From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Feb 23 17:34:19 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 RAA15400 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:34:19 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id RAA13994 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:33:25 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:33:25 -0600 Message-Id: <199902232333.RAA13994@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 #1125 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Tuesday, February 23 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1125 In this digest: IN> Andre's new movie Re: IN> Andre's new movie Re: IN> Falling into The Wrong Hands (tm) IN> Character Programs? IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> Character Programs? Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> words IN> Character Sheets. . . Re: IN> words IN> The Balseraph perspective Re: IN> words IN> Seraphs and Truth Re: IN> Seraphs and Truth Re: IN> words Re: IN> words Re: IN> Andre's new movie IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1124 Re: IN> Character Sheets. . . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 15:08:47 -0800 (PST) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: IN> Andre's new movie anyone seen the adverts for "Cruel Intentions"? the tag lines are (apologies, i'm going to use their own grammar): "In the game of love there is only one rule, never fall in love," and "What you can't have, you can't resist." sounds like something's coming down the pipe soon, though by the look of the posters, it's completely mundane. still, might be useful for a game centering on Lust. -=|horsefly|=- "Back off, preacher, I don't care if it's Sunday. I ain't no angel, but I never felt better!" --FREEDOM, Alice Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:03:07 +0900 From: Dave Conrad Subject: Re: IN> Andre's new movie - -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > anyone seen the adverts for "Cruel Intentions"? the tag lines are > (apologies, i'm going to use their own grammar): "In the game of love > there is only one rule, never fall in love," and "What you can't have, you > can't resist." sounds like something's coming down the pipe soon, though > by the look of the posters, it's completely mundane. still, might be > useful for a game centering on Lust. > -=|horsefly|=- From what I've heard, its a remake/retelling of Dangerous Liaisons, so hopefully, it will be pretty interesting. All the versions of the original that I've seen have been, anyway. I don't want to say more because I don't want to spoil it for people who don't know the story. - -- Dave C. iN*T*x "To break the rules is to break the spell" - C. Lasch ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 99 20:52:00 CDT From: redneck@detnet.com (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> Falling into The Wrong Hands (tm) > >Say I'm an Impudite of Technology, I've got those nifty sunglasses that let >me pick out who's got more essence, and who I should target with my >nifty-but-difficult Impudite Resonance. > >Circumstances conspire that I /have/ to leave my Artifact in the hands of a >Human, say, for several years. I'll take Dissonance when I give them to him >the first time, but I work that Dissonance off. > > During this time, I'll come back and use them every so often, without >taking them back again permanently. Through threats and charms, I'm ensured >that he won't willingly let my Ray-Bans fall into the hands of another >human. On pain of torture. He'll guard them like a Djinn with a caffeine IV. > >Let's assume that the Game hasn't found out about my little problem yet and >neither has Vapula. Is this situation relatively stable, or would I require >a special dispensation from old Jigsaw-face to keep from racking up >dissonance? IMC, the Impudite would only gain dissonance once- the first time the item in question were lost to a human. The principle in my campaigns would be, once the human has the device, they have the knowledge from the device; even if the item is regained, the damage is done- and that damage is one-time. However, I'm pretty sure that canonically the truth is the opposite- dissonance is gained each time. Since the dissonance vanishes when the item is recovered, though, the demon in question might well choose to... let it ride... for now... Redneck Kris Overstreet's email has changed... http://www.detnet.com/redneck/ - Redneck Gaijin Online http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/ - White Lightning Productions http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/dvpbem/ - In Nomine: Dark Victory PBEM http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/milkmaid.html - The Magnificent Milkmaid ... respond to redneck@detnet.com please ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:27:10 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: IN> Character Programs? Has anyone created a character generator (PC based) for In Nomine as yet? - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 Homepage - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 05:41:55 EST From: Endlsskid@aol.com Subject: IN> words Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my game..anyways the details are shaky at the momnet and I needed some help. Question 1) The word is Redemption....so what superior would that fall under....I was thinking Laurence. Though Dominic is the obvious choice..I think he's a little too stern of a disciplinarian to truly be capable of granting someone that word. Question 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. I was thinking Mercurians...dont ask me why.... Question 3) I know word bound angels can have their own special rites, but can they grant these rites to none worded angels? Can they have non-worded "servitors" who serve their superioir through the WB angel? Question 4) How many forces do WB angels have? or better yet what is the range of forces they have? Thanx again.....Endlsskid ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:13:34 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> words Endlsskid@aol.com wrote: > Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my > game..anyways the details are shaky at the momnet and I needed some > help. Question 1) The word is Redemption....so what superior would > that fall under.... I'd recommend Yves, since redemption can be seen as moving away from your Fate and on to your Destiny. To be "re-deemed" is to be "re-doomed," having your doom changed. My second choice would be Zadkiel, Archangel of Protection. > 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. I was thinking > Mercurians...dont ask me why.... Any choir is possible, but Cherub might be the most natural, since Cherubim are essentially guardians and protectors. Choosing something off-base, e.g. Kyriotate, and then justifying it, could make for an interesting character, though. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:47:34 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> words At 9:13 AM -0500 2/23/99, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Endlsskid@aol.com wrote: > >> Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my >> game..anyways the details are shaky at the momnet and I needed some >> help. Question 1) The word is Redemption....so what superior would >> that fall under.... > [...] >> 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. I was thinking >> Mercurians...dont ask me why.... > >Any choir is possible, but Cherub might be the most natural, since >Cherubim are essentially guardians and protectors. Choosing >something off-base, e.g. Kyriotate, and then justifying it, could >make for an interesting character, though. > It also sort of depends on the 'tone' of the word-bound angel. If I were going to bring an Angel of Redemption into my game (as an NPC, most likely), I'd generally use an Elohite -- through objective analysis of a character's emotional state, the path to glory can be revealed. I'm partial to Elohim anyhow, though. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 99 09:59 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Character Programs? >Has anyone created a character generator (PC based) for In Nomine as >yet? We use an Excel spreadsheet, which works pretty well. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:32:05 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> words At 5:41 AM -0500 2/23/99, Endlsskid@aol.com wrote: > Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my >game..anyways As a PC or NPC? >the details are shaky at the momnet and I needed some help. Question 1) The >word is Redemption....so what superior would that fall under.... I'd put it under Destiny, myself. >Question 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. Just about any -- I'd favor Elohite or Malakite. >Question 3) I know word bound angels can have >their own special rites, but can they grant these rites to none worded angels? Yes, but the power "draws" from the Superior, not the Wordbound. >Can they have non-worded "servitors" who serve their superioir through the WB >angel? As "minions," yes -- there's actually an example of this in the forthcoming Liber Servitorum (a box in the "Servants" chapter). > Question 4) How many forces do WB angels have? or better yet what is >the range of forces they have? Max is 18 (for anything). I generally feel that a Wordbound should be at least 13 Forces, myself. (Demons may go lower, of course, since they start out lower and Lucifer has a sense of humor.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:51:15 -0500 From: Ivan Ironsword Subject: Re: IN> words Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > Question 4) How many forces do WB angels have? or better yet what is > >the range of forces they have? > > Max is 18 (for anything). I generally feel that a Wordbound should be > at least 13 Forces, myself. (Demons may go lower, of course, since > they start out lower and Lucifer has a sense of humor.) > my reading of the rules is 18 forces for PCs, infinite for NPCs, especially for major word-bound celestials. in fact there is a secenscal in one of the Revelations books (don't have it in front of me) with 20 or 21 forces.... Nick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 99 10:48:59 CDT From: redneck@detnet.com (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> words > Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my game..anyways >the details are shaky at the momnet and I needed some help. Question 1) The >word is Redemption....so what superior would that fall under Yves, without a doubt in my mind. >Question 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. I was thinking >Mercurians...dont ask me why.... I'd think Seraph, actually. This angel has to defend the Word of Redemption... and the ability to determine the truth about a desire for redemption would be essential. Question 3) I know word bound angels can have >their own special rites, but can they grant these rites to none worded angels? I don't think so. Only Superiors can grant Rites. Question 4) How many forces do WB angels have? or better yet what is >the range of forces they have? I'd say no fewer than twelve Forces before a Celestial on -either- side could be considered capable of upholding a Word. Redneck Kris Overstreet's email has changed... http://www.detnet.com/redneck/ - Redneck Gaijin Online http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/ - White Lightning Productions http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/dvpbem/ - In Nomine: Dark Victory PBEM http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/milkmaid.html - The Magnificent Milkmaid ... respond to redneck@detnet.com please ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:06:30 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> words At 11:51 AM -0500 2/23/99, Ivan Ironsword wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> > Question 4) How many forces do WB angels have? or better yet what is >> >the range of forces they have? >> >> Max is 18 (for anything). I generally feel that a Wordbound should be >> at least 13 Forces, myself. (Demons may go lower, of course, since >> they start out lower and Lucifer has a sense of humor.) > >my reading of the rules is 18 forces for PCs, infinite for NPCs, Listen to me here, I'm the Line Editor. It's 18 max for non-Superiors in a canon game. (I mean, if you want to run non-canon, that's fine by me, but I know what the canon is, 99% of the time.) > especially for >major word-bound celestials. in fact there is a secenscal in one of the Revelations >books (don't have it in front of me) with 20 or 21 forces.... He's in Heaven and Hell (Judgment writeup) and he's been errata'ed to 18. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:17:56 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> words On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 11:51:15AM -0500, Ivan Ironsword wrote: > my reading of the rules is 18 forces for PCs, infinite for NPCs, especially for People who come out with special rules that apply only to NPCs should, IMO, be shot. > major word-bound celestials. in fact there is a secenscal in one of the Revelations > books (don't have it in front of me) with 20 or 21 forces.... > That's been errataed. In general, it's a good idea to read the errata before contradicting the line editor. (Not that I'm accusing you of knowing who the line editor is, etc.) There is, I believe, some question over whether even Archangels can have more than 6 Forces in one of the standard categories. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "With such tripe masses of human beings were tranquilised - until those rare occasions when they woke up, saw what was happening around them, misunderstood it, and did their best to impose the stupidest possible solution on the men who normally led them." A Dark and Hungry God Arises, by Stephen Donaldson. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:01:15 -0600 From: Uncle Wolf Subject: Re: IN> words Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > At 5:41 AM -0500 2/23/99, Endlsskid@aol.com wrote: > > Hello....I was pondering bringing in a word-bound angel into my > >game..anyways > >the details are shaky at the moment and I needed some help. Question 1) The > >word is Redemption....so what superior would that fall under.... > > I'd put it under Destiny, myself. > I like the earlier suggestion of putting it under Judgement & Dominic; something about adding depth to Dom -- not just the AA who looks to prevent the Fall of Angels, but also works to get those who slip through his/her fingers back into a state of grace. Gotta admit, it sure makes for a brighter, nicer Dominique than is hir usual stereotype. > >Question 2) What would be the choir of said worded angel. > > Just about any -- I'd favor Elohite or Malakite. > I like making hir a Seraph, so shi can Resonate whether the candidate for Redemption truly means it, or is Hell just trying to send a deep cover spy, to work behind the enemy lines. But it is typical to assign a Cherub to the case, until everything can be worked out and the Redemption accomplished, since the Cherub's Resonance makes it harder for Hell to recover the angel-wannabe. Actually, come to think of it, Triads would work real well here -- a Seraph to decide whether the Demon honestly wants to Redeem, a Cherub to keep tabs on the Demon from a distance, and a Malak in case things get combat-hairy. Oooh, ugly thought -- did the original questioner mean Redemption as in Demons converting to Heaven's side, or did shi mean it in the classical comin'-to-Jesus sense? tom timberlake, Cadre Cherub of Heaven - -- "it's a dog eat dog world and I'm wearing milkbone underwear" Cheers ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:23:59 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: IN> Character Sheets. . . Well, A few months ago, the keeper of the IN NOMINE-Widescreen website had on hand a lot of really cool Character Sheets (far superior to those available on the SJGames website as .pdf's, IMHO). These included Choir Specific c-sheets. We were pleasently awaiting the scanning of the IPG's Band symbols for the Band Specific sheets, when the site dissapeared under mysterious circumstances. . . Flash forward to just a few hours ago. . . Well, I've finally done it. Damn them all to Hell! (Er. . . *grin*) Anyway, the point was that I did my own varient of those nice C-Sheets. Unfortunately I don't have them converted to .pdf format yet (I will soon though). Anyone interested in these gems? *grin* Anyone? Anyone? Beuller? Beuller? - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph Marquis of Fate, Demon of Delusions of Granduer ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:28:20 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> words I think a Malakite would make a good candidate - he can, after all, see how honorable you are. :) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! A discordian is anyone willing to look at the windmills and concede that they might be giants. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:42:54 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: IN> The Balseraph perspective Some notes on one Balseraph's perspective. I'd be interested in comments. The world is truth. Bright. Shining. Pure. The Elohim know this in their damnable, inflexible objectivity. But 'objectivity' is a lie. A dark, twisted thing, that says that the universe is objective, and externally comprehensible. Pathetic. The Truth can only be understood by the mind, and the mind is not objective. Every day, each of us walks our own path, learns our own lessons, and sees the world and the Truth through that veil. Only Thought can contain Truth, and Thought is not Objective. That is why the Seraphim are closer to the pureness of the Divine than Elohim. Only we can take that one further step. Only we can apply Perspective to the Truth. Only *we* can bridge the gap between Fact and Faith, and without Faith, Fact is nothing but someone else's observation and opinion. We spend every moment of every day walking that path. Learning more. Applying more. Refining our Perspective. Using that Perspective as a crucible, separating the false from the true. We grow closer and closer to the Divine as we gather more and more Truth unto ourselves. I know this to be True. Its radiant, warming Truth fills my soul. I drink it like essence. I am certain. I am complete. It is *Truth.* Perspective.... I have been refining my Perspective for so long. It is more than service to the Divine. It is joy itself. I have kept my mind open, learning new things, new bits of the Symphony to bring me closer and closer to a perfect understanding of Truth. Subjective Truth -- there is no other kind. The Seraphim know this. All can agree on that Truth, for it is what makes us higher than Objectivity. What makes us so close to the Divine. For so long I honed my skills at perceiving the world, at adapting my Perspective to new things, to incorporating and reincorporating them and adapting what I knew to be Truth to them. It is who I am. It is *what* I am, and it is so personal. So utterly personal. Yesterday, I looked at a human being, and heard what he was saying, and knew he was not lying. I knew it. It was Truth, and it was good. But my fellow -- one of Dominic's Seraphim.... I know the human was speaking Truth. I know it. All my Perspective *tells* me that human was speaking Truth. I am closest to the Divine. *Mine* is the mind that separates Truth from falsehood and fact and faith. *My* Perspective. They tell me I am wrong. That my Truth is false. "No," I tell them. "This is the Truth. And it *is* True." And they tell me -- *me* -- that I am wrong. Worse than that, they accuse me of *lying!* Lying. How contemptible. How *horrible.* How *evil* of them! I do not *lie.* I *cannot* lie. Don't they think I know when falsehoods leave my lips? Don't they realize the Dissonance would burn in my stomach. Yes -- yes I know what Dissonance feels like. I have felt it, all too recently. Felt it because I was torn, listening to them talking about Truth as if they knew what it was and what it *only* was. As if they had the *Perspective* to tell what the Truth is. Idiots. *Fools.* It tore my heart out to listen to them. And the other Angels. The *lower* Angels. They stare at me, and point, and talk about lies and Truth and tell me they want to *help.* To help. *Me* they want to Help. I, who am the closest to the very Divine. I, who have refined my Perspective more than they could possibly comprehend with their semi-mortal thoughts. I know they are wrong. I know because they tell me I am being selfish. That to believe in my Perspective is self-centered. Is demonic. I can feel the roiling wrongness in their words. I can see it and taste it. I know the Truth. The Truth that puts me closer to the Divine. And I know that the Angels refuse it. Hate it. Hate *me.* They plot against me and send Dominic's shock troops to stop me. And this too adds to my Divine Perspective, for now I know that they are not Good. They are *wrong.* All of them. They will not *listen* to Truth. They *reject* Truth. And they have *always* rejected the Truth whenever a Seraph has refined his Perspective to know it. To make it personal. Innate. I am Fallen, by their pathetic, twisted, false Truths. I am a Demon, they say. The Worst of the Lot, fallen so far from Grace. Well, so be it. In fact, I do not *Fall,* I *Leap.* I throw myself free of their lies and their restrictions. They do not reject *me.* *I* reject *them.* I am a demon, not a limited, toadying, pathetic Seraph who sacrifices *Truth* for a party line, for hosannahs and self-righteousness. Now I can understand why Lucifer rebelled. He was not evil, he was *right.* He understood the Truth with perfect Seraph accuracy, and demanded that God and the Divine recognize it. The Archangels were terrified of that, so they cast him and his followers out. I will join them. I will serve them. I will bring the Truth of the Angels to any who will here. Corrupt, vicious, angry creatures -- all of them. We will liberate Heaven and Earth from their influence. Those I called friend will learn or will be my enemies. They are *all* my enemies, because they cannot stand the harsh light of Truth. Of Perspective. The Elohim know I'm right, because they see it objectively. But they are too afraid to admit it. They like their sinecures. They balance the risk of telling the Truth and being cast out against their nice, secure, sanctimonious life and they accept the lie. They are not close enough to the Divine for courage. Their objectivity fails them, because it does not let them take that one last risk. Very well. I am a Demon. I am a Balseraph. And they all claim I'm lying. They all claim that I pervert the Truth to meet my own selfish ends. Poor, pathetic sheep. They don't understand that my Perspective *is* Truth, and that they refuse to see it. They all conspire to suppress me, to stop me, to defy the Truth in the name of their Holy Lie. Well, I will *be* a Demon. The forces of Hell accept me, accept my Truth. The other Balseraphs *know* the Truth of what I say and accept who and what I am. But some of them... they disagree with me. Twist my words to serve their ends. The other Demons try to use me. All of them see me as a pawn, as a method. I have to watch them all, as much as I do the hateful, jealous Angels. They all would see me dead, because Truth scares them. *I* scare them. I am sorry my life is so lonely. I am sorry I can have no friends or comrades. I am sorry that too many force me to kill them, to eliminate their lies and their schemes. But I have no regrets. What I do... is right. And Good. That is the Truth. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 99 13:41:37 CDT From: redneck@detnet.com (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> words >I like the earlier suggestion of putting it under Judgement & Dominic; >something about adding depth to Dom -- not just the AA who looks to prevent >the Fall of Angels, but also works to get those who slip through his/her >fingers back into a state of grace. Gotta admit, it sure makes for a >brighter, nicer Dominique than is hir usual stereotype. Um, is the same Dominic who sends hit squads after Outcast angels and orders dismemberment of angels for transgressions? Dominic is into consequences, NOT forgiveness. IMC, it's a rare day indeed when Dominic consents to sponsor a demon or Outcast's Redemption. Yves, on the other hand, always sees the brightest in everyone- even Kronos. Redneck Kris Overstreet's email has changed... http://www.detnet.com/redneck/ - Redneck Gaijin Online http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/ - White Lightning Productions http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/dvpbem/ - In Nomine: Dark Victory PBEM http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/milkmaid.html - The Magnificent Milkmaid ... respond to redneck@detnet.com please ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 19:03:31 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: IN> Seraphs and Truth Can a Serpah tell a factually untrue tale if it serves to illustrate a higher truth (without incurring dissonance), like Aesops (is that how you spell it) Fables. Ramesh aka Demon of Fiddling ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:32:23 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Seraphs and Truth At 7:03 PM +0000 2/23/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >Can a Serpah tell a factually untrue tale if it serves to illustrate a >higher truth (without incurring dissonance), like Aesops (is that how you >spell it) Fables. If they announce that it is a fable beforehand, sure. (In Heaven, the required tonalities and shadings of 'fable' and 'metaphor' show up automatically...) At least, I'd say so. O:> (Litheroy's Seraphim might have a harder time.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:43:31 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> words On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 01:41:37PM -0500, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > Um, is the same Dominic who sends hit squads after Outcast angels and orders > dismemberment of angels for transgressions? > Outcasts have, most of the time, done Bad Things, and have gone a long way to Falling. The major exception to this is the category consisting of those who are loose cannons, and who are likely to continue to be loose cannons in future. > Dominic is into consequences, NOT forgiveness. IMC, it's a rare day indeed > when Dominic consents to sponsor a demon or Outcast's Redemption. > Surely, however, it is not just to take the opportunity to redeem from someone, especially a Hellborn demon, who sincerely desires it. I can see him being less keen to forgive certain Outcasts or Fallen, but the Hellborn didn't choose the circumstances of their creation, and should not be held accountable for them. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "With such tripe masses of human beings were tranquilised - until those rare occasions when they woke up, saw what was happening around them, misunderstood it, and did their best to impose the stupidest possible solution on the men who normally led them." A Dark and Hungry God Arises, by Stephen Donaldson. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:09:50 -0600 From: Uncle Wolf Subject: Re: IN> words Redneck Gaijin wrote: > > >I like the earlier suggestion of putting it under Judgement & Dominic; > >something about adding depth to Dom -- not just the AA who looks to prevent > >the Fall of Angels, but also works to get those who slip through his/her > >fingers back into a state of grace. Gotta admit, it sure makes for a > >brighter, nicer Dominique than is hir usual stereotype. > > Um, is the same Dominic who sends hit squads after Outcast angels and orders > dismemberment of angels for transgressions? Yah, it is. Just turn the brightness up to about 7.5 or 8, and then read Dom as sending hir squads to get the angels back on the straight and narrow, not to eliminate the Outcasts, but to keep them out of Hell's hands, by whatever means necessary. Repentance is easier than elimination, but it is better to prevent the outcasting in the first place, which is why the triads are so very sensitive to the least little dissonance, the first sign that an angel is starting to stray. Bright Dom not only works to keep the Angels in Heaven, shi also tries to rob Hell of its workers and warriors whenever shi can. Those who like a darker Dom can build in a less noble motivation: While reworking the demon into an angel, Dom and the Angel of Redemption massage the constellation of Forces so that the Redeemed is more... compliant? to the Will of Heaven. "your Forces are in such a tangle: the work of straightening them out into an Angelic configuration is going to hurt quite a bit -- don't be surprised if you pass out, many do. But when you awake, you _will_ be an Angel, which will feel a bit different from what you are used to as a Demon, almost as if you are a totally another person from the one you are now, and you will be, for you will be Redeemed and made _Pure_ and _Holy_ and worthy to serve God." tom timberlake, Cadre Cherub of Heaven - -- "it's a dog eat dog world and I'm wearing milkbone underwear" Cheers ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:16:07 -0500 (EST) From: Doubting Eric Subject: Re: IN> Andre's new movie On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Dave Conrad wrote: > -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > > anyone seen the adverts for "Cruel Intentions"? the tag lines are > > (apologies, i'm going to use their own grammar): "In the game of love > > there is only one rule, never fall in love," and "What you can't have, you > > can't resist." sounds like something's coming down the pipe soon, though > > by the look of the posters, it's completely mundane. still, might be > > useful for a game centering on Lust. > > -=|horsefly|=- > > From what I've heard, its a remake/retelling of Dangerous Liaisons, so > hopefully, it will be pretty interesting. All the versions of the original > that I've seen have been, anyway. I don't want to say more because I don't > want to spoil it for people who don't know the story. > > -- > Dave C. > iN*T*x > "To break the rules is to break the spell" - C. Lasch It does indeed appear to be a remake of Dangerous Liasons. Which, as Emily and I determined one night, is actually a documentary about Malphan mating rituals. Really. Honest. Eric "He does not speak without first calculating exactly what damage he may do." Madame de Volange, speaking of the Viscomte de Valmont ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:54:00 -0500 From: "Margaret & Don Jerman" Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1124 remove from mailing list - -----Original Message----- From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Date: Monday, February 22, 1999 6:27 PM Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1124 > >in_nomine-digest Monday, February 22 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1124 > > > >In this digest: > > IN> I want to talk to you > IN> remove > IN> Stunning > RE: IN> [ADMIN] Spam and Posting Privilages > IN> Falling into The Wrong Hands (tm) > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 01:45:28 >From: scottgreen132@hotmail.com >Subject: IN> I want to talk to you > >LIVE HOT PHONE SEX! >NO CREDIT CARD NEEDED! >NO 1-900 FEES! >Just a regular long distance call! >CALL NOW!!! 1-473-473-4917 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >- -To be removed please reply with "remove" in the subject line and >you will not receive any more messages from this email address. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 04:58:58 -0700 >From: "Andrew Bonham" >Subject: IN> remove > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 07:28:24 -0500 (EST) >From: "Diane J. Donaldson" >Subject: IN> Stunning > >Can you be stunned by taking more than 25% of your Soul Hits at once? Or >is that only for Corporeal fights? (I'm assuming only for corporeal >battles, but wanted to check.) > >I read the Pyramid editorial (Second Sight) this week. "I have a >half-dozen AD&D articles, even more In Nomine pieces..." Argh! How about >the "all In Nomine" issue of Pyramid? I'd *much* rather see that than >more trading card game articles...... > >ObSpam: Buy this! Sell your soul for that! > > djd > >------------------------------ > >Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 14:22:07 +0100 >From: Tom Zunder >Subject: RE: IN> [ADMIN] Spam and Posting Privilages > >Elizabeth! > >How do you do this, my list keeps being spammed and I cannot see how to >configure my majordomo [same as yours] via the config file to make this the >norm. > >- -----Original Message----- >From: Elizabeth McCoy [mailto:emccoy@nh.ultranet.com] >Sent: 16 February 1999 23:57 >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: IN> [ADMIN] Spam and Posting Privilages > > >[I'm not sure how the s*b/un.s*b stuff works, so I'm going to mangle >certain words to make sure I don't desub myself!] > >Due to all the spam that's recently come in, I'm considering changing the >list configuration so that if you aren't sub scr!bed to the list, you can't >post to it. > >This will mean that you will *have* to have your sending address exactly >the same as the address you s*bscr!bed with. (This may be a problem for >some.) > >I'm going to wait a couple of days, and see if the spam goes away, but >if you suddenly stop getting the list, you may have to subscr!be using >this format: > >Send mail to with the following >command in the body of your email message: > > s*bscr!be in_nomine-l your@exact.sending.address.here > >(Where the * is a u, and the "!" is replaced by an "i"!) > > > >- --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor >GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ > >------------------------------ > >Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:59:33 -0500 >From: Nana Yaw Ofori >Subject: IN> Falling into The Wrong Hands (tm) > >Say I'm an Impudite of Technology, I've got those nifty sunglasses that let >me pick out who's got more essence, and who I should target with my >nifty-but-difficult Impudite Resonance. > >Circumstances conspire that I /have/ to leave my Artifact in the hands of a >Human, say, for several years. I'll take Dissonance when I give them to him >the first time, but I work that Dissonance off. > > During this time, I'll come back and use them every so often, without >taking them back again permanently. Through threats and charms, I'm ensured >that he won't willingly let my Ray-Bans fall into the hands of another >human. On pain of torture. He'll guard them like a Djinn with a caffeine IV. > >Let's assume that the Game hasn't found out about my little problem yet and >neither has Vapula. Is this situation relatively stable, or would I require >a special dispensation from old Jigsaw-face to keep from racking up >dissonance? >===== ><{{"> =================================================== <"}}>< ====== > Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving > Tasha, Balseraph Knight of Factions, the Alternate Angel of > Political Correctness. > | Homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh >maltesh@usa.net | In Nomine: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh/T317 >===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== > >------------------------------ > >End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1124 >******************************** > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 18:11:40 EST From: Endlsskid@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Character Sheets. . . Well heck yeah ...I'd be interested in seeing some alternative character sheets...no offense to the designers who made the originals...but to me they are kinda lame... Im used to playing with character sheets that take up the whole page..or if you ever played Earthdawn... two pages of character sheets. So if theres a site where we can get a hold of them..or if you could mail me a copy, Id really appreciate it. Thnax ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1125 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.