From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Nov 18 04:54:05 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 EAA23736 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 04:54:05 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id EAA02639 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 04:54:42 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 04:54:42 -0600 Message-Id: <200011181054.EAA02639@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 #1927 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 Saturday, November 18 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1927 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor IN> A Servitor with No Real Economic Content Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN> A Servitor with No Real Economic Content Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes IN> "They called me mad. Mad! Mad!" Re: IN> "They called me mad. Mad! Mad!" Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes IN> Hi. Re: Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Re: IN> Hi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:07:09 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: An Affair of Honor At 4:11 PM -0500 11/17/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Besides, Gabriel's an Ofanite, >and "long term relationship" for an Ofanite means that they visit for a >few seconds every few minutes... O:> I have this hideous image of Michael and David sitting and pigging out on ice cream, with Michael saying "I feel so *used.* She never even took off her *shoes.* Next time, I'm going to just tell her no way -- you'll see!" - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:28:24 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> A Servitor with No Real Economic Content I've been meaning to write this one out, mostly because the _next_ one I'm doing is Sparky's Worst Possible Nightmare. :) As always, enjoy or not. :) Sparky Balseraph Baron of Gremlins Corporeal Forces: 4 Strength: 4 Agility: 12 Ethereal Forces: 5 Intelligence:10 Precision: 10 Celestial Forces: 6 Will: 12 Perception: 12 Vessel (nervous-looking man)/2 Skills: Chemistry/1, Computer Programming/1, Dodge/6, Electronics/1, Emote/5, Knowledge (Accounting/3, Technology's Organization/3, Would Vapula find THIS Idea Irresistible?/6), Ranged Weapons/1 (pistol), Running/3 Songs: Light (Celestial/3), Healing (All/2), Motion (Celestial/3), Shields (All/6) Attunements: Balseraph of Technology, Technobabble, The Curse of Vapula, Word of Power, Baron of Gremlins Relics: Whatever you want him to have. He's the one who approves the budgets, after all. As has been said elsewhere, Sparky has the dubious pleasure of being the only sane one in the asylum. He didn't precisely set out to become, bluntly, Vapula's keeper, but he's got it, and nobody else wants to take it away from him. Heck, he doesn't even need a bodyguard - and _that_, considering the nature of Hell, says a lot. Granted, he's good at both the official and unofficial aspects of his job. Officially, Sparky's supposed to just keep track of Technology's budgets, watch over what little administration that's managed to survive the perennial explosions, implosions, field reversals and general mayhem, and generally remind Vapula of his appointments. Unofficially, he's the one that has to keep the Prince of Technology on track at least some of the time. _That_ actually takes up most of his time. Over time, Sparky's worked out precisely what will make Vapula drool and scamper with delight, and he does his best to arrange things so that the Prince somehow almost never manages to see them. "Almost never" is the trick: Sparky's predecessors always tried to completely cut Vapula off from the neat stuff, which never worked. The Baron's wiser: if you let the Prince go wild every so often, he'll actually be happier than if he had no restrictions at all. Thrill of pulling one over people, and all that: more to the point, Sparky would much rather have Vapula scheming how to slip something by than have Vapula wondering why he should bother. Such musings never end well. So far, it seems to be working, but that's no guarantee. Plus, Sparky's success in keeping Vapula's eyes on the prize has actually worked against him: the other Princes cut the Baron no slack when Tartarus explodes, implodes, releases gravity waves, or generally disturbs the nap of Someone Important. Some of them do understand that Sparky can cajole and connive, but not control his Prince. It's just that none of them care. The Baron has picked himself out of a wall on more than one occasion. Personally, for a Balseraph, Sparky's actually not too bad a guy (he doesn’t usually have time to be nasty). Most individuals on both sides of the War break things down to Good/Evil, Slave/Free, or Us/Them, but Sparky divides Creation into Isn't Causing Me A Problem/Going to Eventually Result In Having Asmodeus Scream At Me. Those who fall in the first category are left strictly alone: those in the second will get their funding cut off permanently. Anybody that helps the Baron defuse a bad second-category problem (yes, even angels) will not find him ungrateful. ===== 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!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:37:06 GMT From: daiv@cruzio.com Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness > Well, yes, it is. In fact, anyone who spends money on luxuries > ("luxuries" being defined as anything not necessary to maintaining your > continued good health) when there are other people in the world who lack > the necessities of life is being selfish. If you are buying In Nomine > books and paying for Internet service, when you could be sending that > money to feed starving children in Africa (or homeless people in your > hometown, or choose any other charity), you're being selfish. > I would point out that it is more complicated than that. For some people, for wahtever reasons, who do devote every waking moment to the betterment of others, they do so because they enjoy it. As simply as that. They do it because it feels good to them. It is not unlike the concept of enlightened self interest. So, even though they are not getting Material rewards for what they are doing, they are getting a reward... Taking in this light, it could be argued that there is No Such Thing as a "Totally" selfless action. I have oberved this to be true in the Real world, (sometimes) and I assume that it is true in IN. Taking David's example of the Drug Companies who do research because there is profit to be made from the elimination of disease (and I am paraphrasing here, from memory; any mistakes or misrepresentations are my fault not his)... there is likely to be some members of the staff, doing research solely becasue they want to; people who are almost literally obsessed by the idea of eliminating disease and work for that end, and want nothing more than to eliminate disease from the face of hte earth. And when you look at this womans life history, you see that she lost a brother to a bad case of Influenza, or AIDS... Clearly she is motivated by Revenge. Revenge is generally considered to be a bad thing. But the elimination of disease in general, and AIDS in particular, is generally considered a good thing. She is acting selfishly, for the betterment of all Humanity. In the end, Humans are very complicated creatures. In my IN campaign world, Angels (and Demons) are a great deal less complex, by nature. So. my opinion (which may not be worth the paper it's printed on...) - -Daiv ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:41:35 -0800 From: "Kish" Subject: Re: IN> A Servitor with No Real Economic Content From: Maurice Lane <> Now, that belongs in a .sig somewhere. :-) - -- Kish ICQ#: 28085879 AIM: Kish K M Kish_K@mindspring.replacewithcom ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:09:08 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 12:53:07 -0600From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness >This is probably why we don't see too many selfless >angels actually being written (officially or >unofficially); it's hard for us humans to wrap >our minds around the concept that being selfless DOES >mean giving away all your money, and that wanting to >keep something for yourself and enjoy the finer >things in life IS inherently selfish. (Not evil; >selfish.) >- -David Thank you ever so much, Mr. Edelstein. Now I have to try (I'm a perennial anthropomorphizer), just to see if I actually _can_...* :) Moe *But not the next one I do. Mental print queue, and all that. :) ===== 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!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:08:21 -0500 From: Jonathan Walton Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes > "A.Hamilton" wrote: >> Right, but give me a real world, large scale example that doesn't work >> in> that fashion. > > There is none. But that doesn't mean it can't happen, or that Marc's > Angel of Communism isn't trying. ;) I was going to stay out of this, but you guys forgot the fact that Marc (or the organization of Trade itself) isn't only interested in "large scale examples." Hell, if 40 people are living on a commune and pooling resources, he's happy. Communism, in its completely ideological and utopian model, is basically a system where everything is traded freely, with no direct system of barter or money involved. I suppose that you could argue that it's not _really_ Trade, but Archangels expand their Word as far as they can, and I don't think Marc'd hesitate to include Communism, if only because he _could_ include it under his domain without much fuss. Later. Jonathan ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:07:01 -0000 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) From: "Whistling in the Dark" Subject: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) > Hm... now there's a concept. The Angel of Communism, in disfavor > because of the... trouble of the last hundred to hundred and fifty > years, trying to build something new, and turning to the only Angels > who might have some sympathy.... i always assumed the Angel of Communism would work for Stone. the former word-holder, now Demon of Communism, is of course working for Factions these days... liam ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:27:37 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes >From: David Edelstein >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes >Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:19:45 -0600 > >"A.Hamilton" wrote: > > Though I think Trade would > > definitely be a supporter of the libertarian ideal, > >That would be awfully limiting for Trade. I think Marc has an Angel of >Capitalism, an Angel of Communism, and various other economic models, >all trying to devise the best one for humanity. > Sounds plausible. I'm quite sure he is all in favour of free trade. Marc views God as 'the invisible hand' (cf Adam Smith), IMO. Probably neutral to taxation as a concept, except that it should be fair (for some value of 'fair' that is probably more progressive than a pure libertarian would be happy with ;) ). jo _________________________________________________________________________ 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: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:34:40 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Communism (not a writeup) At 1:07 AM +0000 11/18/00, Liam Astley wrote: > >i always assumed the Angel of Communism would work for Stone. the former >word-holder, now Demon of Communism, is of course working for Factions these >days... > Communism is, at heart, an economic theory that then extends into a philosophy. It would be very surprising if A) David would have proactively tried to take the Word of Communism when it first began to gain strength as a movement (long before 1917) or B) the Seraphim Council would have assigned an economic matter to David's purvue, given David's hostility to Marc. It would be seen as a Heavenly repudiation of Trade in lieu of Stone. This is all IMC and IMO, of course, but it just doesn't seem to otherwise work. (You know, I honestly hope Marc's writeup, whenever it comes, explicitly lists who the Angel of Communism works for so we don't have to have this discussion every four months. ) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: 18 Nov 2000 05:35:05 -0000 From: "Malachi Constant" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes *De-lurk* I know Marc is a libertarian (or would be), considering he's all about a laissez-faire marketplace kept in check by people's individual moral codes. That being said, I think Marc would take a fairly jaundiced eye to most taxes. In the grand scheme of the word of trade, some taxes are acceptable, because they are user fees. A good example of a tax as a user fee is gasoline taxes and toll roads being used to pay for highway maintenance. In this equation, government provides a service, and the people who use this service pay for it. This is trade, I'm sure Marc would have no problem with that. However, some/most modern taxes are coercive. I'm not talking about user fees, or government upkeep taxes, but taxation with intent to redistribute wealth is flagrantly against the word of trade. Trade implies that there is a choice, you exchange x for y because you want to, when an agent in power actively determines what will be done with your money (which the government has no rig! ht to) and takes it from you without your consent, that is coercion and that is inimical to the word of trade. This means (for the most part) no social programs. This idea flies in heaven because most angels are idealists (or at least should be), so helping others is the responsibility of the individual and not the government. Looking at it in a selfish/selfless paradigm. It is selfish to give your money to others because you fear what the government would do otherwise (if you don't pay your taxes), but it is selfless to help others with your own money because it is right thing to do (when it is your choice). Marc probably has an angel of taxes, but it'd be something like the angel of moral taxes or something suitably libertarian. Five tons of Flax, Mal pi *re-lurk* _____________________________________________________________ Email your boss can't read - sign up for free disinfo.net email at http://www.disinfo.com, your gateway to the underground ------------------------------ Date: 18 Nov 2000 05:47:02 -0000 From: "Malachi Constant" Subject: Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness *De-lurk* (again) However, lets look at the reason people actually pay taxes. Does anybody pay taxes because they genuinely like or want everything (or anything in some cases) that the government does? Does anybody wish to pay taxes so that poor people can get their welfare check or food stamps? No. People pay taxes because the consequences (Jail and more taxes) are undesireable. Modern taxes are an inherently selfish thing, or at least have been corrupted by the forces of the Game to become selfish. A significantly more selfless thing would be for somebody to give their own hard-earned money because that person needs/deserves it. I would think that heaven would want to encourage that sort of thing (whether or not its realistic). This would actually make for an interesting campaign seed. A cadre of Marc's angels trying to institute a more selfless tax code. Hmmm. Five tons of Flax, Mal pi *Re-lurk* _____________________________________________________________ Email your boss can't read - sign up for free disinfo.net email at http://www.disinfo.com, your gateway to the underground ------------------------------ Date: 18 Nov 2000 05:58:39 -0000 From: "Malachi Constant" Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes *De-lurk* (third time's the charm) Marc can advocate communism and still hold libertarian beliefs. This sort of communisim, or libertarian socialism, is quite possible the socio-economic system that heaven works on. Under Marc's moral communism, one would give something away to somebody else because they have it and the other person needs it, could use it better. It is an entirely selfless system. Marc's communism is basically the ideal communism where there is no need for a government to forcibly redistribute goods and services because selfless and moral individuals can do it themselves. The angel of communism simply works to evolve existing communism into this quasi-quixotic state. Five tons of Flax, Mal pi *wondering if I should re-lurk* _____________________________________________________________ Email your boss can't read - sign up for free disinfo.net email at http://www.disinfo.com, your gateway to the underground ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:06:46 -0800 (PST) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> "They called me mad. Mad! Mad!" I had the day off today, so naturally I went into the City anyway (had to pick up my paycheck). So, I went Christmas shopping... and there they were. Issues #1 through #5 of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I've been meaning to snap them up, so I shelled out the cash (as well as one other thing), and read them on the train ride back. Oh, yeah, after I devoured the LAGs, I read the other thing I bought (The Unknown Armies sourcebook Postmodern Magick). Here we go. Moe Wolfgang Malakite Friend of the Illuminated Angel of Retro-Technology Corporeal Forces: 4 Strength: 7 Agility: 9 Ethereal Forces: 6 Intelligence:12 Precision: 12 Celestial Forces: 5 Will: 10 Perception: 10 Suggested Word Forces: 5 Vessel: elderly human male/3, Charisma +1 Skills: Chemistry/3, Computer Operation/2, Driving/1, Emote/1, Enchant/6, Electronics/2, Engineering/4, Fighting/2, Knowledge (history of Science/2), Language (German/3, English/1, Latin/1), Large Weapon/1 (sword), Piloting/1, Ranged Weapon (rifle/1), Throwing/1 Songs: Artifacts (Corporeal/4, Ethereal/6, Celestial/4), Attraction (Corporeal/1), Essence (Celestial/1), Form (Corporeal/1), Healing (Corporeal/1), Lighting (Corporeal/2, Ethereal/1, Celestial/1), Ice (Corporeal/1), Light (Celestial/1), Machine (all/3), Motion (Corporeal/1), Shields (all/2) Role: "Herr Doktor Wolfgang von Bayern" (Austrian professor)/4, Status 4 Relics: He's got a Fiery Sword/3, a couple of Reliquary/3s, and just about anything that your twisted heart desires in the lab somewhere. Have fun. Attunements: Malakite of Lightning, Remote Control, Friend of the Illuminated Angel of Retro-Technology: Wolfgang can look at an engineering or mechanical problem and automatically determine if it can be fixed with the materials he has on hand. If he makes his Perception Roll, he'll get an idea how to go about doing it. Special Rite: Create a genuinely useful device out of discarded junk. Oaths: "Suffer not an evil to live, if it is my choice." "Never surrender, or allow myself to be captured by the forces of Lucifer." "Always encourage others to use technology as a servant, not a master." "Always attempt to foster a sense of informed wonder about Science." Well... how to explain this one? Jean didn't precisely expect this angel to go off on such a tangent. What he was looking for was a Servitor who would discourage technogreed: after all, there are times when you should be upgrading what you have, rather than junking the whole thing so that you can buy the latest toy. Many 'obsolete' methods and technologies still work, after all: people have just been conditioned to equate 'new' with 'more efficient', even if the 'obsolete' method can be maintained locally and the 'cutting edge' one can't. Well, that's what the Archangel of Lightning wanted. What he got was a Servitor who has become addicted to the idea of STEAM! Not to mention vacuum tubes, the POWER OF THE ATOM!, diathermy machines, Tesla coils (Wolfgang is really fond of Nikola Tesla: if you understand the implications of this, you won't need to read any further), orinthopters, zeppelins, flying wings, Babbage Machines, clockwork automata and the Art Deco artistic movement. There's more, but Wolfgang will tell you about it himself if you give him the chance. Believe me, he will. The Angel of Retro-Technology justifies all of this by pointing out that current human attitudes towards gadgetry owe a lot to the propaganda issued by Nybbas. He's made technology hip and sexy, but he's also made it impersonal. Clean, cold, not for the uninitiated: if the Prince of the Media has his way, humanity will end up literally worshipping their computers and televisions as sterile gods, superstitiously propitiating their cold, unblinking eyes. If you want to combat this, you need... warm technology. Stuff that's neat. Stuff you can build yourself, in your garage, and show off to your envious neighbors, who will then go off and come up with their own bizarrely delightful inventions. Wolfgang wants to make science and engineering fun and universal again, and encouraging the creation of intricate and unusual gadgets that anyone can build seems to be the best way to get to that happy state of affairs. Oddly enough, Jean isn’t exactly receptive to this attitude. Must be an Elohite thing, or something. However, until Eli (the usual dumping ground for Lightning's Lunatics) comes back from his extended vacation, the Archangel doesn't have many options. Wolfgang is loyal enough: he's just been saddled (in Jean's eyes) with a Word that didn't pan out. It would be needlessly cruel to strip it from him. Best to let him stay on the corporeal plane, out of the way. Wolfgang maintains a Role as Herr Doktor Wolfgang von Bayern, a professor of engineering in a minor Austrian university who has a talent for creating odd mechanical contrivances. He's considered eccentric, but in that good way people reserve for teachers that they remember quite fondly. His miniature clockwork automata are well known locally, as is his habit of suggesting wacky alternate solutions to every engineering and mechanical problem that comes up. On occasion, people have actually tried them... to find that not only does the suggested method work just fine, but people will actually come from quite far away to look at them (and incidentally buy souvenirs). He's well liked, really. It's probably just as well that they don't know about Wolfgang's Laboratory. He owns a modest country house with a decent amount of land... which hides a fairly large underground bunker, filled with all the really good stuff. Wolfgang's hobby is recreating all those unusual gadgets that the Renaissance, Victorians and Golden Age science fiction authors delighted in: his enchantment abilities (and knowledge of scientific principles that the Halls of Progress haven't released yet) allows all this stuff to actually work. Wolfgang might give out a neat thing or two to somebody who helps him out. Personally, Wolfgang is an odd, yet pleasant, mix of eccentric mad scientist and driven Malakite. He likes humans a lot better than most Servitors of Lightning (or Malakim, for that matter): when properly primed, mortals can really get into his Word. That always pleases a Word-bound, especially one who's out of favor with his Superior. Of course, Wolfgang has to dispatch the occasional dishonorable human, but he's got a bit of latitude there (Jean has specifically told him to at least try to keep a low profile). He'll often try to salvage them first: after all, what's an ethical mad scientist without diamonds-in-the-rough, reformed henchmen? His relationship with Servitors of Technology is, alas, less friendly. Sparky, Vapula's 'keeper', hates and fears the Angel of Retro-Technology more than any other member of the Host. Not because he thinks that Wolfgang is a threat: he's afraid what will happen if Vapula ever gets a good look at this angel. Sparky knows how his Prince thinks, and if Vapula ever really focuses on Wolfgang, eventually every other Prince will be lining up to pound the demon into the floor. You see, the Prince of Technology wants an adversary so badly that he can taste it: a proper adversary, one who understands, one who won't flub his lines, one who can look upon Vapula's creations and see the malignant beauty, even as he strives to defeat the Prince. Vapula wants the excuse to cackle madly, wear a cape, have an undersea lair, create baroque weapons of mass destruction, and sneer: he wants to be a Mastermind, dammit, but what's the point when nobody else wants to play? Thus, Wolfgang will seem to be a gift sent by God. Vapula may have to encourage the inflation the Word of Retro-Technology a little, in order to get a proper adversary, but that's a small price to pay for finally getting to break out the Devolvo-Ray. Sparky needs to shut this angel down now, before his Prince awakes to all the possibilities (and ignores the rest of the War): of course, doing this without tipping off Vapula is a whole different problem. Special Conversion Note: those of you who might actually be using the Heretic Vapula (Archangel of SCIENCE!) have probably already decided to adapt Wolfgang. That's cool: the only thing faster than his decision to petition to switch Servitors will be Jean's permission to do so. Keep the Malakite of Lightning Attunement, dump Remote Control, and add Malakite of SCIENCE!, Mad Genius, Synthesis and Mentor. Vapula will also be doing his best to boost the Word of Retro-Science to a higher level, too. The Archangel of SCIENCE! will be very, very fond of Wolfgang... ===== 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!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:19:20 -0800 From: "Bevan Thomas" Subject: Re: IN> "They called me mad. Mad! Mad!" Kick ass! A steampunk angel derived from League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. He is sooo cool! - ----- Original Message ----- From: Maurice Lane To: Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 10:06 PM Subject: IN> "They called me mad. Mad! Mad!" I had the day off today, so naturally I went into the City anyway (had to pick up my paycheck). So, I went Christmas shopping... and there they were. Issues #1 through #5 of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I've been meaning to snap them up, so I shelled out the cash (as well as one other thing), and read them on the train ride back. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:18:36 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes At 5:35 AM +0000 11/18/00, Malachi Constant wrote: >*De-lurk* > >I know Marc is a libertarian (or would be), considering he's all >about a laissez-faire marketplace kept in check by people's >individual moral codes. He is? Man, I don't agree at all. Marc is all about *equity.* To individualize the moral decisions made within the marketplace is to invite the inequitous to devour the fair minded or less informed in economic darwinism. For Marc, it's a victory if *everyone* wins. Otherwise, it's not quite there yet. > That being said, I think Marc would take a fairly jaundiced eye to >most taxes. In the grand scheme of the word of trade, some taxes >are acceptable, because they are user fees. What tax isn't a use fee? Taxes by definition pay for the functions of the government. I'll repeat my earlier statement. The Trade involved is the covenant of the community and the government of that community, on a local, state or national level. The citizens trade compliance with the laws of that community (including taxation) in exchange for the benefits *of* that community. Renegotiation (sometimes with guns) may take place, but the theory is the same the world over. >However, some/most modern taxes are coercive. I'm not talking about >user fees, or government upkeep taxes, but taxation with intent to >redistribute wealth is flagrantly against the word of trade. Er... like? Or is this an antiwelfare state bit? Understand, I think you'd have a hard time in Heaven explaining why all the surplus wealth in a country isn't "redistributed" to the poor, elderly and infirm. As David put so well, the idea that there are wealthy people and starving people in the same country is at the best seen as abberant behavior among the species, and at worst shows how corrupt and selfish humanity is. >Trade implies that there is a choice, you exchange x for y because >you want to, when an agent in power actively determines what will be >done with your money (which the government has no right to) and >takes it from you without your consent, that is coercion and that is >inimical to the word of trade. Government has whatever right has been granted them by the social compact, in any kind of democracy. (Totalitarian regimes are a different flavor entirely.) In the construction of the community, there are Trades that form, as individuals grant some of their sovereign rights to the leaders that are designated (by one of many methods). > This means (for the most part) no social programs. This idea >flies in heaven because most angels are idealists (or at least >should be), so helping others is the responsibility of the >individual and not the government. Bwah? I expect that Socialized Medicine (as an example) would be at the very top of almost every Archangel's list of things any society on Earth should provide automatically, and if it means no one in that society gets to have big (polluting) cars, so what? Self-interest over community interest is *selfish* by definition. It is placing the needs of the one over the needs of the many. >Looking at it in a selfish/selfless paradigm. It is selfish to give >your money to others because you fear what the government would do >otherwise (if you don't pay your taxes), but it is selfless to help >others with your own money because it is right thing to do (when it >is your choice). Mm. "Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's, but render unto God what is God's." "It is selfish to give money to others because you fear what the government would do otherwise (if you don't pay your taxes)" sounds like a Game or Greed statement, to be honest -- which I'm *not* accusing you of. And am I the only person who pays his taxes every year because... well, I'm a citizen of the country I live in and it's expected of me, not because I'm afraid men in boots will break down the door and shoot me? Somehow, I think not. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:21:49 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness At 5:47 AM +0000 11/18/00, Malachi Constant wrote: >*De-lurk* (again) > >However, lets look at the reason people actually pay taxes. Does >anybody pay taxes because they genuinely like or want everything (or >anything in some cases) that the government does? Does anybody wish >to pay taxes so that poor people can get their welfare check or food >stamps? No. People pay taxes because the consequences (Jail and >more taxes) are undesireable. I pay taxes because I'm a citizen, because honor demands I act as a citizen, and because while I may not like every governmental decision, I like enough of them that I choose to live here and therefore accept the responsibility of that citizenship. These are also the reasons I vote in every election held. And when I *don't* like something, I try to change it. I've never paid taxes out of fear. I'm not afraid of my government. The day I decide I don't, I'll move somewhere else. My history bears this out. So, I'm afraid I ruin your theory. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:24:24 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes At 5:58 AM +0000 11/18/00, Malachi Constant wrote: >*De-lurk* (third time's the charm) > > Marc can advocate communism and still hold libertarian >beliefs. This sort of communisim, or libertarian socialism, is >quite possible the socio-economic system that heaven works on. >Under Marc's moral communism, one would give something away to >somebody else because they have it and the other person needs it, >could use it better. It is an entirely selfless system. Marc's >communism is basically the ideal communism where there is no need >for a government to forcibly redistribute goods and services because >selfless and moral individuals can do it themselves. The angel of >communism simply works to evolve existing communism into this >quasi-quixotic state. Just to prove a point... I agree completely with the above. I'm not saying I think Marc is a Libertarian (I don't), but I agree he could be, yet still advocate communism. And certainly he could be championing all the different economic models (including the economic aspects of Libertarianism), working towards Selflessness in all of them. In fact, given Marc's role as Heavenly Diplomat, I expect he tries hard to see every side he can, to champion every side he can. It's another way that David (the Constant One) finds himself in conflict with Marc. See -- I don't disagree with you on *principle.* - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:01:16 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN>The Demon of Taxes Malachi Constant wrote: > I know Marc is a libertarian (or would be) No you don't. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:09:11 GMT From: darkness@i-manila.com.ph Subject: IN> Hi. Hi, I'm pretty new to this list. I'd stay quiet but I have a few questions about In Nomine that I'd like some answers to, or comments on... Balseraph of Fate / Master of Divine Knowledge questions... 1) Does a Balseraph of Fate with the Malakite resonance take oaths? 2) As I understand it, Mercurians become dissonant when they turn to violence, unless it is directed at diabolicals. Is a Balseraph of Fate with the Mercurian resonance restricted to violence against fellow infernals? 3) As I understand it, Superiors have all the abilities their Attunements bestow on their Servitors, up to a point (meaning, no possession of bodies for non-Kyriotate or Shedite Superiors, no attuning for non-Cherub or Djinn). I take this to mean that Kronos has his Balseraph Attunement, and Yves his Master of Divine Knowledge Distinction. Anyone care to speculate on which Choirs they "belong" to? 4) I know this has been answered already, I just want to be sure. Can the Balseraph of Fate Attunement and the Master of Divine Knowledge Distinction provide a celestial with the resonances of: a) Grigori? b) Bright Lilim? c) Menunim? 5) If the concept behind a Balseraph of Fate is that it is able to lie to the Symphony well enough to masquerade as an angel, shouldn't it regenerate Essence at sunrise? Or, even more interesting, shouldn't it regenerate Essence _twice_ a day? 6) Can the Balseraph of Fate Attunement fool a Malakite of Destiny? Other questions... 1) Bright Lilim seem to be bound by exactly the same dissonance conditions as their infernal sisters. Fall of the Malakim wasn't very specific about this. Do I take it to mean that what makes a Lilim dissonant will also make a Bright dissonant? 2) Among Archangels, the naming convention among first-level Distinctions seems to follow the "Vassal of " format, i.e. "Vassal of the Sword", "Vassal of Flowers". All the written-up Archangels follow this...except for Dominic, whose Vassal Distinction is listed as "Vassal of Conscience". In an interesting development, Asmodeus's Knight Distinction is "Knight of Judgment". Anyone care to comment on this? Hoping for some answers and comments, Manny N - -----------------------------168071508944249 Content-Disposition: form-data; name="send.x" 25 - -----------------------------168071508944249 Content-Disposition: form-data; name="send.y" 14 ============================================================= This message was sent using I-Mail ( http://www.i-mail.com.ph ) Internet Manila's Web-Based E-Mail interface ============================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 03:11:20 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: Re:IN> Selflessness vs. Selfishness From: "Whistling in the Dark" > At 5:47 AM +0000 11/18/00, Malachi Constant wrote: > >*De-lurk* (again) > > > >Does anybody wish > >to pay taxes so that poor people can get their welfare check or food > >stamps? No. People pay taxes because the consequences (Jail and > >more taxes) are undesireable. *section snipped for length* > I've never paid taxes out of fear. I'm not afraid of my government. > > The day I decide I don't, I'll move somewhere else. My history bears this out. > > So, I'm afraid I ruin your theory. So do I, actually, because I take the "promote the general welfare" part of the preamble to the US Constitution seriously. Thus concludes my first (and I promise my last) post to the list on this topic. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 02:52:30 -0800 From: "Kish" Subject: Re: IN> Hi. From: darkness@i-manila.com.ph <> From the Infernal Player's Guide: Yes, starts with four, just like a Malakite. However, the four oaths are all chosen by the player--one of them doesn't have to be "do not suffer an evil to live," though Balseraphs of Fate with the Malakite resonance frequently choose, "Do not choose to let an angel live." <<2) As I understand it, Mercurians become dissonant when they turn to violence, unless it is directed at diabolicals. Is a Balseraph of Fate with the Mercurian resonance restricted to violence against fellow infernals?>> Errataed, on the In Nomine website. Mercurians--and BalMercurians--can't be violent toward humans, but can be violent toward all celestials (and presumably animals, too). <<3) As I understand it, Superiors have all the abilities their Attunements bestow on their Servitors, up to a point (meaning, no possession of bodies for non-Kyriotate or Shedite Superiors, no attuning for non-Cherub or Djinn). I take this to mean that Kronos has his Balseraph Attunement, and Yves his Master of Divine Knowledge Distinction. Anyone care to speculate on which Choirs they "belong" to?>> Actually...I'd guess they each have the resonances of /all/ the Choirs. But that's all it is--a guess, and what I'll probably do in my own games in the unlikely event that it ever matters at all. <<4) I know this has been answered already, I just want to be sure. Can the Balseraph of Fate Attunement and the Master of Divine Knowledge Distinction provide a celestial with the resonances of: a) Grigori?>> Fnord. Ask someone else. <> From the online FAQ: No. (At least, the Balseraph of Fate attunement.) Reason given: Even Kronos doesn't understand how the Lilim resonance works. <> Fnord. <<5) If the concept behind a Balseraph of Fate is that it is able to lie to the Symphony well enough to masquerade as an angel, shouldn't it regenerate Essence at sunrise? Or, even more interesting, shouldn't it regenerate Essence _twice_ a day?>> For that matter, shouldn't it try to act selflessly and oppose Hell, since a Balseraph believes its own lies? :shrug: <<6) Can the Balseraph of Fate Attunement fool a Malakite of Destiny?>> I suspect that the attunement doesn't do anything it's not specifically noted as doing--that is, the Balseraph gets /just/ the extra resonance, and that's it. <> Yes. Strikes me as broken, though, in light of the rationale behind the difference between angelic and demonic dissonance conditions. <<2) Among Archangels, the naming convention among first-level Distinctions seems to follow the "Vassal of " format, i.e. "Vassal of the Sword", "Vassal of Flowers". All the written-up Archangels follow this...except for Dominic, whose Vassal Distinction is listed as "Vassal of Conscience". In an interesting development, Asmodeus's Knight Distinction is "Knight of Judgment". Anyone care to comment on this?>> Perhaps Asmodeus picked something to mock Dominic, and Dominic picked something to remind his Vassals that their rank doesn't entitle them to be overly harsh. - -- Kish ICQ#: 28085879 AIM: Kish K M Kish_K@mindspring.replacewithcom ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1927 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.