From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Mar 8 20:54:17 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 UAA12168 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 1999 20:54:17 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id UAA26891 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 1999 20:53:50 -0600 Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 20:53:50 -0600 Message-Id: <199903090253.UAA26891@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 #1138 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 Monday, March 8 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1138 In this digest: RE: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? IN> RE: in_nomine-digest V1 #1137 Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink RE: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim Re: IN> RE: in_nomine-digest V1 #1137 Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim Re: IN> Lilim and Marc Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink RE: IN> Lilim and Marc IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink RE: IN> Lilim and Marc IN> Lilim RE: IN> Lilim and Marc IN> Re: The Nature of Evil Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Re: IN> Lilim IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 11:15:35 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink >>The difference between many geasa and agreed upon trades is a rather large >>one. One is a compulsion, and the other isn't. > >Ahh... I see, because you *have* to pay the Lilim back it's obviously evil. >But if you were able to walk away from the bargain like a normal deal it'd >be okay. In my perception, this is entirely the wrong axis to make the differentiation on. The Lilim's resonance is evil because you don't know what you're agreeing to when you accept the fulfillment of your need, but Trade is inherently good because everything is laid out on the table when you agree to it. . . With Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're buying into. With Lilith, you could be asked to do _anything_. steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 13:54:36 -0600 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Shedim can try to possess a random sampling of the passengers -- anyone > they can't slip into is a celestial. (They can also possess the > staff and check to see which cities people have come from -- and > monitor closely the flights coming from angel-dominated areas.) > Shedim are also nasty if you want to send a Soldier into the > area, because they get to riffle through his memories. > > Habbalah can look for emotions like, "I am being sneaky and > worried I might get caught." (IPG, sophisticated use of resonance.) > > Lilim can read needs bip-bip-bip as they make eye-contact. Needs > to infiltrate, needs to not get caught, needs to slay evil... > > No, they're not going to get everyone. But they don't have to get > everyone immediately. They just have to get *enough* people... A couple of nitpicks here. A random sample isn't going to do the Shedite much good, since you're looking for a statistical outlier. Unless, of course, there are a whole lot more angels trying to sneak into town than I'm assuming. So it's a straight percentage shot. If there are 10,000 passengers coming in every hour, how many can the Shedite possess? More importantly, all of these methods have a serious problem with false positives. The Shedite trick, I believe, requires a resonance roll, and most of the individuals he can't possess will be due to failing one. And when that failure comes on a check digit of six... The Habbalah and the Lilim have to worry about that six, but that doesn't make much difference. Overwhelmingly, those that have the emotion or need that they are looking for will be mundanes who have mundane reasons for feeling that way. Trying to investigate further all of the cases where the individual reads as suspicious will overwhelm the system very quickly. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 12:21:29 -0800 (PST) From: Wade Trupke Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Gee, my first post to this list, and I'm disagreeing with someone. Not the normal way to make friends and influence people. > For my money, Lilim resonance is inherently selfish; how can it be used > for good? Easy. Geas someone into doing something for their own good, or the greater good. Geas the druggie into checking himself into rehab. Geas the engineer to refuse the 'secret plans' that the shady stranger (a Servitor of Vapula) promised to bring him. The BL of Yves geases the writer into finishing the article he's writing, exposing the criminal acts happening at the local megacorporation. (Then get a Cherub down here to protect him!) The list goes on... Also, if they are made from Lilith's own family recipe (it's > been with us for generations) then again they are inherently selfish. I don't think so. Lilim aren't just copies of Lilith. If they were, none of them would serve other Princes, because that would restrict their freedom. Lilim are individuals, with their own minds, thoughts, and beliefs. And some might end up being decent people... err, beings. Wade (hi, everybody!) _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 15:53:40 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> FoTM: Asmodeus' Angel Spotters??? > (Of course, that does assume that Lilim psychology is simply *so* biased > towards fulfilling Geases that their brains just turn off. Though a > Bright has more to lose from dissonance than a dark one -- she can, > after all, Fall again.) I've always played it that way, more or less. The Lilim gets a geased called in, and it submurges her consciousness. Depending on how big the geas is is how much of her is actually in control. A small, level-1 geas will put a small dent in the Lilim's psyche, a level-6 will make her into an automaton. If you want to play this with points or stats, you can say that the Lilim's will is submurged by (Level of Geas x 2) points - a 10 will Lilim under a 1 geas will have an effective will of 8, under a 2 would have a will of 6, etc. To resist the geas (and thus pick up dissonance), it might be a will roll. Basically, any Lilim under a 5 or a 6 would be a robot, carrying out the will of the geas. Enh. Just an idea. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 15:55:37 -0500 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> RE: in_nomine-digest V1 #1137 > -----Original Message----- >Lilim have free will. They can choose to do good just as they can >choose to be lazy and do evil. A Bright can choose to never invoke >a hook, or even to vanish them immediately upon acquiring them. >That's why some call them "Gifters." >Of course, others call them "Troubles," because that's what they >cause a lot of. >Go check out Redemption in the IPG for more along those lines. >The little greenies get their own sections. >- --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor >GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ Oh Mighty Archangel. Bright lilim are sort of bright. They aren't green any more. Novalis washes them whiter than white. Adam Malakim of Creation Angel of Philosophical Weapons "Who does not want to repeat the last few weeks being reassembled again to remove the nitpicking resonance you gave him." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 13:02:44 -0800 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim At 01:47 PM 3/7/99 -0800, EDG wrote: >Hydrax 59 wrote: > >> P.S. has anyone else ever thought that every time any calabim uses his >> resonance, Belial grows? > >Why? The Calabite resonance is for destruction, which doesn't >necessarily take the form of fire. It can also age, disintegrate, or >erode the target, to give three fairly common examples. > >-EDG For the same reason that the Demon of Unexpectedly Short Fuses falls under Belial. His Fire is the Fire of Destruction. He isn't PURELY fixated on the physical aspects of his Word (just mostly) and this can be seen in several places. Come to think of it, his dissonance condition is very interesting, on review. It's almost entirely idea-based...a very deep condition for an /apparently/ shallow Prince, even if he does date back to the Fall. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 16:09:55 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" wrote: > In my perception, this is entirely the wrong axis to make the > differentiation on. The Lilim's resonance is evil because you don't know > what you're agreeing to when you accept the fulfillment of your need, but So baseball trading, which frequently includes "a player to be named later", is evil? > Trade is inherently good because everything is laid out on the table when > you agree to it. . . With Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're > buying into. With Lilith, you could be asked to do _anything_. Unfortunately, the people Marc makes deals with all too often forget to read the fine print. Many _don't_ have full knowledge of what they're buying into, although they could. The same is true of Lilim; "What do I have to do for you?" is a perfectly valid question, although it'll often be answered with "Oh, just a little favor..." Obviously, Geas levels aren't used in-character - "I've got a level 4 Geas on you." "Um, what?" - but Bright Lilim will probably be urged to answer "Oh, just a favor... nothing more than..." and name something random that's about the same level. > steve - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu 159.28.165.120 "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 22:22:11 +0100 (CET) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 3:49 AM -0800 3/6/99, Martin Arnold wrote: > > >Actually while you're at it, could you explain Bright Lilim! :-) > > They, like Lilith, are rule-breakers. (Humans can't have Words. But > do you want to tell *Lilith* that?) The Lilim resonance is to see > needs, and then ensure that they get paid back for fulfilling them. > > Seeing needs is not inherantly "Evil" -- it's even close to what > Elohim can do. > > Imposing Geases can be selfish, or it can be selfless -- such as a > Lilim making a scumbag businessman give to charity (Lilim of Gabriel, > anyone?) or forcing a demon to keep its word (Lilim of the Sword, > perhaps?). I'd actually recommend the movie Michael for seeing how a Bright might work. 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. - Principia Discordia ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 13:27:49 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink >> In my perception, this is entirely the wrong axis to make the >> differentiation on. The Lilim's resonance is evil because you don't know >> what you're agreeing to when you accept the fulfillment of your need, but > >So baseball trading, which frequently includes "a player to be named >later", is evil? Well, actually, in virtually all cases, in baseball both teams already know who the player to be named later is, but can't trade him at that time due to waivers, injury, or contract status--it's just a formality, to stay within the game's rules. (You can't really settle a deal without knowing who they're going to let go. You're hoping they'll trade you Roger Clemens and the only player they're ever willing to name is Joe Shlabotnik--this generates strife between teams.) However, let's assume that they really finalize a deal with "a player, totally unspecified and with nobody in mind, to be named later". The team accepting that proposal _knows_ that they're going to get a _player_, not an anvil, a coupon good for a hot wax, or a six-year old can of Diet Pepsi. When you accept a favor from a Lilim, she can ask you to do _anything_, and you're bound by it. Simply the fact that there are rules in the game for being geased to do things you loathe or despise should point out the difference I'm trying to highlight: with Trade you might not know what you're going to get, but you're not going to _hate_ it, unless you knowingly accepted a bad trade. With Geasa, you might very well hate it a _lot_. >> Trade is inherently good because everything is laid out on the table when >> you agree to it. . . With Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're >> buying into. With Lilith, you could be asked to do _anything_. > >Unfortunately, the people Marc makes deals with all too often forget to >read the fine print. Many _don't_ have full knowledge of what they're >buying into, although they could. The same is true of Lilim; "What do I >have to do for you?" is a perfectly valid question, although it'll often >be answered with "Oh, just a little favor..." Angels of Trade are still _angels_. They don't have to point out the fine print, he says, rereading the dissonance conditions, but their behavior has to be selfless. And there's a big difference between forgetting to read the fine print and literally not having any way to predict what the Lilim is going to decide to ask you to do. >Obviously, Geas levels aren't used in-character - "I've got a level 4 >Geas on you." "Um, what?" - but Bright Lilim will probably be urged to >answer "Oh, just a favor... nothing more than..." and name something >random that's about the same level. And even so, a person knows what they're getting into. "She's not going to tell me. Could be bad. Is it worth opening myself to the whims of this stranger to get what I need?" Myself, I'd say no, if she wasn't willing to be more specific. steve ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 09:03:39 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim EDG wrote: > Actually, add Andre's Calabite attunement... *shudder* Although that attunement can't take a Force away, I play with a slight variation that allows the potential of losing Forces. If a Cal of Andre causes enough soul hits to cause the victim to lose a Force (if they were in Celestial Combat), I rule that the Force has come 'loose'. This has no effect on game play, but the only thing holding the force to the character is their vessel. So while the force is loose, if they try to take Celestial form, the Force is freed, and they instantly lose it. For example, Joe angel has 10 soul hits, and takes 12 soul damage. If he assumes Celestial form before he has healed the damage, he *will* lose a random Force. This house rule makes Calabim of Andre a lot scarier, and forces the victims into difficult positions. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 16:44:43 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> RE: in_nomine-digest V1 #1137 At 3:55 PM -0500 3/8/99, Adam Canning wrote: >> -----Original Message-----. >>Go check out Redemption in the IPG for more along those lines. >>The little greenies get their own sections. > >>- --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor > >Oh Mighty Archangel. >Bright lilim are sort of bright. >They aren't green any more. >Novalis washes them whiter than white. And then there's Kanah's commentary on redemption in Maya's Fiat Justitia game. And on being washed by Novalis. Not to mention that the Bright over in that game is tie-dye... (homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/fiat.html) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 16:48:28 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim Sean McCarthy wrote: > For the same reason that the Demon of Unexpectedly Short Fuses falls under > Belial. His Fire is the Fire of Destruction. He isn't PURELY fixated on > the physical aspects of his Word (just mostly) and this can be seen in > several places. Not really; an unexpectedly short fuse results in something blowing up before you expected it to, causing all sorts of problems which all pretty much go back to the explosion, which is - you guessed it - an expression of fire, or Fire. Remember, too, that "Belial represents only the literal power of fire - its destructive nature - and not its conceptual power..." (IN, p. 106) OTOH, the Lilim resonance is for causing mayhem in general, which seems to back you up... hm. > Come to think of it, his dissonance condition is very interesting, on > review. It's almost entirely idea-based...a very deep condition for an > /apparently/ shallow Prince, even if he does date back to the Fall. *nods* This is true. > Sean - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu 159.28.165.120 "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 17:06:36 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Lilim and Marc "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" wrote: > Well, actually, in virtually all cases, in baseball both teams already know > who the player to be named later is, but can't trade him at that time due to > waivers, injury, or contract status--it's just a formality, to stay within > the game's rules. (You can't really settle a deal without knowing who > they're going to let go. You're hoping they'll trade you Roger Clemens and > the only player they're ever willing to name is Joe Shlabotnik--this > generates strife between teams.) This is true; I wasn't really remembering that when I wrote. :) > However, let's assume that they really finalize a deal with "a player, > totally unspecified and with nobody in mind, to be named later". The team > accepting that proposal _knows_ that they're going to get a _player_, not an > anvil, a coupon good for a hot wax, or a six-year old can of Diet Pepsi. > When you accept a favor from a Lilim, she can ask you to do _anything_, and > you're bound by it. Simply the fact that there are rules in the game for > being geased to do things you loathe or despise should point out the > difference I'm trying to highlight: with Trade you might not know what > you're going to get, but you're not going to _hate_ it, unless you knowingly > accepted a bad trade. With Geasa, you might very well hate it a _lot_. Hm. I think it depends on how you play Lilim and Geases. A Lilim could very easily walk up to a businessman down on his luck, hand him $40,000 - which will bring his business out of the red - and walk off, knowing she's fulfilled a need and can later come back to call on that businessman. She could just as easily determine someone's need, walk up to him, and say, "I'll do X for you if you'll do Y for me. Deal?" The latter is how I imagine Bright Lilim. Of course, nasty Lilim will say, "If you do Y for me, I'll do X for you," get the businessman to act first, fulfill the need _after_ the businessman's done her a favor, and then Geas him for the need and pull in a _second_ favor. Particularly nasty Lilim will do this, ask what it's worth to him to NOT have to fulfill the favor she asks, get that instead (money or such), and then slap a hook in him for relieving the need to pay off the favor! *shudder* I don't know if that works in canon... but it's still not fun to think about... > Angels of Trade are still _angels_. They don't have to point out the fine > print, he says, rereading the dissonance conditions, but their behavior has > to be selfless. And there's a big difference between forgetting to read the > fine print and literally not having any way to predict what the Lilim is > going to decide to ask you to do. Where, then, does this put the first of Marc's Rites - Make 100% profit on an honorable transaction? A truly selfless angel would only be able to use this rite when he was a mediator, crafting the deal for the benefit of another party - a charity, perhaps, or an organization - and then I probably wouldn't let the angel get Essence for it, since it's not him that's making the profit, it's the organization. Marc, to me, seems the least selfless of all the Archangels, as do his servitors seem of all the angels, as evidenced by that Rite (and by several of his Invocation modifiers and Choir attunements - how selfless can a Kyriotate of Marc be, anyway? "'Scuse me, I'm going to steal your body now..."). > And even so, a person knows what they're getting into. "She's not going to > tell me. Could be bad. Is it worth opening myself to the whims of this > stranger to get what I need?" Myself, I'd say no, if she wasn't willing to > be more specific. *shrugs* That's you... and I'm betting it depends on the need. ;) > steve - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu 159.28.165.120 "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 22:10:44 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Calabim/ofanim On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 04:48:28PM -0500, EDG wrote: > > Come to think of it, his dissonance condition is very interesting, on > > review. It's almost entirely idea-based...a very deep condition for an > > /apparently/ shallow Prince, even if he does date back to the Fall. > > *nods* This is true. > I've tended to explain this as a metaphorical extension of the Calabite dissonance condition, which is a backlash from resisted resonance. 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: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 18:15:53 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink At 4:09 PM -0500 3/8/99, EDG wrote: >"Steven Feldon (Exchange)" wrote: > >> In my perception, this is entirely the wrong axis to make the >> differentiation on. The Lilim's resonance is evil because you don't know >> what you're agreeing to when you accept the fulfillment of your need, but > >So baseball trading, which frequently includes "a player to be named >later", is evil? > After watching what's happened to the Seattle Mariners and the dismemberment of the Florida Marlins, you ask if Baseball Trading were evil? In my IN campaign, I'd have a Lilim servitor of Nybbas as the Demon of the Mariners -- maybe Randy Johnson would have actually *tried* his last season of the Mariners had he been geased.... (Baseball is one of those areas that bring out my inner Habbalite -- punish them! Punish them all! Scurge the unworthy from the diamonds they have defiled!) - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 15:48:02 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc >Quoth EDG: >> Quoth me: >> Angels of Trade are still _angels_. They don't have to point out the fine >> print, he says, rereading the dissonance conditions, but their behavior has >> to be selfless. And there's a big difference between forgetting to read the >> fine print and literally not having any way to predict what the Lilim is >> going to decide to ask you to do. > >Where, then, does this put the first of Marc's Rites - Make 100% profit >on an honorable transaction? A truly selfless angel would only be able >to use this rite when he was a mediator, crafting the deal for the >benefit of another party - a charity, perhaps, or an organization - and >then I probably wouldn't let the angel get Essence for it, since it's >not him that's making the profit, it's the organization. There's nothing inherently selfish about how much a given type of business usually charges for their wares relative to their cost; I don't see why people have such problems with 100% profit. I used to sell books. I had remainder items, old books, that literally cost us a buck, and we were selling them for $5.98. If someone comes in to an angel's store, sees a hardback copy of the book they're looking for for $6 and is delighted, then goes home and reads it and becomes a magically better person, the angel's made a 500% profit _and_ done good at the same time. Furniture has a profit margin of 300%. Diamonds are easily 200%. Collectibles can be thousands of percent; don't ask me about the obscenity of Marc's Angel of Magic: the Gathering Trading on the Internet. Lots of delighted people were on the "wrong" end of 10000% profit. Profit margin is determined by how difficult or risky it is to earn that dollar, not just how much the thing you're selling costs. And on the demonic side, the total cost of murder is usually quite low, but hitmen don't work cheap. Even then after taking that into account, you somtimes have to evaluate risk from the point of view of the business, not of the seller, sometimes, as well: remainders have a 500% profit margin because they don't sell well at all. The rest of Marc's Rites and invocation modifiers can be thought of as other aspects of Trade: wealth itself, cash in its role as the representation of wealth, contracts as a representation of the action of moving money from place to place. Trade is just the blood and bloodflow of an economy; it's Marc's job to make sure that the economy is directed at Heaven's goals. steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:17:53 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink >>>The explanation is, simply, that anyone with a trace of dissonance can be picked up by a Gamester with Sense of Betrayal.<<< I doubt angels with dissonance would be sent to L.A. >>>Shedim can try to possess a random sampling of the passengers -- anyone they can't slip into is a celestial.<<< I can't see Shedim sitting in a crowded place jumping frequently from one person to another. They'll make a disturbance each time, risk being spotted by a mortal with a high Perception each time, and risk failing with a check digit of 6 each time. >>>(They can also possess the staff and check to see which cities people have come from -- and monitor closely the flights coming from angel-dominated areas.)<<< I doubt angels would therefore fly directly from S.F. to L.A. >>>Habbalah can look for emotions like, "I am being sneaky and worried I might get caught." (IPG, sophisticated use of resonance.)<<< Well, that will get a lot of drug smugglers and people bringing in undeclared items from other countries... >>>No, they're not going to get everyone. But they don't have to get everyone immediately. They just have to get *enough* people...<<< 10,000 people every hour....how many Servitors can Asmodeus station at the airport? If the angels use any sense at all, they'll send someone who doesn't have anything that will be a telltale giveaway (like dissonance, or coming straight from San Francisco, or being a Malakite radiating a Need to Kill Demons). I'd say it would be incredible luck for the demons to catch an angel passing by right under their noses. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 18:30:04 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: > There's nothing inherently selfish about how much a given type of business > usually charges for their wares relative to their cost; I don't see why > people have such problems with 100% profit. I used to sell books. I had > remainder items, old books, that literally cost us a buck, and we were > selling them for $5.98. If someone comes in to an angel's store, sees a > hardback copy of the book they're looking for for $6 and is delighted, then > goes home and reads it and becomes a magically better person, the angel's > made a 500% profit _and_ done good at the same time. > Furniture has a profit margin of 300%. Diamonds are easily 200%. [ ... ] You're confusing markup and profit. Diamonds and other gemstones have a standard 200% *markup* (triple keystone;) the retailer sells them for three times what he paid for them. The retailer only makes a *profit* if the money he made on the markup exceeds his other costs (rent, security, sales personnel, et cetera.) If your rent is $10,000 a month, security is included in rent, you pay your employees a total of $5,000 monthly, and you sell purchase diamonds for $100 apiece and sell them for $300 each, you have to sell 75 diamonds just to break even. Depending on how your GM interprets it, either you would have to sell 150 diamonds to make a 100% profit (proceeds - costs = original value of merchandise *2) or you'd have to sell 300 diamonds a month (proceeds = costs + original value of merchandise *2) or you'd make a Rite on every diamond you sold after the first 75 (since you've covered costs and now every diamond makes a 200% profit.) Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:37:52 -0500 From: Kim Foster Subject: IN> Lilim I've problably just blundered in my reading of the Lilim geas ability, but I felt it was more random than seems to be the case. The Need perecived might be anything from trivial to major depending on the roll. They can take penalty to get something more specific. But from some recent comments on the list, it seems that it is much more precise than I've been running it. Have I been accidentlly shafting my Lilim players? Email Address change:Please update to the following: nexus@uky.campuscwix.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 16:41:55 -0800 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc This is showing that I come from a line of business where you sell a large number of low-priced units in a low-overhead environment; I was assuming that overhead was so minimal that it could easily be absorbed by the first few hundred transactions and leave the rest to be a Rite a day for several Trade angels--a used book store with moderately high prices could handle generating Essence for quite a number of angels. Your statistics do validate my point, even if you're quite right that I was all over the place with my terminology. It's not _impossible_ or even unlikely to make 100% profit; it just requires the right business, good management, and a combination of good prices, good service, and reliable ethics. All of which would please Marc. This is rapidly drifting off topic. . . . steve - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Bartley [mailto:ebartley@enteract.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 1999 4:30 PM To: 'in_nomine-l@lists.io.com' Subject: RE: IN> Lilim and Marc On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Steven Feldon (Exchange) wrote: > There's nothing inherently selfish about how much a given type of business > usually charges for their wares relative to their cost; I don't see why > people have such problems with 100% profit. I used to sell books. I had > remainder items, old books, that literally cost us a buck, and we were > selling them for $5.98. If someone comes in to an angel's store, sees a > hardback copy of the book they're looking for for $6 and is delighted, then > goes home and reads it and becomes a magically better person, the angel's > made a 500% profit _and_ done good at the same time. > Furniture has a profit margin of 300%. Diamonds are easily 200%. [ ... ] You're confusing markup and profit. Diamonds and other gemstones have a standard 200% *markup* (triple keystone;) the retailer sells them for three times what he paid for them. The retailer only makes a *profit* if the money he made on the markup exceeds his other costs (rent, security, sales personnel, et cetera.) If your rent is $10,000 a month, security is included in rent, you pay your employees a total of $5,000 monthly, and you sell purchase diamonds for $100 apiece and sell them for $300 each, you have to sell 75 diamonds just to break even. Depending on how your GM interprets it, either you would have to sell 150 diamonds to make a 100% profit (proceeds - costs = original value of merchandise *2) or you'd have to sell 300 diamonds a month (proceeds = costs + original value of merchandise *2) or you'd make a Rite on every diamond you sold after the first 75 (since you've covered costs and now every diamond makes a 200% profit.) Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:08:26 -0600 (CST) From: Benjamin Acosta Subject: IN> Re: The Nature of Evil Ok, I hate to do this but I'm going to have to drag in a fictional character to use as an example for the Destiny/Fate question, to illustrate what I think is being asked. Does anyone remember the Star Trek episode "The Conscience of the King" which had a guy known as Kodos the Executioner? There was a famine on the colony he was governor of and he had half the population executed so that the other half might survive. In the episode he was portrayed as a basically good man who had to make a horrible decision for the good of the colony. It was a pretty monsterous act, but it was unselfish. Would Kodos in In Nomine be considered Hell Fodder who met his fate, an unselfish man who met his destiny (if I remember it right he did ensue the other colonists survive until help came, and taking the emotional pain the decision caused him seems unselfish), or does he get another spin at the wheel? And while were on Star Trek, I have to ask is Captain Kirk a Soldier of Lust or what? He did seduce a lot of alien women after all. :-) Orion Slave Girls and Lilim. Both green. Both desirable. Coincidence or not? Ben Acosta Angel of Neat Ideas ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 00:48:44 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Steven Feldon wrote on 08 March 1999 19:33 >>>The difference between many geasa and agreed upon trades is a rather large >>>one. One is a compulsion, and the other isn't. >> >>Ahh... I see, because you *have* to pay the Lilim back it's obviously evil. >>But if you were able to walk away from the bargain like a normal deal it'd >>be okay. > >In my perception, this is entirely the wrong axis to make the >differentiation on. The Lilim's resonance is evil because you don't know >what you're agreeing to when you accept the fulfillment of your need, but >Trade is inherently good because everything is laid out on the table when >you agree to it. . . With Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're >buying into. With Lilith, you could be asked to do _anything_. That could make the use of geases evil, however it doesn't make them *inherently* evil in the same way that the Word of Cruelty is *inherently* evil, the resonance of a Lilim *can* be used for good and that was the point I was trying to make when comparing a Lilims resonance to the Wrod of Trade. Anyway do you *seriously* believe that "with Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're buying into", why then does it seem to me that Fast-Talk is a favourite skill of servitors of Trade (Remember the "Power Tie" [or something] from LR). Ramesh aka Demon of Fiddling, Balseraph of ???? "First you must learn Fiddling, then you must forget Fiddling. Must you remember to breath for breathing to occur? No. It is the same with Fiddling" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 01:05:41 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Vurt, FotM, the Kitchen Sink Steven Feldon wrote >>> Trade is inherently good because everything is laid out on the table when >>> you agree to it. . . With Marc, you have full knowledge of what you're >>> buying into. With Lilith, you could be asked to do _anything_. >> >>Unfortunately, the people Marc makes deals with all too often forget to >>read the fine print. Many _don't_ have full knowledge of what they're >>buying into, although they could. The same is true of Lilim; "What do I >>have to do for you?" is a perfectly valid question, although it'll often >>be answered with "Oh, just a little favor..." > >Angels of Trade are still _angels_. They don't have to point out the fine >print, he says, rereading the dissonance conditions, He should find that it say that they cannot break their word when they have given it freely but their behavior has >to be selfless. No, not really. Angels don't *have* to act selflessly and those that spend time on earth (tend to) act increasingly less selflessly (until they discover the True Path, the path of Selfishness, oops mind wandering), angels only act selflessly because they want to because they love the Symphony, not because they are programmed to act so (despite what Hell says). >And there's a big difference between forgetting to read the >fine print and literally not having any way to predict what the Lilim is >going to decide to ask you to do. So the stock exchanges (which seems to be little more than gambling) and investments schemes would have nothing to do with Marc then. Ramesh aka Demon of Fiddling, Balseraph of ???? "First you must learn Fiddling, then you must forget Fiddling. Must you remember to breath for breathing to occur? No. It is the same with Fiddling" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:22:27 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Lilim On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Kim Foster wrote: > I've problably just blundered in my reading of the Lilim geas ability, but I > felt it was more random than seems to be the case. The Need perecived might > be anything from trivial to major depending on the roll. They can take > penalty to get something more specific. But from some recent comments on the > list, it seems that it is much more precise than I've been running it. Have > I been accidentlly shafting my Lilim players? It sounds like you're playing it as written. It's a classic house rule, including in my campaign, that Lilim can see several or all of the target's Needs up to the roll indicated (or target number of random level Needs.) Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 18:51:03 -0800 (PST) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: IN> Bright Lilim & Geas conflict On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [snip quotes and hypotheticals] > (Of course, that does assume that Lilim psychology is simply *so* biased > towards fulfilling Geases that their brains just turn off. Though a suffering dissonance is painful, but i think any intelligent Bright would willingly do so in order to dissolve a Geas owed to an Infernal entity; definitely in the case of Demon Princes. in fact, i'd go so far as to say that any Superior of said Bright--no, EVERY Superior in Heaven--would willingly cleanse said Bright of the dissonance she suffered for nullifying that Geas. > Bright has more to lose from dissonance than a dark one -- she can, > after all, Fall again.) from 1-6points of dissonance[1]? yeah, it's painful, but were i a Bright Lilim i'd refuse a Demon Prince any Geas it attempted to have me carry out were i to judge the results to be against the goals of Heaven or the resultant loss of human life too great, and if the DP didn't vessel- kill me itself, i'd willingly vessel-kill myself, suffer Trauma, wake up in Heaven less one Geas, aching with dissonance, and tell my Archangel exactly what happened. to presume that an Archangel would not strip the dissonance from a Bright Lilim for such an event requires one to further suppose the hierarchy of Heaven is hellbent on stupidity. > [But then, I *do* assume that Lilim are inclined to avoid dissonance and > fulfill Geases; my PC slammed her Renegade sister up against a wall and ordinarily, sure, and between Hellborn i don't see a problem with it. it's Brights who would risk/accept dissonance more often here, especially when their former allies and masters come calling to collect old debts. > screamed, "You *****, you put me in Geas-conflict with an Archangel!" > Which wasn't the smartest thing to reveal, but she was in Geas-conflict...] probably not, but it sounds like a bundle of fun. which Archangel, btw? -=|horsefly|=- [1] my rememberance of Lilim dissonance conditions/results isn't 100%. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1138 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.