a human body. His request to a Malakite, and a Hellsworn Soldier. He is directly responsible for the damage inflicted. In the first case, because he struck the human himself. In the second, because he fed the Hellsworn to the Malakite. He's actually *much* more responsible for the Malakite than the car. Accidents can happen to anyone, no matter how careful they are (I generally agree with Walter that accidents are caused by stupidity, but sometimes they are *accidents*). Asking the Malakite to "chat" with the unreasonable Hellsworn Soldier is no accident. The Mercurian had full control of the situation, and injured him just as much as if he'd held the rubber hose himself. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:40:33 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 1:09 PM -0400 10/20/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 12:05 AM -0400 10/20/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: > >In a message dated 10/19/99 12:02:35 PM Central Daylight Time, > >emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: > > > ><< Check the errata. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata >> > > > >Okay! Question answered! I was always under the impression that Mercurians > >could not be violent against anyone but demons. Personally speaking, I'd > >still smack the Merc with dissonance if he bitch-slapped an angel. > >Hey, if he did that, the Dominicans land on him like a ton of bricks >as soon as they find out. (And any angel who _got_ slapped around by >a Mercurian, unless he was an Outcast angel, is gonna run and tell >Judgment way-fast, I'd figure.) So... the angels around Nicole from "Bright Dream" have their local Judgement tether on speed dial? - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:04:42 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 2:44 PM -0400 10/20/99, Richard Gant wrote: >On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> Actually, it's a perfect example. He's not to blame for _human_ >> reactions. Just as if he tells a Malakite, "This Hellsworn is >> not being reasonable. Your turn," he's not dissonant. It is when >> he is directly the cause of the violence. (His fist, a human face. >> His baseball bat, a human body. His car which he is nominally in >> control of (i.e., conscious and able to get to the wheel), and a >> human. > >But the "Malakite example" can easily be construed the same way: His >baseball bat, a human body. His request to a Malakite, and a Hellsworn >Soldier. He is directly responsible for the damage inflicted. In the >first case, because he struck the human himself. In the second, because >he fed the Hellsworn to the Malakite. Right. But look at the text on p. 104 that _wasn't_ errata'ed. "When negotiations break down, a Mercurian has to know when to step aside and wave in the sharp knives of the Malakim." The causal link must be physical and direct. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:07:22 -0600 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> A question. > READ THE ERRATA. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata/ > The books were unclear, and are errata'ed. Change the first two sentences under Dissonance to: "Mercurians cannot be violent toward humans. Violence is the antethesis of politics, the dampener of reason." You can hurt someone without being violent. Violence requires either an emotional commitment (I'm steaming mad! Argh! Thwap! *bong*) or intellectual commitment (I'm sorry, I can't let you do that. No. Stop. Thwap! *bong*). If a Mercurien is playing baseball, and the ball beans a human and kills him, he's cool. Pissed, dumb, but cool, and certainly not dissonant. After all, he wasn't being violent, it was just an accident, right? One could extrapolate from this that a Mercurien who is driving and runs some schlub over was not being violent. He must take a violent action against a human to be dissonant. This means he, himself, launching an attack against a human. Unless I've horribly misread the errata, which is entirely possible. I've always been given to understand that angels become dissonant due to their choices, not due to their bad luck or incompetence (as demons do.) Ben ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:29:25 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: A question. At 2:40 PM -0400 10/20/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >At 1:09 PM -0400 10/20/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>At 12:05 AM -0400 10/20/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: >>> I'd still smack the Merc with dissonance if he bitch-slapped an angel. >> >>Hey, if he did that, the Dominicans land on him like a ton of bricks >>as soon as they find out. (And any angel who _got_ slapped around by >>a Mercurian, unless he was an Outcast angel, is gonna run and tell >>Judgment way-fast, I'd figure.) > >So... the angels around Nicole from "Bright Dream" have their local >Judgement tether on speed dial? So _this_ is why I got the impression she doesn't really stay _that_ long in one town? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:40:59 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A question. At 15:04 -0400 10/20/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 2:44 PM -0400 10/20/99, Richard Gant wrote: >>On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >>> Actually, it's a perfect example. He's not to blame for _human_ >>> reactions. Just as if he tells a Malakite, "This Hellsworn is >>> not being reasonable. Your turn," he's not dissonant. It is when >>> he is directly the cause of the violence. (His fist, a human face. >>> His baseball bat, a human body. His car which he is nominally in >>> control of (i.e., conscious and able to get to the wheel), and a >>> human. >> >>But the "Malakite example" can easily be construed the same way: His >>baseball bat, a human body. His request to a Malakite, and a Hellsworn >>Soldier. He is directly responsible for the damage inflicted. In the >>first case, because he struck the human himself. In the second, because >>he fed the Hellsworn to the Malakite. > >Right. But look at the text on p. 104 that _wasn't_ errata'ed. >"When negotiations break down, a Mercurian has to know when to step >aside and wave in the sharp knives of the Malakim." > >The causal link must be physical and direct. The other thing to note here is that there's an implication that the Mercurian must have tried non-violent means *first*, before passing the demon to the blackwing. If he didn't, I'd think real hard about giving him some dissonance. So my interpretation of the dissonance condition would read something like: 1) A Mercurian cannot directly do physical harm to a human. 2) He also cannot *condone* such harm unless he's tried non-violent means to resolve the problem. You could also change 1) to read "do violence to a human", which is a more literal interpretation of canon than I'd use. I admit I'm somewhat influenced by the Impudite dissonance, and also the alternate title for the Choir -- "the Friends of Man". It's also a better rein on munchkinoid players; it's sometimes hard to judge a *player*'s intent. I also don't like the notion of Mercurians being able to use non-violent ways of damaging humans. (I.e., a drug injection that kills a human in his sleep. Or paralyzes him. It's not really *violent*....) - ---Walter ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1368 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.