From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Mar 15 23:29:29 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 XAA28906 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 23:29:28 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id XAA11394 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 23:31:44 -0600 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 23:31:44 -0600 Message-Id: <199903160531.XAA11394@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 #1155 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 15 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1155 In this digest: IN> Geases Re: IN> Corporeal forces Re: IN> Lilith a Human? IN> Set Up Re: IN> Lilith a Human? Re: IN> Set Up Re: IN> Word-Bound Attitudes Re: IN> Set Up IN> FLUFF (RE: Word-Bound Attitudes) Re: IN> Set Up Re: IN> Set Up IN> New Running Gag Re: IN> Set Up IN> Seraph and Truth Re: IN> Set Up Re: IN> Seraph and Truth Re: IN> Seraph and Truth Re: IN> Seraph and Truth Re: IN> Seraph and Truth (Fluffish) IN> Fluff!!! Re: IN> Fluff!!! Re: IN> Seraph and Truth (Fluffy) Re: IN> Fluff!!! Re: IN> Seraph and Truth Re: IN> Seraph and Truth IN> [ADMIN] DEAD THREAD Re: "Casting Call" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 19:48:11 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Geases >>>David, can saints get geased?<<< I don't see why not. (Though it would be hard, given they're all Blessed...) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:01:39 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal forces On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Seth Buntain wrote: > In one of the books, one of Michaels servitors is punished by Dominic by > stripping all of her corporeal forces for x years, and they would be > returned so she could go hunt down the half-demon kid that she had with a > shedite. So that strongly implies that you only need corp forces if you go > to earth. > Angelic player guide maybe? Heaven and Hell. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:58:22 -0500 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Lilith a Human? Stacy Stroud > >Remember that Lilith is the sole remaining pre-Fall human. Even in the IN >cosmology, she and Adam were unique: specially created rather than evolved. >Who's to say they weren't green? According to the midrash, anyway, pre-Fall humans were a thousand feet tall, armor plated, and glowed in the dark. "Like all creatures formed on the six days of creation, Adam came from the hands of the Creator fully and completely developed. He was not like a child, but like a man twenty years of age. The dimensions of his body were gigantic, reaching from heaven to earth, or, what amounts to the same, from east to west..." "...[After eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the] first result was that Adam and Eve became naked. Before, their bodies had been overlaid with a horny skin, and enveloped with the cloud of glory. No sooner had they violated the command given them than the cloud of glory and the horny skin dropped from them, and they stood there in their nakedness, and ashamed." (From Louis Ginzberg's _Legends of the Jews, Vol. 1: From the Creation to Jacob_.) >And since IN borrowed Adam and Eve from Genesis, it's not completely unreasonable >to assume that they were immortal before the Fall -- in which case, Lilith would >have been, too. According to one tale of her origins, Lilith used a record of >celestial secrets given to Adam (a copy of Raziel's book? I forget) to evade >the angels hunting her by calling upon the names of God. "With the help of the Ineffable Name, which she pronounced, Lilith flew away from Adam, and vanished in the air. Adam complained before God that the wife He had given him had deserted him, and God sent forth three angels to capture her. They found her in the Red Sea, and sought to make her go back with the threat that, unless she went, she would lose a hundred of her demon children daily by death. But Lilith preferred this punishment to living with Adam. She takes her revenge by injuring babes -- baby boys during the first night of their life, while baby girls are exposed to her wicked designs until they are twenty days old." AFAICT, Lilith is usually mentioned in myth as a demonic spirit. This doesn't matter much of course -- Lilith debuted in a parody of the Talmudic writers (the Alphabet of Ben-Sira), was promptly taken seriously by readers with no sense of humor and even less standards of evidence, and then was used by bad Romantic poets as an archetypal femme fatale, and finally somehow morphed into a feminist icon in the last few decades. Along the way, of course, everyone involved made up whatever historical references they needed to fit their image of her. As long as you can maintain a straight face, you can use Lilith in any way you want, I think. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 23:22:43 -0300 From: Daniel Kerr Subject: IN> Set Up I'm new to the list and got some doubts that may seem dumb but believe they're making me feel as the most miserable thing on earth once they're the core of an adventure I'm working in. I'd also like to know where are this info once I didn't found them in the IN. 1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? 2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept is it a gea? 3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his celestial form. But what if he does? 4 - Every Lilim get those 9 geas with Lilith or just those who are free?(who don't serve other prince) thanks to all Daniel Kerr ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 21:24:59 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Lilith a Human? At 8:58 PM -0500 3/15/99, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: >As long as you can maintain a straight face, you can use Lilith in any way >you want, I think. > Even as a Guest Host on Later? Man, the possibilities are endless. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | non in-nomine mail to sabre@annotations.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 21:30:30 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Set Up Daniel Kerr wrote: > > I'm new to the list and got some doubts that may seem dumb but believe they're making me feel as the most miserable thing on earth once they're the core of an adventure I'm working in. I'd also like to know where are this info once I didn't found them in the IN. > > 1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? Unless you're a celestial yourself, no; and even if you are, you'll only notice if the other person makes a disturbance or is in celestial form to begin with. (I'd count Songs, but Soldiers can use them; and going celestial, but it makes disturbance, and so falls under the first category. :) An afterthought: If an Attunement or a Resonance is openly used, it's generally a good indication - but they're often _very_ hard to detect. > 2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept is > it a gea? If Lilim A says "I'll do this for you if you'll do this for me", and Person B accepts and A proceeds to carry out her end of the bargain, then A has a Geas-hook on B; she can turn that into a Geas by requesting that he keep his end up. Or so I understand it. Do Lilim need to detect a Need before they can lay a Geas, or can they hook anyone with whom they make a deal? > 3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his > celestial form. But what if he does? He can't. A demon in celestial form is actually "physically" repelled by Divine Tethers. > > 4 - Every Lilim get those 9 geas with Lilith or just those who are free?(who > don't serve other prince) Just the Free Lilim start out that way. > Daniel Kerr - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 02:37:06 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Word-Bound Attitudes David Edelstein wrote on 16 March >>>>In my utterly arrogant opinion, that's nonsense. To say that the person >who holds a Word doesn't *really* hold *all* of the Word devalues the very >idea of having a Word. Especially if it's a Superior who holds it. If >there's an aspect of your Word that you don't control, chances are it's >because that aspect is someone else's Word, and they control all of *it*. >[1]<<< > >That’s incorrect in canon, though. Otherwise, many Superiors must be very >ambiguous beings, and so are most Word-bound celestials. There’s hardly any >Word that’s absolutely good or evil (or selfless or selfish) by itself. I thought many Word bounds *were* ambiguous - the domain of many Words are vague and metaphorical and the Demon of Spam shows that the domain of Words can change and if Words are not vague but fixed how could this be possible? >>>>I don't see the need for there to be the Angel of Good 'X' >and the Demon of Bad 'X'. There's just 'X', and whoever holds that Word >gets to steer it.<<< > >Also incorrect in canon, but it’s an interesting way to run an alternate >campaign. Erm, in canon are angels Good and Demons Bad? If so I really have no Idea of the game I play. If not then the how is the Angel of X, is the angel of Good X? >>>>It's already been shown that Archangels can encompass the destructive, >amoral, violent aspects of their Words.<<< > >Only when "amoral" is a natural part of the Symphony -- elemental forces >are amoral. There’s nothing evil or selfish about hurricanes and >naturally-occurring forest fires, and they are a vital part of the Earth’s >biosystem. If my stange notion that Angels aren't *good* and Demons aren't *evil* then surely AAs can be very morally questionable. And although hurricanes aren't selfish I think stealing can be (not that servitors of the Wind, steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness :-) ). Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:52:47 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> Set Up >I'm new to the list and got some doubts that may seem dumb but believe >they're making me feel as the most miserable thing on earth once they're >the core of an adventure I'm working in. I'd also like to know where are >this info once I didn't found them in the IN. Remember, there are no stupid questions. . . Just stupid Superiors like Saminga. *evil grin* >1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? Certain Resonances can be used in that regard. A Malakim with a Check-Digit of Six can tell if a the target is a Balseraph. Shedim - -cannot- possess Celestial's in vessels. And certain Attunements can as well: An Impudite of Technology can see someone with nine or more essence and assume he's dealing with a member of the Host or Horde. Worst case scenerio: You can always rely on that trusty Two-by-Four. If they don't 'gong' the Symphony, then you might just be dealing with a Celestial. (If you, find yourself going through the day -without- eating, drinking, sleeping or anything except breathing. . . You just might be a Celestial Being. . . ) >2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept >is it a gea? Depending on if she invokes the Geas or not. Typically, if a Lilim does something for someone, it's -never- free. *grin* Your millage may very though, as they say. . . >3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his >celestial form. But what if he does? They die. Horribly. Essentially the 'light of heaven' is too goodie-good for them, and they are force-stripped. The details are in LIBER CASTELLORUM (AKA the Tetherbook). Though, you may wanna check the IN NOMINE Errata pages to see if they added details of that nature. . . *grin* >4 - Every Lilim get those 9 geas with Lilith or just those who are >free?(who don't serve other prince) Just the Free. Though I assume a 'Bound' Lilim (those serving a Prince) can start with any number of Geases (the plural form, btw). I'd leave it up to the individual GM/ST to decide what's 'reasonable' in this case (IE, don't let a player take a gazzilion Geases just to get points for creating The-Ultimate-Character). >thanks to all You're welcome. Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Granduer * http://www.best.com/~lyceum/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:58:48 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: IN> FLUFF (RE: Word-Bound Attitudes) >If my stange notion that Angels aren't *good* and Demons aren't *evil* then >surely AAs can be very morally questionable. And although hurricanes >aren't selfish I think stealing can be (not that servitors of the Wind, >steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness :-) ). Not -only- do you take several points of Dissonance for -outright- lying. . . It just proves what I've been trying to say all along. . . >Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind Join the Dark-Side. *evil grin* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Granduer * http://www.best.com/~lyceum/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 02:55:50 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Set Up Daniel Kerr wrote on 16 March 1999 >I'm new to the list Hi >1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? Yep, Several check this out: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/Tips/perception.html >2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept is it a gea? erm - I should know that but I don't >3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his celestial form. But what if he does? It's in the FAQ at: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/faq The FAQ says: "What happens to a demon in Celestial form that is in a Divine tether? Most of the time, this is impossible because demons in Celestial Form cannot even approach a tether. But it can happen (e.g. a Shedite is knocked unconscious and he resumes Celestial form inside of a tether). A tether is an extension of the realm that produced it, so a Divine tether is, for many practical purposes, a bit of heaven on earth. The demon takes one Dissonance per round until they can flee the tether (easily done most of the time) and will take a Celestial attack that automatically hits. If they roll a '666', the forces of darkness protect them for that round, and if they roll a '111', the demon has the immediate choice of being utterly destroyed or being Redeemed. Only demons that were truly 'wavering' have the second choice at all! And even then it might not work . . . " >4 - Every Lilim get those 9 geas with Lilith or just those who are free?(who don't serve other prince) Just those who choose to be Free at creation. >thanks to all Pleasure Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:05:09 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Set Up Shadowstar wrote: > They die. Horribly. Essentially the 'light of heaven' is too > goodie-good for them, and they are force-stripped. The details are in > LIBER CASTELLORUM (AKA the Tetherbook). Though, you may wanna check the IN > NOMINE Errata pages to see if they added details of that nature. . . *grin* Eek. Well, brand me with an L... I don't have Castellorum, so I was operating on the assumption that they really, truly couldn't enter a Tether. :) - -EDG who is really getting sick of the smell of pot smoke on his hall. - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:08:44 -0700 (MST) From: Jason Corley Subject: IN> New Running Gag A man had become an Ethereal "echo chamber" when his dream-self was accidentally really-killed in the Marches, making him appear as whatever the viewer most highly prized and trusted - to the angelic PCs, of course, this was God. So, Elohim of Michael, in hawk vessel form, flies over downtown LA when suddenly he notices God, in all His glory, standing on a platform, surrounded by an adoring crowd. Quickly he finds a place to shift back and gets on a cell phone to the rest of the group. The following transpired without my interference: ELOHIM OF MIKE: You gotta get down here! OFANIM OF MARC: What? Why? ELOHIM OF MIKE: God's down here!! OFANIM OF MARC: What? God? MALAKIM OF ELI (riding in car w/Ofanim, no phone): What? ELOHIM OF MIKE: Yeah, God's here! OFAMIN OF MARC: It's really God? ELOHIM OF MIKE (to GM): It's really God? GM: It's really God. ELOHIM OF MIKE (in phone): It's really God! OFAMIN OF MARC: Hang on. (to Malakim) God is downtown! MALAKIM OF ELI: What? God is downtown? OFAMIN OF MARC: God is downtown! (GM goes to refill coffee. Ofanim continues, into phone) Are you sure it's Him? ELOHIM OF MIKE: Yeah, I'm sure! It's definitely Him! MALAKIM OF ELI: Is he sure it's Him? OFANIM OF MARC: Hang on. (to Malakim) He's sure it's Him! (into phone) Does He do that...y'know...does He do that *thing* God does? Y'know, that sort of annoying little... ELOHIM OF MIKE: Yeah, that sort of nervous tic, except kind of... OFAMIN OF MARC: Yeah, sort of...that *thing* He does... (GM returns with cup of coffee.) ELOHIM OF MIKE: Just a minute, let me check. (To GM) Does he do that *thing* God does? GM: Oh, definitely. ELOHIM OF MIKE (into phone): Yeah! He does that *thing*. OFANIM OF MARC: Whoa. MALAKIM OF ELI: Does he do that thing God does? OFANIM OF MARC: Hang on. (to Malakim) Yeah! Y'know, that sort of... MALAKIM OF ELI: Yeah, that kind of...he does that! OFANIM OF MARC: Yeah! (to phone) We're on our way. - -------------------------- So of course all of the NPC angels he tells the story to immediately ask about 'that thing'... Jason coffee out the nose, of course ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:17:29 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Set Up At 11:22 PM -0300 3/15/99, Daniel Kerr wrote: >1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? Check out http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/Tips/perception.html >2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept is it >a geas? If you promise to help her, and she exerts her Will for a round, then yes -- see the _Infernal Player's Guide_, enhanced resonance section. >3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his >celestial form. But what if he does? Check out the _Liber Castellorum_ -- the short form is, he starts taking Soul Hits from the Light of Heaven. (Also check out the errata for _Heaven & Hell_ -- http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/errata .) >4 - Every Lilim get those 9 geas with Lilith or just those who are free?(who >don't serve other prince) Free Lilim take their 9 Geases. One who chooses to bind immediately upon her creation goes, ungeased, to her new Prince -- who then pays Lilith for her. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 03:16:40 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: IN> Seraph and Truth Shadowstar wrote on 16 March 1999 > > >>If my stange notion that Angels aren't *good* and Demons aren't *evil* then >>surely AAs can be very morally questionable. And although hurricanes >>aren't selfish I think stealing can be (not that servitors of the Wind, >>steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness :-) ). > > Not -only- do you take several points of Dissonance for -outright- >lying. . . It just proves what I've been trying to say all along. . . On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? Because you are telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) different. Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind "No, really. Would I lie to you?" :-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:24:08 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Set Up At 9:30 PM -0500 3/15/99, EDG wrote: >Daniel Kerr wrote: >> >> I'm new to the list and got some doubts that may seem dumb but believe they're making me feel as the most miserable thing on earth once they're the core of an adventure I'm working in. I'd also like to know where are this info once I didn't found them in the IN. >> >> 1 - Is there any way of knowing a person is a celestial? > >Unless you're a celestial yourself, no; and even if you are, you'll only >notice if the other person makes a disturbance or is in celestial form >to begin with. (I'd count Songs, but Soldiers can use them; and going >celestial, but it makes disturbance, and so falls under the first >category. :) > >An afterthought: If an Attunement or a Resonance is openly used, it's >generally a good indication - but they're often _very_ hard to detect. > >> 2 - If a Lilim say: "I can do this if you help me". and the other accept is > it a gea? > >If Lilim A says "I'll do this for you if you'll do this for me", and >Person B accepts and A proceeds to carry out her end of the bargain, >then A has a Geas-hook on B; she can turn that into a Geas by requesting >that he keep his end up. Or so I understand it. Actually, if she says, "Promise me you'll do this," and you do, of your own free will, then you owe her a *hard* Geas, not just a hook. And then she may or may not do what she said she would. (Many Lilim will; many will be amused if they can scam someone...) >Do Lilim need to detect a Need before they can lay a Geas, or can they >hook anyone with whom they make a deal? They have to fulfill a Need which they have seen with their resonance to hook someone. (And in canon, they don't have to make a bargain with someone -- they just have to fulfill the Need, and the GM may rule that the person has to *know* they did it.) They can *Geas* anyone who they make a deal with -- see the IPG. >> 3 - It's said in the IN that demon's can't enter a divine theter in his > >>celestial form. But what if he does? > >He can't. A demon in celestial form is actually "physically" repelled >by Divine Tethers. No -- he gets fried by the Light of Heaven, and will quickly die if he goes inside it. The FAQ needs to be fixed. (Karakash!! The FAQ needs to be fixed!) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:30:43 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth At 3:16 AM +0000 3/16/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >Shadowstar wrote on 16 March 1999 > >> >> >>>If my stange notion that Angels aren't *good* and Demons aren't *evil* >then >>>surely AAs can be very morally questionable. And although hurricanes >>>aren't selfish I think stealing can be (not that servitors of the Wind, >>>steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness :-) ). >> >> Not -only- do you take several points of Dissonance for -outright- >>lying. . . It just proves what I've been trying to say all along. . . > >On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? Bingo. You can't say what is not. > Because you are >telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) >different. Unless they *say* it's sarcasm before or immediately after, they can't do it, and even then, they're going to be wincing to have the vile, fetid taste of false words on their tongue. And they *certainly* can't do it in text without enclosing it in tags. Heck, they have trouble with idioms... (My Seraph tends to say, "As some say, 'Busted.'" or other phrasings that make it obvious he's quoting *other* people's idioms.) Nana Yaw Ofori, IIRC, has a Seraph who says things like, "Step on it! Idiom!" Dissonance, baby, dissonance. 2 points, one for saying Servitors of the Wind don't steal, and another for saying they're nothing but the epitome of Lawfulness. Make your dissonance roll. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:33:39 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? Because you are > telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) > different. IMO, if the Seraph speaks untruth to illustrate a point (a fable or sarcasm), and a person listening to said untruth from beginning to end stands a chance of not realizing that the Seraph is speaking untruth, the Seraph takes dissonance for speaking the untruth. Untruth. Word of the day, methinks. > Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind > "No, really. Would I lie to you?" :-) Hee hee. Balseraph of Kronos masquerading as a Seraph? - -EDG Oo. Can a Balseraph of Kronos fool Archangels with their Attunement? How about the Seraphim Council? (I'm thinking of a Liar of Fate with an Angelic Word.. would an Angelic Word bind properly to a demon? How 'bout a Bright?) - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 04:18:56 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth McCoy To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: 16 March 1999 03:33 Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth >At 3:16 AM +0000 3/16/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >>Shadowstar wrote on 16 March 1999 >> >>> >>> >>>>If my stange notion that Angels aren't *good* and Demons aren't *evil* >>then >>>>surely AAs can be very morally questionable. And although hurricanes >>>>aren't selfish I think stealing can be (not that servitors of the Wind, >>>>steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness :-) ). >>> >>> Not -only- do you take several points of Dissonance for -outright- >>>lying. . . It just proves what I've been trying to say all along. . . >> >>On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? > >Bingo. You can't say what is not. I meant "note" not "not". (Damn Nitpicking! :-) ) >> Because you are >>telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) >>different. > >Unless they *say* it's sarcasm before or immediately after, they >can't do it, and even then, they're going to be wincing to have the >vile, fetid taste of false words on their tongue. And they *certainly* >can't do it in text without enclosing it in tags. But it's obvious from the context. If a Seraph uses a sarcastic tone they are (albeit implicitly) saying "I am being sarcastic", I phrased my sentence in a sarcastic manner and therefore (implicitly) said "I am being sarcastic". >Heck, they have trouble with idioms... (My Seraph tends to say, "As some >say, 'Busted.'" or other phrasings that make it obvious he's quoting >*other* people's idioms.) Nana Yaw Ofori, IIRC, has a Seraph who >says things like, "Step on it! Idiom!" Words alone do not make statements, intent and phrasing are also important. Seraphs should only get dissonance if the reality they describe with their intent does not fit the reality they believe in. Otherwise tongue-tied or inexact Seraphs would Fall because they making lots of incorrect statements (which they probably thought were true). How many Seraphs have fallen due to the Word of Nitpicking? >Dissonance, baby, dissonance. 2 points, one for saying Servitors >of the Wind don't steal, and another for saying they're nothing >but the epitome of Lawfulness. Make your dissonance roll. If I were to get dissonance I would only get 1 point since the statement "not that servitors of the Wind, steal things or are anything but the epitome of Lawfulness" is a single statement and therefore only a single lie. Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind "No, really! Would I lie to you?" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 04:20:25 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth (Fluffish) EDG wrote on 16 March 1999: >Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > >> On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? Because you are >> telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) >> different. > >IMO, if the Seraph speaks untruth to illustrate a point (a fable or >sarcasm), and a person listening to said untruth from beginning to end >stands a chance of not realizing that the Seraph is speaking untruth, >the Seraph takes dissonance for speaking the untruth. Right that's it! I'm not talking to any more blondes, to much chance of getting dissonance!! But seriously a Seraph shouldn't be punished because the person they are talking to is dumb, they are speaking Truth and so are not going against their nature. The statement the Seraph makes is true - the dumb person just doesn't understand Truth! If a Seraph told a Fable in the middle of a Forest and were no dumb people to hear them would they get a point of dissonance? :-) >Untruth. Word of the day, methinks. I suppose sarcasm is the lowest form of Truth :-) >> Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind >> "No, really. Would I lie to you?" :-) > >Hee hee. Balseraph of Kronos masquerading as a Seraph? Has Everyone got their own theory now? >EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination >anthoch@earlham.edu >"I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin That wouldn't include me would it? Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind "No, Really! Would I lie to you?" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:02:52 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: IN> Fluff!!! I haven't been on the list as long as some, so I don't know if this really fluffy topic has been addressed yet... I was thinking about In Nomine one day and suddenly remembered the movie Oh, God! with the late George Burns. It occurred to me that George Burns, were he still with us, would be a good choice to play Yves in In Nomine: The Movie. A friendly, good humored, elderly man. I then began to wonder who would be good choices to play the other Superiors. The only ones I could come up with off the bat were James Earl Jones as the Voice of God. "Dominic!!! Leave Michael alone!!!" and maybe Miranda Richardson as Beleth. A friend of mine suggested Tommy Lee Jones as Vapula, which struck me as weird but possible. I decided I would throw the floor open. Let's play Casting Call, everyone! Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:15:26 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Fluff!!! Definitely fluff... and I think "IN: the Movie" has been done before; I'm pretty sure it's referred to in the info file that comes with the list. :) "(As a note: If you want to know about Roles, check the digests. That's been asked a lot, but I don't think it's in the FAQ yet. Also, we've already been through "What is good In Nomine Music" and "In Nomine Movie Casting." At least 3 times. Check the digests, don't start it *again*....)" Yep. Sorry, Brian. :) - -EDG - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:22:34 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth (Fluffy) Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > Right that's it! I'm not talking to any more blondes, to much chance of > getting dissonance!! See the Hypothetical Witness below. > But seriously a Seraph shouldn't be punished because the person they are > talking to is dumb, they are speaking Truth and so are not going against > their nature. The statement the Seraph makes is true - the dumb person > just doesn't understand Truth! Not true! Assuming the Seraph is being sarcastic without disclaiming it at all except his tone of voice, he is speaking untruth - tone of voice doesn't make a sentence true, phrasing does. Now, if the Seraph disclaims it - "That was sarcasm." - even if the listener doesn't get the drift, said Seraph shouldn't take dissonance - UNLESS the Seraph waited until the dissonance hit to say it. As a reference, I have said things (such as claiming that Marcus Antony was a castrati) in a completely sarcastic tone and convinced others of the truth of what I was saying. Not until I told them I was lying through my teeth did they have any inkling that what I said wasn't Absolute Truth. > If a Seraph told a Fable in the middle of a Forest and were no dumb people > to hear them would they get a point of dissonance? :-) It's the classic Hypothetical Witness problem from Mage: the Ascension. How can you be sure no one's hearing you? And even if you're sure - absolutely sure - that no one is, what if someone were? > I suppose sarcasm is the lowest form of Truth :-) No - sarcasm is untruth. The implications of sarcasm are truth, and not everyone grasps implications. > Has Everyone got their own theory now? It just sounded like that kind of character. :) > That wouldn't include me would it? It was actually Caitlin, Calabite of Fire, speaking about newly-Redeemed Joseph, Seraph of Creation. - -EDG was that clear? - -- EDG, Mercurian of Jean, Angel of Information Dissemination anthoch@earlham.edu "I never trust anybody who can't lie." - Caitlin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:18:25 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Fluff!!! In a message dated 3/15/99 11:17:16 PM Central Standard Time, anthoch@earlham.edu writes: > Definitely fluff... and I think "IN: the Movie" has been done before; > I'm pretty sure it's referred to in the info file that comes with the > list. :) Oh well. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:19:37 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth At 10:33 PM -0500 3/15/99, EDG wrote: > Oo. Can a Balseraph of Kronos fool Archangels with their Attunement? Not in celestal form, he can't... >How about the Seraphim Council? (I'm thinking of a Liar of Fate with >an Angelic Word.. No way. >would an Angelic Word bind properly to a demon? Somehow, I doubt the Seraphim Council's tried it. If they did, the GM could have fun with the pyrotechnics. >How 'bout a Bright?) I see no problem with this. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:27:54 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth At 4:18 AM +0000 3/16/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Elizabeth McCoy >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: 16 March 1999 03:33 >Subject: Re: IN> Seraph and Truth >>At 3:16 AM +0000 3/16/99, Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >>>Shadowstar wrote on 16 March 1999 >>>On a serious not can Seraphs use sarcasm if it's obvious? >> >>Bingo. You can't say what is not. > >I meant "note" not "not". (Damn Nitpicking! :-) ) Heh. >>> Because you are >>>telling the truth but you are just using words which sound (drastically) >>>different. >> >>Unless they *say* it's sarcasm before or immediately after, they >>can't do it, and even then, they're going to be wincing to have the >>vile, fetid taste of false words on their tongue. And they *certainly* >>can't do it in text without enclosing it in tags. > >But it's obvious from the context. Not necessarily. It's false. It's words which don't mean what they sound like. It's bad enough that humans use words that don't mean what they sound like, but it's at a *MINIMUM* borderline-dissonant for a Seraph to do it. Besides, you did it in text, and didn't include sarcasm-tags, and it wasn't immediately obvious. Take the dissonance like a snake! > If a Seraph uses a sarcastic tone they >are (albeit implicitly) saying "I am being sarcastic", I phrased my >sentence in a sarcastic manner and therefore (implicitly) said "I am being >sarcastic". Nope. In *HEAVEN*, they can do this, but only because the notes they sing are laden with Sarcasm and are *immediately* obvious as "I sing a Truth obliquely." But most Seraphim restrict themselves to sarcastic questions -- "And did you *enjoy* your little jaunt to Hell, Mazpatiel? Did you enjoy hating the demons there?" Or the ever popular, "Oh. *Indeed*." >>Heck, they have trouble with idioms... (My Seraph tends to say, "As some >>say, 'Busted.'" or other phrasings that make it obvious he's quoting >>*other* people's idioms.) Nana Yaw Ofori, IIRC, has a Seraph who >>says things like, "Step on it! Idiom!" > >Words alone do not make statements, intent and phrasing are also important. Oh, certainly. But a Seraph is not a human. They are not attuned to nuances, they are attuned to TRUTH. A Seraph of the Wind has a greater ability to use Fast-Talk, but only by telling partial truths. Sarcasm is still a vile, vile thing, because it is a wrongness. And they still get dissonance for stuff in text that isn't labled. >Seraphs should only get dissonance if the reality they describe with their >intent does not fit the reality they believe in. Otherwise tongue-tied or >inexact Seraphs would Fall because they making lots of incorrect statements >(which they probably thought were true). An inexact Seraph is one who brushes his teeth a lot, for the inadvertant falsehoods that have passed his lips. He also corrects himself a lot and frequently complains about the imprecision of English. An inexact Seraph who does not correct himself is a dissonant Seraph, or at least a very neurotic one. > How many Seraphs have fallen due to the Word of Nitpicking? Many, because the essence of a Seraph is Truth, and the further they slip from that, into idiom or slang, the more likely they are to discover they have carelessly said something that is not -- but should be . . . >>Dissonance, baby, dissonance. 2 points, one for saying Servitors >>of the Wind don't steal, and another for saying they're nothing >>but the epitome of Lawfulness. Make your dissonance roll. > >If I were to get dissonance I would only get 1 point since the statement >"not that servitors of the Wind, steal things or are anything but the >epitome of Lawfulness" is a single statement and therefore only a single >lie. Nope, it's an "or" clause. It's two statements, two *concepts*, connected by a conjunction. 2 dissonance and English classes. >Ramesh aka Angel of Fiddling, Seraph of the Wind >"No, really! Would I lie to you?" Obviously... - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:31:14 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] DEAD THREAD Re: "Casting Call" At 12:02 AM -0500 3/16/99, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: > I haven't been on the list as long as some, so I don't know if this really >fluffy topic has been addressed yet... >[...] > I decided I would throw the floor open. Let's play Casting Call, everyone! Read the blessed Info message you got when you subscribed and let's *************NOT!************* In other words, that topic comes up, wastes a lot of bandwidth, and bores 75% of the list silly 1 hour into it. If you want to compile a list of characters/actors and put it on *YOUR* web-page, feel free, BUT KEEP IT OFF THE LIST, BLESSIT! - --Beth, DJINN List Admin who has about a -10 reaction to anyone suggesting this particular spammage of the list. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1155 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.