From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed May 24 23:17:42 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06953 for ; Wed, 24 May 2000 23:17:42 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id XAA27354 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 24 May 2000 23:15:19 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 23:15:19 -0500 Message-Id: <200005250415.XAA27354@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 #1642 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 Wednesday, May 24 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1642 In this digest: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) IN> St. Michael's lambent sword... Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) IN> Word Play - minor spirits and fun with Word forces Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> IN Dice - reroll! IN> Eli the Muse? IN> Humans and words Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Pentagrams (was: In Nomine Dice) IN> Pentagrams (was: In Nomine Dice) IN> Minor Superior opinions Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Re: IN> Minor Superior opinions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 04:50:05 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) >From: "O. S. Kerr" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > > >So, if you give Joe Shlobotnik the Word of Obscure Comic >Baseball References, then *every* human can have a Word. > I'd try to avoid looking at Lilith as human. She's not human in any way we'd recognise it -- even newly made Mercurians/ Impudites are probably closer to humanity than she is now. It may be that she was never really human; made instead of being born et al. But for very bright games, you might want to introduce the idea of patron saints. I was thinking about it, and it goes something like this ... It's often thought that once a blessed soul enters the gates of heaven, s/he loses all connection with the corporeal world and instead, devotes herself to helping the angels with their work, singing God's praises, and generally kicking back with the other souls to reminisce about the bad old days. This isn't always the case. Some souls remain quite sensitive to people and events on Earth. Like reverse prophets, they can even sense when good or bad things are happening to the people or places to which they are most attached. This is most common when a soul's direct descendents are in distress, or are celebrating. (The religious, amongst both souls and angels, believe that such souls are 'tuning in' to those prayers on Earth which are directed to Heaven.) If a blessed soul chooses, she can seek an audience with a higher ranking angel to report what she has sensed. Many will only do this if they suspect that something momentous is happening, and wish to warn the host. Some souls ask permission to speak to the mortals they have sensed via their dreams, or to send a message of congratulation or consolation. Others simply say their piece, and request that angels be spared to investigate the situation. This ability has given Heaven the jump on various demonic activities that might otherwise never have been discovered, and talented souls are encouraged to stay in the lower heavens -- unless they truly wish to venture onward and upward -- to speak for their fellows on Earth. The Seraphim Council has found that it is possible to attune a human soul to a Word, but this doesn't take over the soul's entire being as it would with an angel. Instead, such a soul becomes very, very sensitive to the state of her Word on Earth, rather than just being connected with her own home, friends, or descendents. In angelic-speak, the human is a _patron_ to the Word, not a Word-bound. It is quite possible for a Word to be associated with both a Word-bound angel, and a patron soul/ saint. In fact, such a soul would be very useful to the angel in deciding how best to tend to the Word. Many Wordbound humans do ask to serve on Earth as saints, where they can be closer to the people or places for whom they intervene with Heaven, and try to help them more actively. If a mortal is questioned by the Inquisition on Earth, the angels may well decide to call on an appropriate patron saint to help with the defence -- on the grounds that it is their job to intercede with the Host on behalf of their constituency. Some even claim that there are also hosts of animals who act as patrons or patron saints for Words which no human ever knows -- but only Jordi and the Seraphim Council. knows the truth of the matter. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 08:43:41 -0400 From: neelk@cswcasa.com Subject: IN> St. Michael's lambent sword... Uncle Wolf wrote: > > Off Topic comment: In traditional Christian lore, Michael is > portrayed as a sword-wielder -- does Laurence ever get ticked that, > even when he does the work, Michael gets the credit? Bizarrely, this is something I took the trouble to figure out for my game. My working assumption was that Christian myth usually had some basis in fact, though it was frequently out-of-date or misunderstood the significance of events. (The decanonization of Uriel is a good example: in 745 Uriel was recalled to High Heaven -- the same year that the Catholic Church decided that there was not enough proof that Uriel was real and struck from the list of verified saints.) So, IMC Laurence was commander of the Host and Michael wasn't, anymore, and Michael used an axe instead of a sword, both contrary to myth. So I decided that when Laurence was promoted and made Archangel of the Sword, Michael gave him his miraculous sword (a weapon of the nobility) and took up the axe (a common soldiers' weapon) to mark that he acknowledged Laurence's command. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:34:30 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Nice idea. I wish I'd thought of it. Questions: Can a saint be attuned to a Word that has no celestial holder? E.g., can there be a Patron Saint of Detectives when there's no Angel of Detectives? Can a saint be attuned to more than one Word? Can more than one saint be attuned to the same Word, without complications? The undead are, roughly, the infernal equivalent of Saints. Are any of them likewise attuned? Or does that call for too much selflessness? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 08:04:35 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) >From: Earl Wajenberg >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > >Nice idea. I wish I'd thought of it. It was your mentioning the concept of patron saints that reminded me of it! There were a few saints who showed up in the campaign I was running, and they were all patron saints -- and I never really thought about it being non-canonical. It's just such a good opportunity for PCs to bump into famous people. > >Questions: (I'll just tell you how I was using them. There were 3 who were in the background: 1. St Edward, in service to Dominic, patron saint of passionate defence advocacy. He was Edward Marshall-Hall in a former life, the famous Victorian defence lawyer who was deeply opposed to the death penalty -- there was a TV series which dramatised some of his trials a few years ago, so the players had heard of him. 2. St. William, in service to Laurence, patron saint of opening batsmen. W. G. Grace, the (very) famous cricketer, who had moved on from smiting cricket balls to smiting demons, whilst keeping a straqight bat ... of course. He taught one of the PC angels of Laurence the manly art of self-defence. Queensbury rules, of course. 3. St. Denis, in service to no-one -- because no archangel dared suggest it, patron saint of Paris. (St Denis actually is the patron saint of Paris.) In the game, he was a typical Parisian patron -- not unlike Rene in 'ello 'ello, but ruder -- who kept a bar on the Left Bank, which was open to all local celestials as long as they kept the peace. ) > >Can a saint be attuned to a Word that has no celestial holder? >E.g., can there be a Patron Saint of Detectives when there's >no Angel of Detectives? Absolutely. It's also quite plausible that a saint could be attuned to a more specific Word than would normally be the case for an angel. They don't get weaker and die if their Word gets outdated. > >Can a saint be attuned to more than one Word? I don't see why not, but it might be unusual. It's a lot of extra responsibility. > >Can more than one saint be attuned to the same Word, without >complications? *ponder* Again, I can't think of a good reason why not. > >The undead are, roughly, the infernal equivalent of Saints. Are >any of them likewise attuned? Or does that call for too much >selflessness? I don't think they have the same protective instincts. Need to think about it :) Or if anyone else has any thoughts, butt in. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 11:24:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) > >Can a saint be attuned to more than one Word? > > I don't see why not, but it might be unusual. It's a lot of extra > responsibility. In Catholicism, Saints are often patron of more than one concept. For example, St. Michael the Archangel is the patron of grocers, mariners, paratroopers, police, and sickness. There's an enormous list of saints, their histories, and their patronization at http://saints.catholic.org/. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emily K. Dresner -- http://www.nodonut.com/zenith Read No Donut -- Gaming, Politics, Conspiracy, Computers, and other fun stuff at http://www.nodonut.com/. Hitherby says "The first sign of the Messenger of God is the dishwasher breaking. The second sign is the Messenger of God. Then comes the strawberry-scented unicorn." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 11:26:50 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Emily Dresner wrote: > In Catholicism, Saints are often patron of more than one concept. > For example, St. Michael the Archangel is the patron of grocers, > mariners, paratroopers, police, and sickness. And, as I think I mentioned recently, St. Nicholas (Santa Claus) is patron of children, sailors, and pawnbrokers, among others. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 08:37:22 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) >From: Emily Dresner >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) >Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 11:24:29 -0400 (EDT) > > > > >Can a saint be attuned to more than one Word? > > > > I don't see why not, but it might be unusual. It's a lot of extra > > responsibility. > >In Catholicism, Saints are often patron of more than one concept I know. That was why I was reluctant to rule it out. But I also don't think it's necessary to be absolutely bound by Catholic canon on saints. Frex, St. George was de-beatified, but he's still a classic IN type of saint. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:50:52 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Emily Dresner wrote: > In Catholicism, Saints are often patron of more than one concept. For > example, St. Michael the Archangel is the patron of grocers, mariners, > paratroopers, police, and sickness. As pointed out in the CPG, written by someone around here. ;) In fact, the CPG does give some ideas for running Saints as minor Superiors. > There's an enormous list of saints, their histories, and their > patronization at http://saints.catholic.org/. That link is also in the CPG. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 12:17:40 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> Word Play - minor spirits and fun with Word forces Here are two new critters, based on a recent remark that there ought to be more kinds of sub-angelic celestial spirits. Shinanim - the Repeaters, the Echoes Shinanim (singular Shinan or Shinanite) are on the hazy border of being spirits at all. They have Forces in the same ranges as Relievers, but instead of having any Celestial Forces, they have Word Forces. These Word Forces can come from the creating Archangel, or from a lesser Word-bound angel. The resulting being has no real awareness or will, and thus no real individuality or identity, even though it has intelligence. It's sort of a celestial robot, totally obedient to the will of the Word-force donor. You could also think of it as a high-fidelity variation on a familiar. Shinanim are useful when life gets very busy. Superiors can appear in multiple places at once, but there's a limit. Lesser Word-bound can't pull that trick at all. When you have to be more places than you can be, you can send an intelligent and well-trained Shinanite in your place. Shinanim can be given vessels, and so can be sent to Earth. In fact, a Shinanite's master can give it one of their own vessels, then take it back when they're done. In celestial form, they look like miniature versions of its master. Shinanim aren't really an Essence-drain, since their masters can tap them for Essence freely. Of course, they DO reduce your personal Word Forces. As a result, they may be temporary, getting disassembled so the master can re-absorb the Word Forces. Shinanim do have their limitations, which is why they're a minor choir, if they're a choir and not a class of artifact: Shinanim have no choir atunements. They can't grow beyond eight forces, or increase in attributes at all. They stay as they are made, unless damaged or externally repaired, upgraded, or overhauled. They are VERY tightly forcused on their Word. If some demons jump a mixed group of Stone and Flowers servitors and there are Shinanim in the mix, when the dust settles and its time to debrief, the Flowers Shinanite will give full details about the things the Flowers servitors did and suffered, and about any grass that got stepped on, but will fail to notice anything about the Stone servitors. Likewise, the Stone Shinanite will notice kicked pebbles but not kicked angels of Flowers. In general, Shinanim have a hard time noticing beings not aligned with their Word, except as furniture. They represent their master's intentions perfectly, having no Will, but similarly, they have no intiative whatsoever. Where the master might have changed his mind on looking over a situation (say, by taking non-Word-related factors into account), a representative Shinanite would not. Demon Princes can make Shinanim, too, but are much more reluctant to share out their Word Forces, even to a wholly obedient servant. Shinanim are sometimes bound into major artifacts. Infernal Shinanim are often bound like this, and usually come from Word-bound demons who have been completely disassembled by their Prince. Of course, such Shinanim have no true master in the normal sense, but can still be handed out as semi-reliable tools and prizes. Logites - Wordlings, Verbetti Add some Word Forces to a reliever or some Celestial Forces to a Shinanite, and you have a Logite. Infernal Logites are virtually unheard-of, since it would mean a Prince or Word-bound peeling off some of his Word Forces and giving them to an imp. They are rare enough in Heaven. Logites have the independent judgement and wider perception that Shinanim lack. They are still excellent representatives of their masters, having exactly the same Word. And, like normal relievers, they can grow in attributes and Forces. They can even grow to nine Forces and beyond. However, they can't fledge into any choir until those Word Forces are removed. The resulting angel is left pining for their Word, and is only really content when it has won a Word for itself, as similar as possible to its old one. This is such an angst-ful process to put an angel through that an Archangel is tempted to leave a Logite as it is -- which means leaving some Word Forces tied up. Alternatively, a Logite could grow in Forces and accumulate good deeds until it has earned a new Word for itself, going straight from Logite to Word-bound angel. This is certainly the best outcome for both Logite and Archangel, but it takes a long time and is no easier than any other winning of a Word. The commonest reason for creating a Logite is because you have a really good Shinanite that you wish was a real, live angel. Sometimes, an Archangel gives a reliever a Word-force, as a way of grooming it for being a Word-bound angel later, but a reliever that would look worthy of that is the celestial equivalent of a child prodigy. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 13:19:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) > As pointed out in the CPG, written by someone around here. ;) In fact, > the CPG does give some ideas for running Saints as minor Superiors. Assuming that I've actually _READ_ anything In Nomine -- especially stuff I have either playtested, or worse, written in -- is a massive mistake, David. - - Em, Total Illiterate ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 13:07:31 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: Patron Saintds ( was Re: IN> Words for Humans. ) Emily Dresner wrote: > Assuming that I've actually _READ_ anything In Nomine -- especially stuff> I have either playtested, or worse, written in -- is a massive mistake,> David. I was just reminding others (and plugging my own book). :þ - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 17:48:05 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral >Depends very much on the flavour of the particular campaign. After all, >it's possible the Ethereals are not 'lying' when they say God is an >ethereal but that they actually believe this to be true. Similarly, >Celestials are not 'lying' when they say God is not (and never was) an >ethereal but are stating their own firmly held belief on the matter. Yes which no doubt righteously cheesed off every Seraphim they happened to talk to. Like Balseraphs I bet the Seraphim hate to have anything register as true that contradicts what they "know" is true. Ergo I doubt you were see many Seraphim around sincere Atheists and people who believe God is evil. It would force them to come face to face with the fact something is very wrong with "truth" in the symphony and a real need is not being met. If they are serpahim of Michael, Michael, Dominic...we get out the old fashioned broad-swoard. Unpleasant folk. >Certainly celestials are stating a belief, not a fact, in canon. >I was assuming the older ethereals really did remember back >far enough to know whether God was once Yahweh >(the ethereal) or not. If their memories are fallible enough, maybe >not, and it's also likely that there are few, if any, extant ethereals who >were Yahweh's contemporaries. At that point it degenerates to belief, >and not knowledge. An interestingly little point there that was brought up by a friend there is what if there actually was a Yawhew Ethereal? However the religeon was rather "usurped" by Michael and the rest of the gang. I know this frankly reeks of Gnosticism but it's something to comtemplate. It might be amusing to find Ethereals working on Earth who believe themselves to be angels working for Yahwhew. This figure having gained great power by "tacking" his vile ways onto religeous figures and gaining essence by the horde-essence perhaps to cloak his realm entirely in an Etheral land. Indeed this God figure might have made a Devil's bargain (So to speak) with Uriel to betray the rest of the Ethereals for Uriel's Crusade in exchange for being able to "suck" from the monotheists unapposed so to speak. Thus the whole reason Angels and Ethereals disagree is they're referring (unknown to everyone but Uriel) to two different figures....one a great betrayer and one the compassionate dude we know well. Abraham and the rest likely were God's chosen folk (as the spirits would be missing in Heaven) but much of the confusion (still to Dominic in the rest) is going on because of this omnipotent guys fundementalist stances. Thoughts? >But an ethereal pulling the "Yahweh trick" would be pretty hard evidence -- >it's not something that's really compatible with ethereal capabilities in >canon. (Though creating a Domain isn't far off, I suppose....) Agreed on this end...Gabrielle's Volcano exists halfway between the Marches and Heaven in my game. Also I'm thinking of creating... The Limbo Bar and Grill which exists beyond the Marches and Celestial Realms....basically the place serving as a "not so" final resting place for souls that have been destroyed in the War between Heaven and Hell. (Yes I know it's stolen from Afterlife). The place is unknown to everyone but Yves and Kronos for obvious reasons but here all the fallen angels and angels whove been destroyed lie with souls that died in Uriel's purge when he attacked the various afterlives of Odin and the rest etc...and await the Judgement day when their case will be reviewed again. Atheists go here directly as they frankly were such smarty pants in life they get the most jossing from everyone. I'm still describing the owner but I think he should be a Archangel of Final Destruction or the Metatron. Maybe the Words of Beer and Peanuts or Ribs? I wonder if destroyed Valkyries can find themselves work as waitressses? hehe should there be a way to escape? >True, but having a new realm suddenly appear would be a real shocker; it's >less of a shock if it's just another fragment of an existing realm (like Hell >is of the celestial). The three realms have been around since the beginning >of time, more or less, according to angelic history. It's hard to see a >new one not being a real shock in the meta-cosmology. Well actually I think Yves would explain everything as once being part of Heaven wouldn't he? I mean the Hells were created when Lucifer and his gang were thrown out of Heaven and the war ripped the place apart into two places. Earth was made to least teach the new children the wages of sin and death and "prove" Lucifer wrong. The Marches appeared after Humanity came to pass and their essence and dreams of God that were judged "unfitting" of Heaven were cast off to form the Ethereals.... (this is the way I put it after all) The Ethereals I think see Yawhew making Heaven out of his Ethereal Realm and Lucifer wising up and doing the same. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 17:06:33 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Charles Phipps wrote: >>>Ergo I doubt you were see many Seraphim around sincere Atheists and people who believe God is evil. It would force them to come face to face with the fact something is> very wrong with "truth" in the symphony and a real need is not being met.<<< Not really. A sincere atheist would just register with a Seraph as "He really, really believes that God doesn't exist." - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 18:01:01 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> IN Dice - reroll! At 1:20 -0400 5/24/00, Ryan Elias wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: >>>a traditional demon's tail, curled into the shape of a 6, >> > >> >I like this idea. If it comes up, I'll present this as an option. >> >> And it's already part of the Lilim Band symbol > >Really? Hm. I'd always thought that was a hook (you know. A heart with a >hook through it. That's Geases, in'it?) Actually, you're probably right, but for some reason it looked like a tail to me. It does have a barb on only one side, though. >A tail, though. This bears further consideration... I'm sure that Lilim with tails are cute.... Maybe I just watch too much anime and read too many "furry" comics. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 17:24:15 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Eli the Muse? >For the most part I agree. I do take issue with the use of the term >"interfere," however (though I acknowledge that I may have >misinterpreted the intent). Well in my mind the average Superior...is more or less a Control freak. Being nigh omniscent I think does that to you. Therefore whenever Eli "adds his special something" to his fellow Archangel's prodject only a few Superiors are not righteously cheesed off that they're careful planning is ruined (though likely it's better for humanity in the short and long run if the angels stop stomping their feet). >I doubt that Eli *consciously* interferes >in the affairs of other Archangels (Demon Princes are another matter). I can just see it now....Saminga muses for several years a small remote research lab a huge biological weapons facility that will create a massive genocide when it is released by the dictator of the country on another country. Eli the janitor of the buildling talks to the guys as Saminga is studying "Better living through Lichdom" for his sorcery guilds and the dictator releases the virus to the public...discovering it's a cure for A.I.D.S if altered slightly. Enjoying much more the fame for being a philantropist. Eli sends a thank you note to Saminga and says "Peace dude...always glad to help a fellow Angel....dang if you had released that though...wow lots of needless deaths" >It is possible that he adds his little touches to other Superiors' >projects seemingly at random -- and certainly without permission -- >with little thought to the long-term consequences, but I wouldn't see >this as intentionally trying to mess up somebody else's Word (which is >what interfering in another Superior's Word-promotion amounts to). Actually they'res two ways to go with that...while I certainly meant it when I wrote it exactly as you explained above ('interfere' is merely a term for going in without permisson not sabotage) I'm wondering if Eli might not enjoy "teaking" his nose at his fellow superiors on some level if he suspects he can do so to the betterment of humanity. (though this may be more "rebel" and less "laid back dude than I've seen most people play Eli) Basically I see Eli as working for humanity as he believes it's what angels are here for (hey if the Big Guy wants universal love...he did last time I checked...I say we help as we can and pull out...you know like U.N. food deliverers..except without the trouble) and he might be aware his fellow guys are often a bit misguided in their attempts... He walks a thin line because his work so far has turned out good in the long run for everyone? Or basically he's just pretty randomly helping and doing what he can? - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 18:16:51 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Humans and words >Christopher, Saint in service to Janus, directly serving an >Ofanim with the Word of Travel. Or a Mercurian with the Word of >Travellers. Now this brings up an interesting question....how many Saints of the Catholic Church are actually angelic vessels? Also is somebody in Dominic's personal place of residence keeping track of all the people they confirm are angels in disguise? >George, Saint in service to David, liason between two Servitors >of National Identity (England and Greece). Formerly a Saint of >Uriel during the Purification Crusade. Nice guy George. Not too popular with Gabrielle though. Busy little bee though. >Sure. Any blessed soul, able to return to the Corporeal realm, >fully human and mortal in nature, with full knowledge of Songs, >most likely some Servitor Attunements, and awareness of the War, >would be a boon to any cause. "If you strike me down, I shall >become more powerful than you could possibly imagine." Obi Wan seems to be very popular to convert to In Nomine but here's the *REAL* question. Was Yoda a Celestial or was he a Etheral who converted? Very big question here....Darth vader....did he serve Technology while his Balseraph Master served Lucifer himself? Or was Vader more the old fashioned Baal type? - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:27:50 -0700 From: Ryan Elias Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Charles Phipps wrote: > I'm still describing the owner but I think he should be a Archangel of Final > Destruction or the Metatron. Maybe the Words of Beer and Peanuts or Ribs? A similiar writeup is hanging around at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/grads/paul/innomine/characters/abyss.htm if you're at all interested. (no, it's not mine, but I stumbled across it a while back, and was instantly reminded of it by your post ^_^) Cheers, Ryan "Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for the day. Set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life" -T. Pratchett, Jingo ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 18:35:50 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral At 17:48 -0400 5/24/00, Charles Phipps wrote: >An interestingly little point there that was brought up by a friend there is >what if there actually was a Yawhew Ethereal? However the religeon was >rather "usurped" by Michael and the rest of the gang. I know this frankly >reeks of Gnosticism but it's something to comtemplate. It might be amusing >to find Ethereals working on Earth who believe themselves to be angels >working for Yahwhew. I think the canon on this is that the early Jewish religion was actually inspired by celestials. (Assuming God is *not* an ethereal; if he is, he has to have backwritten history somehow in everyone's memory so that this is believed to be true.) So if you follow canon, and assume that God is what He is claimed to be, then I believe the canon answer is that Yahweh the ethereal couldn't form, since the human belief in him would have focused on the celestials, instead. David is probably the right person to talk about this, since I think this issue was going to be covered in the EPG. >Well actually I think Yves would explain everything as once being part of >Heaven wouldn't he? I mean the Hells were created when Lucifer and his gang >were thrown out of Heaven and the war ripped the place apart into two >places. Earth was made to least teach the new children the wages of sin and >death and "prove" Lucifer wrong. The Marches appeared after Humanity came >to pass and their essence and dreams of God that were judged "unfitting" of >Heaven were cast off to form the Ethereals.... I think the canon angelic history implies that all three realms were created in the beginning, though the Marches was rather vague and unformed until consciousness arose in the corporeal realm. Earth definitely predates the Fall, and therefore was not created to prove Lucifer wrong. (Again, I'm presuming God is God, not an ethereal; if he's an ethereal, His historical revisionism makes this true in peoples' memories, but not in reality.) You can get a lot of weird stuff by postulating God=ethereal, you basically get into all the usual solipsistic and related arguments about what is "real" vs. what God can simply make you believe you remember, since you have to at least postulate "historical revisionism" as one of his powers as a hopped-up ethereal, to make the notion work at all. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 18:00:12 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral Walter Milliken wrote: > I think the canon on this is that the early Jewish religion was actually > inspired by celestials. (Assuming God is *not* an ethereal; if he is, he > has to have backwritten history somehow in everyone's memory so that this > is believed to be true.) Essentially correct. > I think the canon angelic history implies that all three realms were created > in the beginning, though the Marches was rather vague and unformed until > consciousness arose in the corporeal realm. Yup -- also note that Hell was not "discovered" until after the Fall. > You can get a lot of weird stuff by postulating God=ethereal, you basically > get into all the usual solipsistic and related arguments about what is > "real" vs. what God can simply make you believe you remember, since you > have to at least postulate "historical revisionism" as one of his powers > as a hopped-up ethereal, to make the notion work at all. You have to bend over backwards with absurd rationalizations to fit In Nomine around the premise that God is just a hopped-up ethereal. Which is why it's a stupid idea, in my unofficial, non-canonical, non-humble opinion. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 00:27:18 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral >Yes which no doubt righteously cheesed off every Seraphim they happened to >talk to. Like Balseraphs I bet the Seraphim hate to have anything >register as true that contradicts what they "know" is true. Ergo I doubt >you were see many Seraphim around sincere Atheists and people who believe >God is evil. It would force them to come face to face with the fact >something is very wrong with "truth" in the symphony and a real need is >not being met. I guess, if a Seraph was in a position where it had to be around a sincere Atheist (or a very sincere ethereal soldier who subscribed to the Yahweh is a jumped up ethereal theory) it would try to avoid using its resonance on that person, if the results disturbed it. I'm not sure how far this would disturb a Seraph, though. After all, what is a Seraph who has come to believe that only his own, personal truth is valid? (My own answer to that question would be 'A Balseraph'). Hilary Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 20:10:53 PDT From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Pentagrams (was: In Nomine Dice) > > In which case the demon would probably be pissed off instead of being > > patronizing and belittling the sorceror's beliefs. > >He'd still be patronizing and belittle the sorcerer's beliefs. But he >would be pissed off that someone actually taught the sorcerer something >useful. > >-David Unless he's an impudite and/or wishes to gain the sorceror's favor. - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Fortress/6045/index.html "And that's the hardest thing for a human being to do - be wrong. Do you know that people would rather die than be wrong?" - --from A Matter For Men by David Gerrold ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 20:24:56 PDT From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> Pentagrams (was: In Nomine Dice) > >>> In Nomine has never really put the Pentagram into its symbology > > though that would make a great demonic symbol. > >Yeah, a pentagram would look great. Even though it doesn't have much >meaning >in >IN terms, it would look very good (on both demonic dice and the GM bag). >And >as >specified a bit further, if you want to sell these dice, they have to be >cool >before anything else.<< > >Ex-*cuse* me? > >What, exactly, is the point to "looking cool" and having nothing to do with >the game? >Kiara Um, pardon me, but in defense of Lauurent here: IIRC, the inverted pentacle is considered demonic (a well known fact among most of the Western world, AFAIK) for the same reason the inverted cross is, at least at the point of it's origin. Both are *holy* symbols, and at one point I believe that the pentacle was used in Christian Symbology (perhaps only in the irish/scottish isles where Christianity had, been shall we say, ameliorated, but I'm not sure where), which is why the *inverted* pentacle was considered demonic. So if you want to say the unholy and holy symbols have *nothing* to do with a game about Angels/Demons, God/Lucifer, ummmm . . . However, the inverted pentacle (aka the pentagram) is problamatic in same way the inverted cross is: when the dice are "backwards" the once inverted symbol is now right-side up, un-inverted. Silly, really. AND the pentagram is not a common symbol used in the game (if at all, actually). But it doesn't have NOTHING to do with In Nomine. Neither would Buddha, Jesus, the Ying/Yang, or other relgious symbols and people. - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Fortress/6045/index.html "And that's the hardest thing for a human being to do - be wrong. Do you know that people would rather die than be wrong?" - --from A Matter For Men by David Gerrold ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 22:35:21 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Minor Superior opinions During playtesting for Superiors 3 & 4, some people commented that they wished they could see Superior opinion quotes by minor Superiors about other minor Superiors (what Aleamon thinks of Christopher, what Zadkiel thinks of Khalid, etc.). Since SJG's policy is that there isn't room for this, I have fulfilled a promise I made toward the end of S3 playtesting. You can now find (need I say it? unofficial) minor Superior opinions at http://www.amadan.org/Innomine/Minor-opinions.html - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 00:09:35 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Yawhew the Celestial/Etheral At 19:00 -0400 5/24/00, David Edelstein wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: >> You can get a lot of weird stuff by postulating God=ethereal, you basically >> get into all the usual solipsistic and related arguments about what is >> "real" vs. what God can simply make you believe you remember, since you >> have to at least postulate "historical revisionism" as one of his powers >> as a hopped-up ethereal, to make the notion work at all. > >You have to bend over backwards with absurd rationalizations to fit In >Nomine around the premise that God is just a hopped-up ethereal. Which >is why it's a stupid idea, in my unofficial, non-canonical, non-humble >opinion. Personally, I don't care much for it, either. But I like having it be within the realm of possibility (if not plausibility), just enough to make the celestials a little worried once in a while. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 00:51:06 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Minor Superior opinions On Wed, 24 May 2000, David Edelstein wrote: > During playtesting for Superiors 3 & 4, some people commented that they > wished they could see Superior opinion quotes by minor Superiors about > other minor Superiors (what Aleamon thinks of Christopher, what Zadkiel > thinks of Khalid, etc.). Since SJG's policy is that there isn't room for > this, I have fulfilled a promise I made toward the end of S3 > playtesting. You can now find (need I say it? unofficial) minor Superior > opinions at > http://www.amadan.org/Innomine/Minor-opinions.html Thank you, David... these are very useful. I wish SJG would acknowledge the minor superiors more; they're definitely of use in any campaign. - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1642 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.