From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Nov 6 15:03:47 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03220 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:03:46 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id PAA14882 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:02:09 -0600 Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:02:09 -0600 Message-Id: <200011062102.PAA14882@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 #1909 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, November 6 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1909 In this digest: Re: IN> Jordi's ire (was STUFF!) Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? Re: IN> Michael against Heaven Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? Re: IN> Animal Cruelty IN> Fwd: Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1899 IN> Sociology and Jordi IN> Angels from Outer Space IN> Uncertainty Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... IN> Word Question IN> Blandine: Lean, Mean Fighting Machine. OK, not "Mean". Re: IN> So..... IN> Just when you thought it was safe to go back to the Digest... IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Re: IN> Word Question Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Oh, dear LORD... (Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials...) IN> [ADMIN] No political rants Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants Re: IN> Michael's Trials Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 06:33:00 -0500 From: "Andrew Stoner" Subject: Re: IN> Jordi's ire (was STUFF!) > Maybe I should inflict Bunnies and Burrows on 'em. Three words: In Nomine Cunicularum (In the name of the Bunnies...) - --Stoner (Not sure if he conjugated Cuniculum correctly) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 08:21:33 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? At 11:20 PM -0500 11/5/00, Charles Phipps wrote: >Offers: Laurence . o O (How did this get to the corporeal realms, and who are these writers who signed up? Role-playing games? Wasn't there some flap about them and sorcer-- Oh. They list discussions of that misconception as a dinner topic. Um...) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 08:13:07 -0500 From: "Andrew Stoner" Subject: Re: IN> Michael against Heaven > Sorry, that's more properly pronounced... > > "AIR-BOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRNNNNNNNNEEEEEE!!!!" "All the way!" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 07:18:15 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elizabeth McCoy" To: Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 7:21 AM Subject: Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? > At 11:20 PM -0500 11/5/00, Charles Phipps wrote: > >Offers: > > Laurence . o O (How did this get to the corporeal realms, and who > are these writers who signed up? Role-playing games? Wasn't there > some flap about them and sorcer-- Oh. They list discussions of that > misconception as a dinner topic. Um...) What? Archangel Beth isn't trying to point out that keeping lists is a clear responsibility of the word of Archives, ergo it should be her responsibility to maintain custody of the sign-up lists and record the names of all the signees? *Strictly* in an impartial manner, of course. *snigger* - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 08:24:43 -0500 From: "Andrew Stoner" Subject: Re: IN> Animal Cruelty > Similarly, this is why so many people attacked by sharks are able to > escape (minus a limb); sharks usually take a bite out of you and then > swim around waiting for you to bleed to death. There is also the theory that sharks go "Bleargh, this isn't FOOD" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 09:09:53 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1899 >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\bsubscribe\b/i at line 1 >Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:06:24 -0800 >From: James Walker >Subject: Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1899 > >>I s u b scribe to the Guy Clothing Philosophy: Every shirt I have must go >>with every pair of pants I have. The only exceptions to this rule are >>suits. Therefore, when I get up in the morning, I can reach into the >>closet while half-asleep, pull something on, and be assured that whatever >>I'm wearing will match. >> >>- -- Casca >Better yet, go mono-chrome. >In Nomine content? Lots. >What do you think negative charisma is? If you are in a different body >type, all of your habits, skills and body language will be wrong. Here we >have an effect linked to gender; imagine actually using the opposite >approach to clothing. Height is another biggie; short people can get away >with things tall people can't (guilty!) and it does show in our speech >patterns and body language. Colour still does weird things to peoples' >expectations. Professions always will. >Think of the roleplaying potential. >My Malakite has been a British merchant banker for the last 40 years; Marc >wants him to become a latino bookie. >My Lilim has been a high class French prostitute and is now a substitute >school teacher in a small religious school. >My Ofanite is normally a Austrian cavalry officer - now he delivers pizza. >--James > >I stared into the Abyss, and the Abyss blinked first......... > > (with apologies to Nietzche) > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 06:26:02 -0800 From: tcp@zoomnet.net Subject: IN> Sociology and Jordi My sociology teacher ironically believes that all animals are lacking instinct. That what we refer to it is merely learned behavior or observation. I wonder how THIS would effect Jordi's write up. - -Charlemagne - ----- Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html ) The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 09:40:51 -0600 (CST) From: Benjamin Acosta Subject: IN> Angels from Outer Space Found this story on rec.arts.sf.fandom. I guess it gives credence to everyone who says Elohim are Greys. But if the first humans were clones, who donated the original material? Mecurians? "Created by advanced science" all but points the finger at Jean. No wonder he's annoyed by humanity. We aren't living up to his design specs :-) Ben, Elohite of Eli Angel of Neat Ideas Humanity, what a neat idea. http://www.foxnews.com/science/101800/clone.sml # # Religious Sect Vows to Honor Alien Forebears By Cloning Humans # Thursday, October 19, 2000 By Adam Pasick # # # NEW YORK - A secretive, well-funded religious group from Quebec has # announced plans to clone a human being, just as the first humans were # cloned by a race of aliens long ago. # # At least that's the belief of the Raelians, a sect founded by a French # race-car driver and former sportswriter who now calls himself Rael. # # He was told by an alien visitor in 1973 that an extraterrestrial race # called the Elohim created humans thousands of years ago, and have # maintained contact with us ever since through messengers that include # Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed. # # "We believe we've been created by beings from space, with very advanced # science," said Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, science director for Clonaid, # a company set up by the Raelians to sell cloning services to homosexual # couples and parents whose children have died, among others. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 09:05:52 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Uncertainty I'm a little unsure about whether or not to expand on the IN/Paranoia crossover I posted a while back. _Not_ because I don't think anybody else wants to read it, or because I didn't enjoy doing the first bits. No, what's worrying me are, well, the legal aspects. AFAIK, there's a lawsuit going on about the intellectual property, and I don't know enough about the appropriate laws to be certain that I'm not violating anything from semi-publicly showing off this stuff. If there was a clear possessor of the rights, I'd just ask permission, but since that's the issue, well... (rueful smile) If anyone with some RW experience in sort of thing could email me with some info, or even a hint where I can find it on my own, I'd appreciate it mucho. Moe ===== In Nomine stuff: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Everything else (not that there is, right now): http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/main.html Last updated 9/5/00 (this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 10:43:46 -0700 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... > Maybe it's just that I can't get my brain around the concept of the Word of > Freedom having a rigid stricture of behavior that's punishable on pain of > dissonance... If Lilith were an Archangel, you'd be right. But she is Lilith, the Demon Princess of Freedom. Her word is a demonic one, not an angelic one. In AD&D2 terms, Lilith represents a free world... filled with chaotic evil individuals. You can do *anything* you want, if you're strong enough to do it. She is *not* about freeing the oppressed. She is about anarchy. She doesn't fight for rights. She fights to overturn anti-trust laws. She represents teachers who won't stop bullies, because "you shouldn't tell folks what to do." She loves credit cards -- the more the merrier! You're free to pay off one with the other, if you want. And she's *all* about fine print. I mean, you *chose* to sign on the dotted line. It was your decision, which you were free to make... Get your mind around that. Say Freedom with a smile. > Chuckg Ben ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 12:05:06 -0600 From: "Cthulhu" Subject: IN> Word Question Little question regarding Words here, brought up by something I'm working on. (kinda wondering if there's any cannon on it either, Beth. Not that I really n*** to know or anything...) How securely is a Word bound to the celestial that holds it? Obviously pretty closely, since it controls the power and very existance of the said being, but I mean in terms of removability. Say a powerful demon had been in Limbo for a Really Long Time. Now this fiend has a powerful Word, and it's Prince kinda wants access to it (the Word). The demon can't be retrieved from Limbo, so the Superior decides to sponsor another demon for the Word, and calls up the Darkest of Dark Lords for the ceremony. What happens? To further complicate the matter, what happens to Words held in this situation (or any situation) when the said Superior is destroyed/redeemed/whatever? There were demons holding Words of Death and Gluttony long before Saminga or Haagenti came to power. What happened to these when the Word fell into the jurisdiction of another Prince? And what if the said Servitor was once again... unavailable? /=- Cthulhu 8= =- \=- (mmm. I'm not sure this Cthulhu smiley works. damn) _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 10:02:45 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Blandine: Lean, Mean Fighting Machine. OK, not "Mean". Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 18:18:40 -0800 From: James Walker Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1906 >>I won't even begin to touch on the insanity of trying >>to jump someone on her own turf (Blandine) >Yep. After all, if Moe cannot think of a winning >strategy, clearly there isn't one. Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. I'm nowhere near infallible (pardon the pun): somebody out there could probably come up with a workable plan to take out the AA of Dreams. The only question is, is it _really_ worth the casualties you're going to take (including, perhaps, your own) in the process? If you're going to look at amounts of sheer bada**ness, Blandine's in the top 5. Maybe the top 3. 20,000 years of relentless war in a battlefield where nothing stays the same from second to second will do that to your abilities.* YMMV. Moe *It's a miracle that the poor AA can still smile. :) ===== In Nomine stuff: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Everything else (not that there is, right now): http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/main.html Last updated 9/5/00 (this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:07:30 -0500 (EST) From: ydobyns@princeton.edu Subject: Re: IN> So..... On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Charles Glasgow wrote: [...] > Mmmmmm.... no, it *isn't* any more fun when the giving and receiving ends > are switched. You wonder why Habbalites are always smiling. That's not a smile, it's a sneer of rage and contempt, distorted by the scars and piercings. You couldn't tell? York Dobyns ydobyns@princeton.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 10:10:54 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Just when you thought it was safe to go back to the Digest... Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 02:50:32 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Animal Cruelty >Similarly, this is why so many people attacked by >sharks are able to escape (minus a limb); sharks >usually take a bite out of you and then swim around >waiting for you to bleed to death. Really? I thought that the reason why was because sharks actually don't like the taste of human. Makes sense to me: _I_ don't like the taste of most seafood. IN Content, IN Content... Hah! Got one. (Appropriate Choir) Angel of Sharks went Outcast a while back. Actually, he went Remnant, but that's not important right now. Alas, he's been found... by Servitors of the Media. In its fuzzy state (and truly large shark vessel), it's kinda suggestible. The Media's keeping it fed while they make sure the cameras are all set up for the "tragic rampaging monster shark frenzy" that's gonna happen Real Soon Now to a beach resort near you. The real trick is to get the angels to notice that the shark's a celestial, but not the fact that it's a Remnant. With any luck, the Host might even think that the entire mess was sanctioned by Jordi... ...but as long as the pics are dyn-o-mite, baby, who cares? :) ===== In Nomine stuff: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Everything else (not that there is, right now): http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/main.html Last updated 9/5/00 (this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 22:27:38 -0800 From: "Glenn Brown" Subject: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? I hope all of the American members of this list will take the time to vote tomorrow. I'm not an American, but speaking as someone viewing it from the outside, I think this election is very important. And at the risk of getting some flames back, I think, IMHO, that Bush displays some remarkably Balseraph-like characteristics. He's been very successful in turning some of Gore's greatest accomplishments against him. For instance, he's persuaded a large part of the American public that Gore is a liar. One way he's done this is to falsely claim over and over again that Gore claimed to have "invented the internet." But Gore never did say he'd invented the internet. What Gore said was that, as a member of Congress, he'd taken the initiative to establish the internet. Gore's phrasing of this was clumsy, but it was basically true. He did recognize the importance of the internet long before most other politicians. He did work to get laws written that would help promote the growth of the internet. As Vice President, he did push to get US government agencies to recognise the importance of using the internet. Gore's work in promoting the use of the internet is one of the most impressive accomplishments of his career. The foresight he displayed in recognising the importance of the internet before it became obvious to everyone is a major reason to think he might make a good President. By helping to accelerate the development of the internet, I think he performed a greater service to his country than anything Bush has ever done. Yet Gore cannot even hint at any of this, because Bush, with a lot of help from the Media, has managed to make "Gore and the Internet" a national joke. Bush seems to me to be a remarkably successful hypocrite. The fact that he now takes credit for the passage of Texas laws which he fought against as hard as he could as Governor is really incredible. As is the fact that he's managed to persuade a large part of the American electorate that he would make a good "education President", despite the fact that he's never bothered to acquire a decent education himself. I don't think Bush is necessarily as dumb as some people say, but he seems remarkably uncurious about learning many of the things he'd need to know to function as President. Did Bush *really* not know that Social Security is a Federal program? If he did, why did he accuse Gore of wanting to run Social Security "like a Federal program"? It's harder to picture Gore as a celestial, but given all the talk about how robotic he is, and how he doesn't quite understand how to interact with humans, might he be an Elohite who hasn't spent enough time learning how to socialise with humanity? He's spent so much time studying the details of arms control and the depletion of the ozone layer that he hasn't had time to quite figure out how to use the emote skill. I suppose Nader might make a good Habbalite of Factions, but perhaps I'd better stop before the flames become *too* intense. I wish you Americans good luck in selecting your next President. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 13:28:31 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Word Question At 12:05 PM -0600 11/6/00, Cthulhu wrote: > >Say a powerful demon had been in Limbo for a Really Long Time. Now this >fiend has a powerful Word, and it's Prince kinda wants access to it (the >Word). The demon can't be retrieved from Limbo, so the Superior decides to >sponsor another demon for the Word, and calls up the Darkest of Dark Lords >for the ceremony. What happens? This actually came up in the Game Master's Pack adventure, when Alaemon was not only the Wordbound Demon of Secrets but the Prince of Secrets, while Gebbeleth was unavailable and *also* the Prince of Secrets. IOW... Lucifer can choose to bind more than one demon to the same Word without the last one losing it, explicitly in situations like this one. >To further complicate the matter, what happens to Words held in this >situation (or any situation) when the said Superior is >destroyed/redeemed/whatever? When the Word goes vacant, it's vacant. If someone new takes it, it's no longer vacant. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 11:36:14 -0700 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Uh. I vote that this thread be removed. There's maybe a handful of people who are objective enough to treat this right, especially a day before the election. Ben (I ain't touchin' it.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 18:40:47 GMT From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Oh, dear LORD... (Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials...) >From: "Glenn Brown" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: >Subject: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would >they be? >Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 22:27:38 -0800 >I hope all of the American members of this list will take the time to vote >tomorrow. I'm not an American, but speaking as someone viewing it from the >outside, I think this election is very important. >And at the risk of getting some flames back, I think, IMHO, that Bush >displays some remarkably Balseraph-like characteristics [snip standard Democratic political ad dressed up in IN-lens] Look, I'm busy arguing politics on several separate message forums right now as we speak, *BUT*... ... I don't wanna do it in *here*. And any substantive response to the points made in your post must, almost *inevitably*, delve into rehashing the same old Bush-vs-Gore arguments going on all over the 'Net if they want to address the points you made at all. Nope, sorry, ain't bitin' at it. So far, the IN list has been remarkably successful at remaining an election-free zone and I'd like that pattern to continue. Just my vote. - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:24:15 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants At 11:36 AM -0700 11/6/00, ben wrote: >Uh. >I vote that this thread be removed. There's maybe a handful of people who >are objective enough to treat this right, especially a day before the >election. > >Ben (I ain't touchin' it.) Wise. Very wise. Any political replies, flames or otherwise, need to go to the originator of the thread and NOT THIS LIST. (The only exception is if there is a full-blown, QUARK-code perfect, perfectly formatted (NOT HTML), point-balanced, and spell-checked character writeup of a candidate (or other politician) of your choice. I'm talking real work here, not just cheap shots. Anyone can call a politician a Balseraph or whatever; making a 9-Force character with a Role: Politician implies some actual careful accounting.) (And my opinion on the election is already posted to .pyramid. I'm not repeating it.) - --Beth, List Admin. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:20:54 -0500 From: Jason Schneiderman Subject: Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants >(The only exception is if there is a full-blown, QUARK-code perfect, >perfectly formatted (NOT HTML), point-balanced, and spell-checked >character writeup of a candidate (or other politician) of your choice. >I'm talking real work here, not just cheap shots. Anyone can call a >politician a Balseraph or whatever; making a 9-Force character with >a Role: Politician implies some actual careful accounting.) You know... a lesser man or woman than myself might call that a dare... Jason ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:10:27 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? At 11:36 AM -0700 11/6/00, ben wrote: >Uh. > >I vote that this thread be removed. There's maybe a handful of people who >are objective enough to treat this right, especially a day before the >election. The only way to do it appropriately is to simplely list opinions of appropriate Choirs and Bands both for all candidates, without judgement. IMO, for example: Angelic: Smithers (Mercurian), Burns (Cherub), Bart (Ofanite), Lisa (Seraph) Demonic: Smithers (Djinn), Burns (Balseraph), Bart (Habbilite), Lisa (Lilim) No judgements laid or allowed, both sides represented. That being said... no way in Hell will I commit to the real candidates on this. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:36:42 -0500 (EST) From: ydobyns@princeton.edu Subject: Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [...] > (The only exception is if there is a full-blown, QUARK-code perfect, > perfectly formatted (NOT HTML), point-balanced, and spell-checked > character writeup of a candidate (or other politician) of your choice. > I'm talking real work here, not just cheap shots. Anyone can call a > politician a Balseraph or whatever; making a 9-Force character with > a Role: Politician implies some actual careful accounting.) Just having a Status/6 Role (which requires that the Role be Level 6 as well) eats 18 points. I think we can safely say that *any* holder of national office, or serious candidate for same, has Status 6. Throw in a minimum of 3 more for the vessel to which the Role must be attached -- more, if it has positive Charisma (which is almost, though not quite, a prerequisite for the Role in question.) We're talking 21-25 points spent, off the top, out of the 36 that a starting 9-Force celestial gets. Plus, politicians tend to be mature, well-educated adults -- a wide selection of Skills is implied. *Maybe* you can fold in the inevitable network of contacts, supporters, etc. as part of the Status/Role cost. But overall, I find myself doubting that one can viably write up a major political figure as a balanced 9-force starting celestial. Of course, there is the possibility of the "Double Star" scenario (Heinlein novel). A political figure (a real human) important to Your Side just got killed by the Other Side; in a desperate effort to avert bad consequences, a Superior creates an identical-looking vessel and assigns it to, well, you. Presumably you have *some* skills and/or other abilities that make you the best available choice for the job -- but remember that kicker, "available." In all likelihood, you have some real fancy footwork ahead of you, just to do whatever job the guy you're replacing was supposed to accomplish. Plus, you'll be ducking agents of the Other Side, who are either miffed at the "failure" of their last attempt, or else have deduced a pretty clear explanation of why it "failed". Might be an interesting framework for a campaign or a story arc, as long as it's OK with the players that one particular player is the focus of the whole storyline. York Dobyns ydobyns@princeton.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:38:05 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants At 2:24 PM -0500 11/6/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > >(The only exception is if there is a full-blown, QUARK-code perfect, >perfectly formatted (NOT HTML), point-balanced, and spell-checked >character writeup of a candidate (or other politician) of your choice. >I'm talking real work here, not just cheap shots. Anyone can call a >politician a Balseraph or whatever; making a 9-Force character with >a Role: Politician implies some actual careful accounting.) > >(And my opinion on the election is already posted to .pyramid. I'm >not repeating it.) QUARK-code perfect? OOC, why? I'd think a total *lack* of formatting would be a requirement, not a series of codes which (to the untrained or semi-trained eye) make the description much harder to read. These wouldn't be submissions, per se, after all. The rest I agree with, but I'd hate to see QuarkXpress codes become a part of the mailing list, even as an artifical way to discourage writeups. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 13:52:25 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> If Bush and Gore were Celestials, what Choirs or Bands would they be? Glenn Brown wrote: > And at the risk of getting some flames back, I think, IMHO, that Bush > displays some remarkably Balseraph-like characteristics. Aargh. This has NO IN content other than a token reference to Bush being a Balseraph and Nader being a Habbalite. Please, go somewhere else (like *.chatter on Pyramid) where I and others will be more than happy to debate you politically, rather than posting flimsily-disguised political screeds here with no apparent purpose other than to start a flamewar. - -David (no, I am not the list admin, and yes, I can still express my irritation at seeing such messages) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 08:51:24 NZDT From: "Alex Liddell" Subject: Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants >Just having a Status/6 Role (which requires that the Role be Level 6 >as well) eats 18 points. I think we can safely say that *any* holder of >national office, or serious candidate for same, has Status 6. Throw in a >minimum of 3 more for the vessel to which the Role must be attached -- >more, if it has positive Charisma (which is almost, though not quite, a >prerequisite for the Role in question.) > >We're talking 21-25 points spent, off the top, out of the 36 that a >starting 9-Force celestial gets. Plus, politicians tend to be mature, >well-educated adults -- a wide selection of Skills is implied. *Maybe* you >can fold in the inevitable network of contacts, supporters, etc. as part >of the Status/Role cost. But overall, I find myself doubting that one can >viably write up a major political figure as a balanced 9-force starting >celestial. Ahhh yes, but what of Asmodeus. He *gives* away characters points for Roles. 12 in fact. That can turn an unbalanced 9 Forcer into a Celestial with at least a few Songs. Asmodeus is a reasonable Prince as well. I have no idea why I care anyway - America is a world away, we still don't let your ships into out harbour! _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 12:14:13 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Michael's Trials Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 21:18:33 -0800 From: James Walker Subject: IN> Michael's Trials Interesting one, there. Nice use of exotic locales (we need more, more, more globalism, and I'm just as guilty, if not more, of ignoring that). :) There's just something about Haagenti that makes me feel sorry for him. Of course, I look through everything through Bright-colored glasses, so I feel sorry for all the poor buggers. (pause) Except Legion. He wasn't very nice. :) Moe ===== In Nomine stuff: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Everything else (not that there is, right now): http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/main.html Last updated 9/5/00 (this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 21:25:26 +0100 From: "Philippe Bolay" Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... The first question that came into mind when I read about Lilith was her word versus her Attunements. As I understand it a wordbound demon works just like a wordbound angel. They both try to further their words. Its how they do it that differs. But Lilith attunement sort of brings slavery to mind.Putting a geas on someone sounds like something a celestial of Freedom would do only with a disgusted look on her face. Angelic or demon. Please prove me wrong. Philippe Oh, BTW.. Anyone else have any sugestions on what to do in the following situation. My players spend their last xp as soon as they get it. And some just made new chars with no xp collected yet. Then their vessels die. And they dont have a spare one. What do I do? Just let them rot in heaven? How do they get a new one? I dont want to let a wordbound give one away on pure mercy, since they will never learn to save xp for vessels. Suggestions please! - ----- Original Message ----- From: Charles Glasgow To: Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2000 10:10 PM Subject: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... > No, it's not one of *those* threads... > > > I was just flipping through Lilith's writeup, and I was thinking that the > concept of being 'bound' to Freedom's dissonance conditions didn't make any > sense to me -- after all, isn't Lilith all about not having to put up with > somebody else's stupid rules? Of being bound only by those particular > case-by-case agreements you wanted to be bound by? > > So here's my own unofficial, non-canon, totally-optional, > I-just-made-it-up-myself [1] alterations to Lilith's writeup, just as > suggestions... > > =============== > DISSONANCE CONDITIONS: > > None. > > If you're a Lilim and you're not Bound to any other Prince, then you've > chosen the same path that your Mother has chosen... to serve only as you > Choose, when you Choose, where you Choose. Have fun. > > However, as with everything else for a free Lilim, there is a price to > pay... > > RITES: > > None. > > Your Mother worked and dealt hard for every single bit of Essence she's ever > gotten, and you're going to do the same. No freebies. > > If you want a Rite, cut a deal with some other demon to learn one of his. > Free Lilim can actually buy Rites at reasonable rates... after all, most > Princes have realized that giving a Free one of their rites is a good way to > eventually lead them into their service, or at the very least to have the > Free out there promoting their word at least *part* of their time. > Andrealphus is known to be particularly generous in this regard... at least > as far as his "Spend half an hour etc." Rite. > > Then again, freedom *has* been defined as having the choice between working > or starving... > > (Game notes -- what this means is that starting Lilim characters can have as > many Rites as they want, from whatever Princes that they want... provided > that they took a Geas/3 to that Prince in return for it. IOW, Rites cost > the starting Lilim just as much as her Forces did, the only difference is . > > If DMs think that's too expensive, they can modify that to a Geas/2 from the > relevant Prince (they're being generous, as the first step towards hooking > the Lilim in) *or* a Geas/3 or Geas/4 from a *Servitor* of that Prince > (i.e., she paid higher in return for learning the rite "on the sly").) > > Lilith, of course, doesn't mind that her daughters are learning Rites from > other Princes -- it's *their* choice to, after all. And better that some > other Prince have to fork out his Essence on a regular basis than her having > to fork out any of hers. > =============== > > Oh, and I'd change her Invocation Modifiers to: > > ============= > Base Chance For Invocation -- 3 > > If you're a Lilim -- +3 (Lilith will deal with anybody... if she's not > busy. But she's usually busy.) > > For every time you've called her in the past six months -- -1 per occasion, > down to a maximum of -6. (This keeps Lilim from summoning Lilith all the > time... sure, they can pop a 6 for Invocation without any other modifiers at > all, but only if they haven't bugged Mom for a *long* time. And yes, this > does mean that a Lilim at an Infernal Tether who's called her Mother half a > dozen times in the past 6 months is going to be rolling vs. a 3 alone, and a > 0 if she were away from the tether. Mother *hates* Daughters who keep > bugging her all the time.) > > If you Geas yourself to her, promising the Geas simultaneous with the > invocation -- +1 to +6, depending on the Geas. (And yes, that means that > a Lilim promising a Geas/6 just for her Mother's time can *always* get > Lilith to show up anywhere anytime... they are, after all, her Daughters, > and any one of them that's willing to pay *that* much just to start a > conversation has obviously got something *important* that Mother ought to > know about. Besides, it's a free Geas on 'em just for showing up for a few > minutes. This applies to all other celestials as well... Lilith *loves* > having angels pop Geas/4 or Geas/5 or Geas/6 on themselves without her > actually having to exert herself.) > > If you are at an Infernal Tether -- +3. > > And that's *it*. I'm especially thinking that Lilith should be exempt from > the usual Universal Invocation Modifiers for "in the presence of enemy/enemy > Superior/corporeal vessel at risk of death" thing... Lilith *doesn't care* > if you're in a mess, you're supposed to take care of yourself... in return > for being beholden only to yourself. That's her nature. That's her vision > of Freedom. Lilith does not show up to bail you out of desperate fights, > not unless you're willing to *doubly* pay through the nose for the privilege > (i.e., to take the Geas hit just for the positive invocation modifier *in > addition* to the heavy Geas she's going to charge for the bail-out). > ============= > > The only drawback to this is, of course, the whole general "Rites are given > to encourage Servitors to promote your Word, so they're really a net essence > gain for the Superior involved", etc, etc. I'm handwaving this by saying > that by setting it up this way, Lilith is setting things up so that the Free > Lilim are promoting her Word enough anyway... and this way, she doesn't even > have to pay them! > > Thoughts? > > -- > Chuckg > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 12:29:06 -0800 From: "Kish" Subject: Re: IN> Thoughts on Lilith's writeup... From: Philippe Bolay <> Give them a good reason to /need/ to get back to Earth. Then have someone offer them a new vessel...for a price that will make them wince. - -- Kish ICQ#: 28085879 AIM: Kish K M Kish_K@mindspring.replacewithcom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:16:43 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> [ADMIN] No political rants At 2:38 PM -0500 11/6/00, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >At 2:24 PM -0500 11/6/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >>(The only exception is if there is a full-blown, QUARK-code perfect, >>perfectly formatted (NOT HTML), point-balanced, and spell-checked >>character writeup of a candidate (or other politician) of your choice. >>[...]making a 9-Force character with >>a Role: Politician implies some actual careful accounting.) >> >>(And my opinion on the election is already posted to .pyramid. I'm >>not repeating it.) > >QUARK-code perfect? OOC, why? I'd think a total *lack* of formatting >would be a requirement, not a series of codes which (to the untrained >or semi-trained eye) make the description much harder to read. These >wouldn't be submissions, per se, after all. Simple. Another barrier to hurdle so that people have to actually _work_ to get off the political snidery. Think about it. >The rest I agree with, but I'd hate to see QuarkXpress codes become a >part of the mailing list, even as an artifical way to discourage >writeups. Hey, did I say it had to be for _all_ writeups? Nah. Just political ones. Oh, right -- and Stylesheet perfect. (A non-Quark-formatted version could follow, of course.) - --Beth, who doesn't want to see anything but the cream of the crop here... ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1909 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.