From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Oct 27 23:27:09 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 XAA05395 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:27:09 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id XAA17850 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:24:29 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:24:29 -0500 Message-Id: <199910280424.XAA17850@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 #1380 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 27 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1380 In this digest: Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons Re: IN> Omniciense Re: IN> Omniciense Re: IN> Chain of Command Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons Re: IN> Critters of Myth IN> Messing with Fates Re: IN> Wadim (Re: AI in IN) Re: IN> Omniscience Re: IN> Omniscience IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> Critters of Myth Re: IN> AI in IN Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: IN> Omniciense Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: IN> Critters of Myth Re: IN> More on Mercs. Re: IN> Ethereals (was AI) Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: IN> Omniciense Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> Critters of Myth Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> AI in IN Re: IN> Messing with Fates Re: IN> Jordi and the Critters of Myth Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: IN> Jordi and the Critters of Myth(FLUFFY) Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) Re: IN> Wadim (Re: AI in IN) Re: IN> AI in IN Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> Jean and Progress IN> Aliens in IN Re: IN> Jean and Progress Re: IN> Jean and Progress ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:41:29 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons From: Azrael > > In reference to my earlier post on 2 minute eggs, I have written lists on many other things (includings "Things that Celestial Just Have To Take on a Trip to Earth", "Superiors Reactions to Two Minute Eggs" and "What the Various Superiors Think Koba;'s Big Joke Is"). Is anyone out there interested? I've enjoyed them, I just don't usually reply to lists is all. *g* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:56:17 +0100 (BST) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Omniciense On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Walter Milliken wrote: > If omniscience is defined as knowing the entire state of the universe > over its entire existance, then the answer to your question is that God > knows exactly what will happen -- it's all static. (Then you can ask the > usual question about where free will fits into this model....) Usual answer to the usual question is "Imagine it's the end of time. You look back on all the decisions you made - there were lots of possibilities and you picked one. Did you have free will? Yes you did. Well, God is outside time, He does not change, and He does not gather knowledge as the universe progresses through time. He knows how you have acted and how you will act, but similarly that does not remove your free will". Or words to that effect. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:56:17 +0100 (BST) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Omniciense On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Walter Milliken wrote: > If omniscience is defined as knowing the entire state of the universe > over its entire existance, then the answer to your question is that God > knows exactly what will happen -- it's all static. (Then you can ask the > usual question about where free will fits into this model....) Usual answer to the usual question is "Imagine it's the end of time. You look back on all the decisions you made - there were lots of possibilities and you picked one. Did you have free will? Yes you did. Well, God is outside time, He does not change, and He does not gather knowledge as the universe progresses through time. He knows how you have acted and how you will act, but similarly that does not remove your free will". Or words to that effect. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:50:03 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Chain of Command At 9:53 AM -0500 10/27/99, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Azrael wrote: > >> At which point does an angel of another choir outrank a seraph? >> And which Superiors Servitors outrank other Superiors Servitiors? >> i.e. Does a starting level 9 force Seraph of Sword outrank a 12 >> force Ofanite of Eli or Blandine? > >I think one of the things that makes Heavenly politics so ... >exciting in IN is the UNclear chain of command. Seraphim, my >impression is, have a sort of social superiority analogous to >a favored race or class in a human society, but no formal >chain-of-command superiority. Thus, "all things being equal," >other angels will tend to defer to a seraph, who will tend to >expect such deference. That's how I've always viewd it, certainly. Within a given Word's organization, you can make more sweeping statements. E.g.: Eli's Seraphim are more laid back, and expect less deference (or at least a different form of it), and his Servitors tend to apply this to all Seraphim unless they're remembering to be on their best behavior. On the other wing, Dominic's lot are fairly caste-oriented, and, barring Distinctions, a Seraph will out-rank a Cherub, who outranks Ofanim, who outrank Elohim, etc. (Of course, a higher-ranking Choir who over-rules the local expert in a situation and is _wrong_ will be smacked over the head with a clue-by-four or the Judgment equivalent.) Now, put the Seraph of Judgment in the same room as the Mercurian of Creation, and watch that Seraphic tooth-grinding as he gets a friendly slap on the back... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:37:18 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons In a message dated 10/27/99 4:14:08 AM Central Daylight Time, chiram@tpgi.com.au writes: << In reference to my earlier post on 2 minute eggs, I have written lists on many other things (includings "Things that Celestial Just Have To Take on a Trip to Earth", "Superiors Reactions to Two Minute Eggs" and "What the Various Superiors Think Koba;'s Big Joke Is"). Is anyone out there interested? Or are my writing too lame and uninspired? If you don't want me to post them, tell me, I don't want to waste Bandwidth/your time. >> I'm a little curious. If the others don't want to see feel free to send them privately. Reverend Brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:04:00 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Critters of Myth >>>So, as I say, where doth is say Jordi made the Earthly creatures of myth, _in print_?<<< Mmmm...it's been so long ago that I wrote that, I forgot that the final version was edited in a couple of places. That's one of them. In the original version that I wrote: And Uriel said, "They were not created by God when He made the world. They were created by thee, Jordi, for thou hast taken it upon thyself to bring forth new beasts which are harmful to Man, and thou hast forgotten that God gave Man dominion over the animals." - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:06:14 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Messing with Fates >>>But he can make it impossible to achieve your destiny. i.e. your destiny is to save ghana from nuclear war and he just waltzes in one day and blows up ghana then you are screwed in that sense.<<< It is possible to prevent someone from achieving their destiny, yes (although the GMG goes into more detail on fates and destinies, and recommends against defining fates and destinies that are one-time singularities in a person's lifetime). But you can't *force* someone into their fate. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:10:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Wade Trupke Subject: Re: IN> Wadim (Re: AI in IN) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 9:23 AM -0700 10/26/99, Wade Trupke wrote: > >>Lilith can create Lilim because she made a deal >>with Lucifer, who made her a Demon Princess. I >>think that qualifies her as a "special case". >> >>Wade (unless I can create 'Wadim'...) > >(Only if you can get Lucifer to make you into a >"Demon" Prince, and >survive Lilith getting annoyed because her >uniqueness is endangered. >(Since you'd be a really new Prince, and she's, >ah, experienced. (It >not being wise to make comments about a lady's >age.) And you wouldn't >have any Tethers and not many Servitors and >stuff.) And providing that >Lilith's genesis (created by God) wasn't the key >thing that allowed >Lucifer to do that in the first place.) Ah. Like I said, 'special case'. Just as well; I'd make a lousy DP, and Wadim would have some embarassingly goofy resonance. Wade (Lilith is properly referred to as 'ageless', I believe) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:11:21 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Omniscience >>>Of course, people have gone round and round on just this topic, in various forms, for centuries, going back at least to the theological speculations about God and Time by St. Augustine (d. 430).<<< And reconciling divine omniscience with free will is a real bitch. Try sorting out the Muslim viewpoint on that one.... - -David (who's just about finished up the extended writeup of Archangel Khalid) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:14:35 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Omniscience David Edelstein wrote: > And reconciling divine omniscience with free will is a real bitch. Try > sorting out the Muslim viewpoint on that one.... The answer Steve Jessop gave is the standard resolution in Christianity. When one is given. Then there's Calvinism. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:20:37 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Jean and Progress >>>If it's only human, the Squelch Team moves out and repairs any damage they caused...<<< This is something else I hope can be nipped before it becomes canon: the notion that Jean won't interfere with any advancement, no matter how destructive, if no diabolicals were directly involved. The reasoning is as faulty as that awful bit that got stuck into the Malakim section of the APG claiming they couldn't off Hitler because he was "honorable according to his own principles." Suppose some super-genius inventor had come up with hydrogen bombs back during the Crusades, or the Hundred Years War, etc., and Heaven was suddenly faced with the prospect of large sections of Europe or the Middle East becoming uninhabitable. Or suppose the Nazis had developed a genetic virus that only kills non-Aryans. Or suppose a madman in the modern world invented a bomb that will destroy the entire planet in an instant. Do you really think Jean would wash his hands and say "That's terrible, but it was a completely human development, so we can't interfere"? I don't think so. I think Jean would be quite willing to squelch even human-invented technologies that are just too destructive. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:30:29 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress At 3:20 PM -0500 10/27/99, David Edelstein wrote: > >>>If it's only human, the Squelch Team moves out and repairs >any damage they caused...<<< > > >This is something else I hope can be nipped before it becomes canon: the >notion that Jean won't interfere with any advancement, no matter how >destructive, if no diabolicals were directly involved. [...] > >I don't think so. I think Jean would be quite willing to squelch even >human-invented technologies that are just too destructive. I think the keys here are "Destiny" and "Fate," which is to say the same keys that are woven throughout Heaven and Hell's War. If a completely human technology would lead to the Fate of Humanity (or the destruction of it), then Jean would very likely take steps to combat it. I don't see him as a neutral. However, he *would* support totally human technologies that don't significantly track the fate/destiny meter, and I should think that he'd actively encourage technologies that move mankind towards their destiny. Not *reveal* divine technologies, of course, but.... Well, he'd hit a few hundred thousand trees with lightning until some near-ape got the idea to bang the rocks together. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:32:56 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Critters of Myth At 3:04 PM -0500 10/27/99, David Edelstein wrote: > >>>So, as I say, where doth is say Jordi made the Earthly creatures of >myth, _in print_?<<< > >Mmmm...it's been so long ago that I wrote that, I forgot that the final >version was edited in a couple of places. That's one of them. > >In the original version that I wrote: > >And Uriel said, "They were not created by God when He made the world. >They were created by thee, Jordi, for thou hast taken it upon thyself to >bring forth new beasts which are harmful to Man, and thou hast forgotten >that God gave Man dominion over the animals." Whoever is doing the expanded writeup of Jordi should clearly address this in some detail, whenever that writeup sees the light of day. We can establish Canon there, I should think. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:23:19 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> AI in IN From: ParadoxDruid > What is humanity (all by itself, so Jean couldn't do anything) created a > device that could alter human memories and beliefs by "typing into a > keyboard"... do humans all suddenly lose their souls? > > > Just wondering... i don't think you van change someone's destiny or fate by poking their brain (unless their fate was "to be poked in the brain", of course) liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:11:42 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) From: > > In a message dated 10/25/99 10:02:30 PM, esp.horsepie@btinternet.com writes: > > >maldom? que? > > He means BalDom (Balseraphic Dominic...), an old contraction for an even > older idea. > i understand, but i don't comprehend (a position i often find myself in) liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:08:34 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Omniciense From: Azrael > God is omnicient, correct? > God is ineffable, correct? > Thus does God know every single possibility or does he know exactly what will happen? > i'm sure there's a vignette at the beginning of one of the books where Yves is talking about the formation of the universe, and mentions that god has purposefully blinded himself to the future, so that humanity might have free will. i think i remember it, anyway. it may just be the product of my fevered imagination liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:17:08 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) From: Elizabeth McCoy > > Dominic was originally a Cherub. And then a Malakite. Or maybe > vice versa. (I've seen drafts which have both Choirs, and am not > quite sure which was which.) > > Since Balseraph Dominic is BalDom, Malakite Dominic is MalDom. > > (And then there are Balakim of Fate, but we won't talk about those...) > there are times when i am sure ignorance truly is bliss. i don't know what a balakim is, and i hope i never find out :) liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:35:44 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Critters of Myth From: Elizabeth McCoy > > "And Archangel Jordi said 'I do [speak against Uriel]," with a great > roar, for his voice was the voice of a thousand lions, and the scream > of a thousand eagles, and the hissing of a thousand serpents, and he > said, 'Thou hast slain the unicorn and the dragon and the gryphon, and > they were all creatures precious to me, and thou has slain them to the > last!' i saw this is meaning that jordi cared for the creatures of myth, not that he created them. i could well be wrong > "And Uriel said, 'Thou has forgotten that God gave Man dominion over the > animals, even the wisest of animals. He made the dragons, verily, they > and their ilk, and He made them mortal that they might die when their time > was over. They consorted with Evil and were slain to the last, and thou > shouldst rejoice in that cleaning.'" > and i saw this as saying that they were either ethereal or (possibly) corporeal liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:21:12 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> More on Mercs. From: Azrael > > Ahah, then this is where our ideas truly come into conflict, IMO punches are pulled to such an extent that they are not violent, just a bunch of arm waving. I would allow a Merc. to throw a punch that was pulled as much as I believe they pull them in Pro Wrestling. > > When you hit like they do in P.W. you do no harm, you just look like a git. > what it still comes down to in the end is that it would take (a) a dumb mercurian to ask for this role, and (b) an even dumber archangel to give it to him liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:18:16 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals (was AI) From: Azrael > I prefer to think of ethereals as Terry Pratchett in the Discworld series explains anthropomoprhic personifactions and gods, ideas, concepts and suchlike that already exist, but then belief shapes and strenghtens them into forms created by the belief. For example: Santa Claus, was originally the idea of "Christmas Spirit and Giving" however as people began to believe in him or it, he took on form. Beginning as say a Saint, then progressing through his different forms until Coca-Cola came up with his current appearence and belief for that form grew. > > Azrael > except of course that the IN santa is Mammon with a false beard on. and he would have got away with it if it wasn't for you meddling kids! liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:48:42 -0700 (PDT) From: David Barr Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress - --- David Edelstein wrote: > >>>If it's only human, the Squelch Team moves out and repairs > any damage they caused...<<< > I don't think so. I think Jean would be quite willing to squelch > even > human-invented technologies that are just too destructive. > > -David Okay, gotta respect that... But at the same time, isn't that kind of squelching counter to the Free will thing that is going on for the human part of the symphony? Or would this fall into the same realm as Liliths "freedom"? Sort of keeping the rate of progress at a reasonable level for everyone, so no individual human groupd gets too far ahead of any other human group...on the othe hand, how far does it go before that turns into a (benevolent) dictatorship? (Anyone want to write the Fall Of Jean series? (and what word would he get if he fell? if any?) I can see plot seeds here (which, IMHO, is the only litmus test on where to set cannon; does it generate more plot threads and seeds than it squelches?) One that leaps to mind, a semi-rogue angel of Eli (no one choir comes to mind off hand) running around telling secrets and inspiring ideas for Creating new stuff. And Jeans angels trying to keep the creations in check, and under control. A fight* between Lightning and Creation (in this context) would be...interesting. (would you beleive, Electric cream pies at 20 paces?) *I do not have my IN books with me right now, so I do now know off hand if the cannonical state of the relationship between the two. - -Daiv ===== reply to my home address -> daiv@cruzio.com my mother once said that boy is stranger than a three toed barking frog - -Daiv __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:04:24 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) At 9:11 PM +0100 10/27/99, Liam wrote: >From: > > > > > > In a message dated 10/25/99 10:02:30 PM, esp.horsepie@btinternet.com >writes: > > > > >maldom? que? > > > > He means BalDom (Balseraphic Dominic...), an old contraction for an even > > older idea. > > > >i understand, but i don't comprehend (a position i often find myself in) It's the idea that Dominic, who after all is hidden behind that cloak so that no one can see his Celestial form, *might* actually have Fallen and be a Balseraph instead of a Seraph. There's a long archive of some cool discussions on it at the In Nomine Collection. It can go into it better than I can. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:29:11 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Omniciense > From: Azrael > > i'm sure there's a vignette at the beginning of one of the books where Yves > is talking about the formation of the universe, and mentions that god has > purposefully blinded himself to the future, so that humanity might have free > will. i think i remember it, anyway. it may just be the product of my > fevered imagination It's the Angelic Player's Guide, IIRC. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:42:22 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress At 16:20 -0400 10/27/99, David Edelstein wrote: >Do you really think Jean would wash his hands and say "That's terrible, >but it was a completely human development, so we can't interfere"? There are limits. The effective destruction of something that is apparently supposed to be a major part of the Symphony (i.e., humankind) would be a case where the Symphony's overall interests trump his normal directives. But similar arguments can be made for many natural disasters -- apparently angels won't stop massive destruction, at least as long as it isn't *total* destruction. >I don't think so. I think Jean would be quite willing to squelch even >human-invented technologies that are just too destructive. I agree. The question is where the "too destructive" line is drawn. I would fully expect that Jean would, for example, stomp any project that was likely to make a good-sized black hole on the Earth's surface, or a few tons of antimatter.... The annihilation of humankind is obviously not in the interests of the Symphony (or God wouldn't have protected them from Jordi). So standard Elohite reaction would have to be opposition to such things, *regardless* of the Power's Word. But something that might kill off 10% of the human race...? Probably not. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:02:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Critters of Myth At 3:04 PM -0500 10/27/99, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>So, as I say, where doth is say Jordi made the Earthly creatures of >myth, _in print_?<<< > >Mmmm...it's been so long ago that I wrote that, I forgot that the final >version was edited in a couple of places. That's one of them. > >In the original version that I wrote: [...] Only quote the parts that made it into print. If it's not in print, there was probably a reason for it. (And that piece would have been edited by SJ himself, since I wasn't LE at that time. It was in the Interregnum.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:00:37 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress >From: Walter Milliken >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > >At 16:20 -0400 10/27/99, David Edelstein wrote: > >Do you really think Jean would wash his hands and say "That's terrible, > >but it was a completely human development, so we can't interfere"? > >There are limits. The effective destruction of something that is >apparently >supposed to be a major part of the Symphony (i.e., humankind) would >be a case where the Symphony's overall interests trump his normal >directives. > I envision Jean as having some kind of planned timeline for humanity and technology. If they are onto something which would wildly contradict that, then he is much more likely to act -- whatever the cause. He believes that he knows best. jo ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:42:16 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> AI in IN From: Elizabeth McCoy > > Humans evolved, in IN canon. (Of course, it's CDaU whether God _tweaked_ > that evolution, and certainly the Big Seven AAs will tell you (well, the > ones still around) that they made the Earth, so in that sense, humans > wouldn't have evolved without celestials. If you believe the celestials.) > i was getting more at the idea that humans were the product of god's grand design, that he planned them to evolve the way they did From: Walter Milliken > > There's a good question as to whether changing a few lines of code in > something as complex as an AI would change its "free will", any more > than randomly slicing a few bits of a human brain would. In both cases, > I suspect the outcome would most likely be to kill the entity in question, > rather than change it in any predictably-useful way. > good point > > Ah, I don't believe there's *anything* in IN canon that says this. As far > as I recall, the only humans directly created by God were those in the Eden > experiment. (And there were humans before that, who evolved.) Certainly > nothing I can remember says God gives a soul to each IN human, personally. > i didn't mean literally create, but that they presumably follow some kind of "grand plan" of god's > One could argue that God created humans indirectly (by setting the universe > in motion with a particular path in His omniscient mind) or directly > (since humans are part of the Symphony, and the Symphony *is* Him in IN > cosmology). But neither of those arguments says that *other* entities > with souls can't be created similarly. > (as i said before) i don't like the idea of god as the absentee landlord (to quote a dodgy movie) because divine intervention suggests he still pays attention to what's going on > > That's a perfectly valid value judgment, and probably consistent with most > Christian thinking (and likely many other religions). But as far as I > know, it's firmly in the CDaU realm in IN, as far as canon is concerned. > well, i guess that's what it comes down to in the end. when it comes to vagaries in the game, i'm inclined to lean towards christian thinking. not due to my own personal bias, but because i think it works better for a game largely based on christian mythology liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:33:04 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Messing with Fates From: David Edelstein > >>>Excuse me? Can't I quite thoroughly alter your fate by hiring, firing, killing, maiming, or otherwise disrupting your life?<<< > > No. You might influence the decisions I make that take me toward or away > from my fate, but you can't alter my fate. > that's kind of the way i saw it. destinies and fates are formed at birth (or before). people can (obviously) have an effect on which one you head towards, but they can't actually rewrite the things themselves. liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:41:28 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> Jordi and the Critters of Myth From: Prodigal > > > > Jordi's beasties wouldn't be true ethereals, however, if he did a > > little divine gengineering -- they'd be corporeal beings. Perhaps > > equivalent in moral standing to the Children of the Grigori and the > > Nephal(l)im... > > (Basically, celestials don't go around creating _ethereals_, though > > they might be able to make a corporeal creature that mimicked the > > appearance of an ethereal being's manifestation.) > > This would explain another part of why Jordi got so mad at Uriel- with all > the etherial beasties being hunted to extinction, A: He was losing the > templates for the creatures he was creating corporeal versions of, and B: A > lot of his corporeal creations were getting slaughtered in the crusade > against the Etherials. > > Destroying and invalidating the work of an Archangel is not the most > politically smart of all possible moves, after all. > > i've always assumed that archangels can't create anything except angels. they can create physocal objects like vessels, but these are soulless things that need a spirit to control them. the creatures of myth are obviously ethereal, or why would they be "of myth"? uriel wasn't hunting down and killing all creatures that looked funny, otherwise he's have wiped out the duckbilled platypus as well. the whole purity crusade was about ending the ethereal incursions into the corporeal realm. if uriel had attacked any creatures that were the creation of jordi, i'm sure jordi would have retaliated. he's not the most peacable of arachangels, after all liam ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 00:15:50 +0100 From: "Liam" Subject: Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) From: Whistling in the Dark > It's the idea that Dominic [...] *might* actually have > Fallen and be a Balseraph instead of a Seraph. it's an interesting idea, i guess, though i would have thought someone like yves would have noticed. and how would he get in and out of heaven? plus, would a DP be able to make angels? liam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:38:04 -0700 (PDT) From: David Barr Subject: Re: IN> Jordi and the Critters of Myth(FLUFFY) > uriel wasn't hunting down and killing all creatures that > looked > funny, otherwise he's have wiped out the duckbilled platypus as > well. > liam Actually, do we know f0or sure that Uriel didn't? it might explain why the platypus is only found in Australlia (where, by this logic, Uriel just never got a chance to go...) But thats silly. - -Daiv __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:42:28 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> (Nicole Fluff) At 12:15 AM +0100 10/28/99, Liam wrote: >From: Whistling in the Dark > > It's the idea that Dominic [...] *might* actually have > > Fallen and be a Balseraph instead of a Seraph. > >it's an interesting idea, i guess, though i would have thought someone like >yves would have noticed. Ahh.... but how do you know Yves hasn't? It's not the first time the Archangel of Destiny has kept something to himself that essentially everyone else in Heaven would be desperate to know.... > and how would he get in and out of heaven? plus, >would a DP be able to make angels? A Superior wouldn't necessarily ever have to send all his Forces out of Heaven in the first place, given that they can appear Corporeally and Celestially at the same time. And perhaps BalDom doesn't make Angels, he simply recruits Relievers. Judgement might notice such odd behavior, but who runs Judgement again....? - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 16:46:39 -0700 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> Wadim (Re: AI in IN) Wade Trupke wrote: > Just as well; I'd make a lousy DP, and Wadim > would have some embarassingly goofy resonance. > > Wade (Lilith is properly referred to as > 'ageless', I believe) Or, as a good number of angels might prefer: "That old, Satanic hag." - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:46:08 -0600 From: "ParadoxDruid" Subject: Re: IN> AI in IN >From: ParadoxDruid > > >> What is humanity (all by itself, so Jean couldn't do anything) created a >> device that could alter human memories and beliefs by "typing into a >> keyboard"... do humans all suddenly lose their souls? >> >> >> Just wondering... > >i don't think you van change someone's destiny or fate by poking their brain >(unless their fate was "to be poked in the brain", of course) > > > >liam > What I intended by this comment (a little cryptic in hindsight) was this: Someone (sorry, I forgot who) was arguing that an AI would be soulless because it could be altered.. I was trying to counter-- if (or when, with brainwashing, etc) we can alter a human mind, does that mean that it doesn't have a soul? (in IN, of course). I think that AI would "grow" celestial forces just like other life... which brings me to another question: Has anyone used aliens/other worlds in their campaigns? I'm thinking of introducing some, and any ideas would be beneficial... :-) Andrew J Bonham ParadoxPhilosopher@worldnet.att.net The Druid's Circle: http://home.att.net/~paradoxphilosopher/ "Imagination is more powerful than knowledge" -Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 16:41:02 -0700 From: Steel Angel Subject: Re: IN> Pop Culture Icons > From: Azrael > > > > In reference to my earlier post on 2 minute eggs, I have written lists on > many other things (includings "Things that Celestial Just Have To Take on a > Trip to Earth", "Superiors Reactions to Two Minute Eggs" and "What the > Various Superiors Think Koba;'s Big Joke Is"). Is anyone out there > interested? I'm sure no one'll mind some fluff postings. I'd like to see them. - - Abracax: Shedite of Riots ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 11:12:10 +0000 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress Beth wrote: > I've been squinting at you people and wondering why you pick the binary > "he does/doesn't investigate first." Surely there are ways to temporarily > slow down or squelch something while an investigation goes on, without > going to the extremes of "let it happen freely while we investigate" > and "kill/kidnap/discredit the inventor, investigate later." Ah, but it's so *nice* to have Jean think in Binary. Lightning is either *on* or *off*. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:23:34 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress At 18:00 -0400 10/27/99, Jo Hart wrote: \>I envision Jean as having some kind of planned timeline for humanity and >technology. If they are onto something which would wildly contradict that, >then he is much more likely to act -- whatever the cause. He believes that >he knows best. I agree with the last sentiment. But I also believe that the "action" you propose would start with investigation, and if no celestial contamination was involved, further action might be limited to semi-subtle discouragement. (Lab accidents, unrepeatable experiments, computer failures that trashed data, etc.) If the human researchers persisted, and there were no "clear and present danger" to humanity, or the Symphony at large, he might be inclined to let it ride. Yes, Jean tends to believe he knows best -- but I also see Elohim, more than most angels, having faith in God's plans, however bizarre they may seem (and the Eden experiment strikes me as pretty bizarre...). So if the Symphony seems to be insisting on going a certain direction (in the form of human efforts, despite some celestial discouragement), I don't see him opposing what would appear to be God's intent. Yes, Jean is hyper-intelligent -- but he also knows that he's not in God's league. Even Archangels have to take some things on faith sometimes, and he's smart enough to know that. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:35:39 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: IN> Aliens in IN At 19:46 -0400 10/27/99, ParadoxDruid wrote: >Has anyone used aliens/other worlds in their campaigns? I'm thinking of >introducing some, and any ideas would be beneficial... I haven't used it in my campaign, but I did do a plot seed for the L.Reliquarum that got cut. It involved a Renegade Balseraph of Dark Humor who claimed he came out of Limbo with an item (basically a *totally invulnerable* sphere of smoky glass-like stuff). According to him, an alien came to him in Limbo and gave him this artifact -- the B'lixteroth - -- telling him it was critically important to the War, and then vanishing again. Needless to say, this story simply doesn't make sense in canon -- you're always totally alone in Limbo, and you never take anything out of it. On the other hand, there's this *totally* inert, invulerable thing, which even Belial can't break. And it doesn't read as a celestial-made artifact, even though it can be taken to the celestial realm. It also does *absolutely* nothing. (Except annoy just about everyone, merely from existing.) So the alien theory does have some merit. The B'lixteroth got cut in final edit of LR -- it was decided that it was a little too far on the silly side for something in canon. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:37:01 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress At 7:12 -0400 10/28/99, Leath Sheales wrote: >Ah, but it's so *nice* to have Jean think in Binary. Lightning is >either *on* or *off*. Only to human perceptions.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:20:38 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Jean and Progress >From: Walter Milliken >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >I agree with the last sentiment. But I also believe that the "action" >you propose would start with investigation, and if no celestial >contamination >was involved, further action might be limited to semi-subtle >discouragement. >(Lab accidents, unrepeatable experiments, computer failures that trashed >data, etc.) If the human researchers persisted, and there were no "clear >and present danger" to humanity, or the Symphony at large, he might be >inclined to let it ride. So you reckon he'd instruct his servitors, "OK guys, make some subtle attempts to discourage this research and if that doesn't work, then give up." If there was no perceived danger to humanity, then why order the research discouraged in the first place? I could imagine quashing anything determined to be against Jean's own visions of what is good for humanity (whoever discovered it), I could imagine investigations into borderline cases and then quash the research if it is demonic, I could even imagine putting out an order to quash soem research and then countermanding them if new data is received which changes the base assumptions, but I can't imagine making half-hearted attempts to quash something. Either do, or do not do. >Yes, Jean tends to believe he knows best -- but I also see Elohim, more >than >most angels, having faith in God's plans, however bizarre they may seem >(and the Eden experiment strikes me as pretty bizarre...). We're not talking about a 'typical Elohite' though. I think it's a mistake to assume that just because Jean is the only major Elohite archangel, that he has to somehow represent a particular ideal of that choir. He's more interesting than that. And he doesn't have to be broken, mad or borderline dissonant. It's like... Vapula isn't the typical "God wishes me to punish the weak" type of Habbalite, either - or if he is, that is NOT mentioned in the main book, even slightly. So if the >Symphony seems to be insisting on going a certain direction (in the form >of human efforts, despite some celestial discouragement), I don't see >him opposing what would appear to be God's intent. If hyper-religious archangels like Dominic and Laurence still feel the need to fidget with humanity, I can't see a more pragmatic type deciding "No, Hands off!" I still don't know why you want Jean to be non-interventionist. That's just so not his style, as I read it. Micro-management and non-intervention don't work well together. > >Yes, Jean is hyper-intelligent -- but he also knows that he's not in >God's league. Even Archangels have to take some things on faith sometimes, >and he's smart enough to know that. > And he's also smart enough to know that if God gave him a job to do, and gifted him with intelligence greater than anything else in creation other than Vapula (but we don't mention that in polite company), God expects him to USE that intelligence to do that job to the best of his ability. Anything else is a dereliction of duty, and an shunning of responsibility. An angel who truly believed in the divine plan above everything would probably never do anything at all, because they would trust that God had allowed for everything in His plans, including demons. I could imagine Yves falling into this category, he has that kind of knowledge of the divine plan. But I don't see this here. jo ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1380 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.