From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Nov 14 18:56:53 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 SAA06136 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 18:56:53 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id SAA08199 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 18:53:55 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 18:53:55 -0600 Message-Id: <200011150053.SAA08199@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 #1921 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Tuesday, November 14 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1921 In this digest: Re: Re:IN> Archangel of Archives Re: Re:IN> Archangel of Archives Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... Re: IN> Words, Mark II Re: IN> Words, Mark II IN> The Tao of Kronos Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? Re: IN> Word Question Re: IN> Bush/Gore Campaign> In Nomine! Re: IN> Hell is bad. Mindless bureaucracy is worse. IN> Never before seen... Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor IN> I may regret this, but I'm sure that we're all adult enough here to handle this. Re: IN> I may regret this, but I'm sure that we're all adult enough here to handle this. There can be only one (Was: RE: IN> What you've all been waiting for...) Re: IN> New site: The In Nomine Cookbook Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... Re:IN> I may regret this, but I'm sure that we're all adult enough here to handle this. Re:IN> Archangel of Archives IN> The Defense of the Archives-Part One IN> Kronos Seed Re: IN> Kronos Seed Re: IN> Never before seen... Re: IN> Crashing the Council Meetings Re: IN> Kronos Seed IN> Superiors 5 IN> Looking for Cleveland people ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:05:07 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: Re:IN> Archangel of Archives At 4:36 PM -0800 11/13/00, Kish wrote: >"Either a Bright Lilim with the Kyriotate resonance (from Yves' Master >of Divine Knowledge Distinction) or vice versa (which incidentally >suggests Yves has the power to grant the Bright Lilim resonance, which >the FAQ indicates Kronos doesn't!)." Thanks. And before anyone asks, no, the AA of Archives does not necessarily use canon or proto-canon rules, especially in that instance. I'll bend canon with the best of y'all for a desired effect. (Usually a humorous one.) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 19:52:29 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: Re:IN> Archangel of Archives - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elizabeth McCoy" To: Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 8:05 PM Subject: Re: Re:IN> Archangel of Archives > And before anyone asks, no, the AA of Archives does not necessarily use > canon or proto-canon rules, especially in that instance. I'll bend canon > with the best of y'all for a desired effect. (Usually a humorous one.) Well of *course* you would. Refusing to bend canon in any way, even for a desired effect, would just be nitpicking. - -- Chuckg *g, d, and r at vhs* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:51:30 -0500 From: "Rolland Therrien" Subject: Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... Beth, it just occured to me that while Princess Beth has had a child, Archangel Beth is still alone! She needs to have a baby Iolanthe as well! For that matter, Heaven needs one too! And I even figured out a Word that's perfect for the Heavenly version of Iolanthe. One that will make all of Heaven's Archangels rally around her like Hell's Princes rally around the Princess of Cute. The Word is Innocence. That word would be perfect for a little baby Archangel... Especially one that all of Heaven would agree to protect and raise. I can even see Michael holding her in his arms before presenting her to the troops, saying "I just wanted to show you all what you're all fighting for." Any comments? - -Exit the LoneWolf ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:14:07 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Words, Mark II At 7:28 PM -0800 11/11/00, James Walker wrote: >Valefor - Library Fines (in service to the ArchDean, of course.) Only after the AA of Archives gets done with him. (Man, catfight, catfight! Not that I ever necessarily intended them to exist in the same universe...) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:02:54 -0600 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Words, Mark II - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elizabeth McCoy" To: Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 8:14 PM Subject: Re: IN> Words, Mark II > At 7:28 PM -0800 11/11/00, James Walker wrote: > >Valefor - Library Fines (in service to the ArchDean, of course.) > > Only after the AA of Archives gets done with him. (Man, catfight, > catfight!) My money's on Archives. After all, you originally *wrote* the ArchDean. *g* - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:07:50 -0800 From: tcp@zoomnet.net Subject: IN> The Tao of Kronos Good ideas all. I like the idea of Kronos being the summation of sins that jesus died for. However that seems a bit odd truly. In any case I think my theory still works that Kronos is Lucifer's embodiment of the Symphony. Explaining his power and lack of ambition. Basically Kronos still has a tie to the Symphony because it is impossible to escape the fact that Lucifer's work is all merely a corruption of God's work. That as Kobal would say "Is the Punchline" - -Charlemagne - ----- Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html ) The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:26:26 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> What you've all been waiting for... At 8:51 PM -0500 11/13/00, Rolland Therrien wrote: >Beth, it just occured to me that while Princess Beth has had a child, >Archangel Beth is still alone! She needs to have a baby Iolanthe as well! Not with all those books around her -- paper-mounchers are heck on books... >For that matter, Heaven needs one too! [...] >Any comments? From her filching of items (pens & tissues) from shirt pockets and insistence on being moved around, Io-chan seems to be a Windy when she's angelic. A little Windy, mind, who doesn't need to move _far_ (bedroom, bathroom, side room, tv room, living room, etc. all seem to count as separate locales), but does need to be moved more often than 3 days... (Innocence? _Innocence_? From someone with _this_ mischievious a smirk? http://www.io.com/~arcangel/Art/BabyPics/Iolanthe7.16.JPEG ) The angelic version... Hm... I'd pick Curiosity, I think. Since boredom seems so dissonant for her. And Choir? I don't know, but my gutfeel is Elohite. When fledged, that is. - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:39:50 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> He's got a sign up sheet for WHAT!? At 7:18 AM -0600 11/6/00, Charles Glasgow wrote: >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* Actually, it quite clearly states at http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Angels/Arcangel.Beth.html that the AA of Archives hangs out with an Elohite of Lightning. Which, naturally, doesn't make her _blind,_ but as dates go, it might be a bit... over-intellectual to be what Laurence was trying to grok. Now, Urichislon (hypothetical Princess of Balance, sketched out a while back) might sign up (whether as a Princess or mere Lilim), and also be totally intellectual as well -- but she's too weird for me to try to get into the mindset while typing with a baby sleeping on my left arm. (A sample, though, might involve her asking, with sincere _intellectual_ curiosity, how much of "that" metaphor about swords is actually incorporated in his Word...) (Real Life exerpt -- a song on the radio dedicated to someone's daughter... named... Destiny. Life parallels with fiction...) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:49:37 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Word Question At 12:05 PM -0600 11/6/00, Cthulhu wrote: >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...) Sorry to take so long -- been trying to get a time when I could type with both hands. But I finally decided to use one hand after all. *sigh* >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? From the stuff in the GMG, I think it's pretty firm that the Word is now shared, with whatever psychological effects that entails, which will become apparent as soon as the first Word-bound comes out of Limbo. Till that time, though, I doubt there would be much effect on the second Word-bound. It's up to the GM whether Limbo'ed Word-bound could "feel" the second holder while there -- some stuff does go into Limbo, after all. Also check out Alaemon's writeup in S4. >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? I'm not sure what you're asking here. Word-bound whose Hearts are held by a Prince (or AA, but we'll use Prince here) are subject to the perks and responsibilities that Prince allows (such as access to his Princely Essence). If you mean a non-Superior Word-bound holding a Word that is then assigned to a Superior... Well, it doesn't usually work that way. I think the general _non-canon_ consensus is that if one member is a Superior and the other isn't, of a shared Word, the non- Superior explodes. O:> Or maybe it get assimilated. O8> Ack, baby woke up, no more time to try to decipher what you mean here! - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "She's either babbling, or summoning Elder Gods. I'm not sure which." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 22:00:33 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Bush/Gore Campaign> In Nomine! At 3:30 PM -0700 11/6/00, Tim Groth wrote: >To sort of go off on a tangent how is membership in the Seraphim >council decided? I know that Archangels are officially voting >members, but in a couple of books vague references are made to the >oldest and wisest Seraphim are allowed to sit on it and vote as well. >Is there some sort of objective criteria, or is it a situation in >which the Archangelic members vote for which other angels should sit >on it? This is as much a question about canon as about what people >have gone with for their games. There's no canon on this beyond what's been mentioned. If it were important to an adventure, I'd have to think about it and come up with something logical. Until then? Eh. My personal opinion is that the Oldest And Wisest Archangels And Angels got together after the Fall, and decided that they wanted to have a coordinated group (well, Janus didn't think so, but he was busy being offended by the whole BAD change thing that he didn't object too much), and then they looked around and started picking Notable Angels (And Archangels) who just _naturally_ had to be members. And this added up to all the AAs of the time, plus a bunch of the Most Holy and a smattering of the sensible members of other Choirs. And, once that happened, the Archangels said, mostly, "Don't call it an _Archangel_ Council! I've got enough to do with my _own_ people right now without having to meet up all the time to decide whether we should have coats of arms or not -- I'll send one of my trusted Servitors." So they called it the Seraphim Council because angels have a certain natural urge toward hierarchy and most of the Old Wise Ones were Seraphim. And that's not canon, but it sounds about like how most traditions start -- it Just Happened, and once it was in place, people started getting elected. ("Hey, that angel, it's doing a really good job. We should make it an Archangel." "We should?" "Well, I think so." "I'm not so sure. Would it really be more effective that way?" "Let's discuss..."