From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Apr 10 17:56:24 2001 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 RAA30591 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:56:24 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id SAA22646 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:02:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:02:12 -0500 Message-Id: <200104102302.SAA22646@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 #2148 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, April 10 2001 Volume 01 : Number 2148 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis Re: IN> =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Gone?= to =?iso-8859-1?Q?Graveyards=22?= Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" Re: IN> =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Gone?= to =?iso-8859-1?Q?Graveyards=22?= IN> Angels and Gender (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" IN> Lines that make GMs laugh out loud Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis Re: IN> Lines that make GMs laugh out loud IN> More Money Than God, v0.5: Requesting Help IN> Golf. Re: IN> Golf. Re: IN> Golf. Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> Golf. Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" IN> The list and intellectual propery Re: IN> Golf. Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" Laurence [Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine] IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2145 Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) Re: IN> Terms of Address for Archangels ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:20:02 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine Bevan Thomas wrote: > It is a modern (and Christian) simplification to describe a lot of > ancient spirits and gods as purely evil. It is a modern (and secular) simplification to describe the relationship of Christianity to paganism in terms of simple opposition. For instance, by the High Middle Ages and Renaissance, the Greco-Roman gods were sufficiently unthreatening that they could be celebrated in allegorical verse without anyone batting a theological eye, and the ones assigned planets could even be quietly reclassified as a species of angel. As to the Aztec gods, it wasn't just Christians who found them objectionable. These gods required human blood to keep the sun rising, and the Aztecs were happy to supply them with that from prisoners of war. Thus, they were loathed by all their neighbors, which was a large part of why they were such a pushover for the Spanish; the Spanish had instant allies agains them. At least, this is what I recall off the cuff. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:22:08 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis Rev. Pee Kitty wrote: > 14. Litheroy > > Um... he'd cry a lot, probably. I can't imagine Litheroy as any other > choir, and somehow, I don't think he could, either. Not being able to > sense the Truth anymore would just suck. If he's still and Archangel, he can sense Truth through his own seraph attunement, can't he? Earl (Does Choir have more than a psychological and cosmetic meaning for Superiors?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:27:44 GMT From: prodigal@ticnet.com Subject: Re: IN> =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Gone?= to =?iso-8859-1?Q?Graveyards=22?= Bradley Paranial writes: > > Novalis' Dead > > Mike's Pissed > > Ba'al's pissed (Though for diffrent Reasons) > > Sammy's toast. > > Kewl, hope to see the rest. Thank you. And it's a most . . . interesting . . . take on things. Hope you enjoy the rest of it as I manage to squeeze it out of my fevered mind. ;) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:32:10 -0000 From: "cassandra benner" Subject: Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis If christopher was ever to become a malakim, he and david would become very good freinds. - -So, dave, what shall wo do to this balseraph of lust? =Pull its wings off and see if it lives? - -YEAH!!!!!! reminds me of childhood, daddylonglegs with out legs or wings... oh those were the (ot) days. Cass - -There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole- Murphy's Law, Combatants Edition. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 09:39:05 -0500 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" The world's got a problem. Novalis' Word and all the work she and hers did towards maintaining it was a very important part of keeping things nice down here. Just because I've always historically believed that she couldn't win the War without Heaven's militant faction doesn't mean that I didn't think they could win it without her either. While the militants are needed to hold off and beat down the encroaching demons, she is needed to hold the ground they've retaken and ensure that the demons would have a harder (or impossible) time coming back and trying to re-corrupt the hearts and minds they'd lost. Or to put it in US military terms -- nobody but a fool would try to fight a war using an army that had *only* the J-5 Civil Affairs Division, but if you're trying to liberate people as opposed to enslaving them then it's just about as foolish to try and run an army without that division as well. Blandine *can't* move in to take up all the slack... she's already the most overworked Archangel there is. So how will the War adjust to the loss? - -- Chuckg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:48:44 GMT From: prodigal@ticnet.com Subject: Re: IN> =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Gone?= to =?iso-8859-1?Q?Graveyards=22?= Charles Glasgow writes: > The world's got a problem. Indeed it does. Remember the story of Persephone? Think about that as you're reading the third segment of last night's vignette, and see if it doesn't give you the kind of chills it gave me as I wrote it... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 06:27:04 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew B. Gerber" Subject: IN> Angels and Gender (was Re: Malakite Blandine) On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Rev. Pee Kitty wrote: > Note that the big sign wasn't meant just for you, Chuck... it's for > everyone on the list who doesn't seem to understand this point for > some reason. There's no such thing as 'gay angels' or 'straight > angels' because their concept of "gender" doesn't work like that. > There IS no true gender; choosing a gender to manifest as is like > choosing what sort of clothing you want to wear. Some people wear the > same kind of clothing every day; others change it up more often. > Doesn't mean a damn thing inside. While true according to canon, this is more than a little hard to internalize, given the way most of the Archangels--and most Angels--are portrayed most of the time. To take the two most extreme and therefore most conveient examples, everything to do with Michael or referring to Michael pretty much screams "male"; likewise "female" with Novalis. Their archetypes are ones we're culturally hardwired to associate with their respective commonly-referred genders. Yes, it's *said* that Michael has a female Vessel that he uses a decent amount, but this is a little like the common science fiction fallacy of saying an alien is alien because it has, say, a forehead ridge: if there's no other difference, it's still going to come across as a human with silly makeup. Correspondingly, if it's just mentioned that the "Michelle" Vessel exists, but nothing ever realizes that, then Michael still comes across as a guy with a really good female disguise. Even if "he" isn't, officially or even technically in the minds of a lot of readers--even if they buy all this--it doesn't matter: it just doesn't resonate. (Pun intended. I'm sorry. Please don't hurt me.) Gender is a rather powerful and pervasive concept. It's really very hard to de-anthropomorphize anything sapient--especially a concept that's been humanized as Angels, and most especially since a lot of the odd unorthodox assumptions IN makes about angels are to make them more human and thus more playable--enough to keep the gender concept from automatically popping up no matter how many times you try to knock it down. Unless you're really, *really* good, concurrency seems to me to be easier: androgynous literally, male and female at once, rather than asexual. I mention this mainly becase there have been enough very good Dominiques done that this whole thing is largely believable of Dominic, for instance; I at least can see him/her in terms of either gender or no gender at all, quite easily. But this just hasn't happened with Michelle, Lauren, Davina, or 90% of the other Angels that I've seen discussed here. IMHO. YMMV. HTH. Matt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:57:48 From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" >From: "Charles Glasgow" >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: >Subject: Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" >Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 09:39:05 -0500 > >The world's got a problem. Novalis' Word and all the work she and hers did >towards maintaining it was a very important part of keeping things nice >down >here Not really. It's the people and their actions that support the Word, not the other way around. Did corruption stop on Earth when Legion died? Did it even get any less? jo _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:39:30 From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Lines that make GMs laugh out loud From one PC to another, after Gabriel has shown up in the latter's living room: "Right now, it's important to take inventory. Are you alive? Are parts of you on fire? Good, Gabriel likes you and you handled yourself well." Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:00:50 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> Haagenti, Malakim of Novalis > If christopher was ever to become a malakim, he and david would become very > good freinds. The way I have always seen it is that Christopher and David are still allied and very close. Christopher "grew up" under David's strict parenting then found his own path. They drifted apart a bit when he got older (Earned the word of Children, his Archangel status, began talking to Yves), but they still have love and respect for each other. > > -So, dave, what shall wo do to this balseraph of lust? > =Pull its wings off and see if it lives? > -YEAH!!!!!! > Children can be so cruel... -:-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:59:34 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Lines that make GMs laugh out loud From: "Janet Anderson" > > "Right now, it's important to take inventory. Are you alive? Are parts of > you on fire? Good, Gabriel likes you and you handled yourself well." LOL! The line that made my GM laugh the most was when the Lilim in our group would approach one of the other PCs in the group and say "Need any help with that?" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:36:25 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: IN> More Money Than God, v0.5: Requesting Help I need help. Specifically, I need the assistance of someone fairly knowledgeable in the areas of corporate economics and tax writeoffs for charity. Said person doesn't need to be lawyer or have a degree, but have enough schooling and/or experience to help plug the large gaping holes in my idea. Small loopholes are fine; I don't have much a problem with Experts In The Field finding flaws with my notion, but I would prefer that someone with, say, a few credit hours in a CPA degree not find demonstrable fault with large flipping chunks of the text. Private email, please: ebertish@hotmail.com . Thank you for your time. - -- Casca _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:50:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Golf. Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 14:20:11 -0400 From: damienw@juno.com Subject: Re: IN> You know, 'the Game' and 'Games' aren't really related... On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Maurice Lane writes: >>The really good one (for Hell, that is - Heziel >>wouldn't ever admit to ever playing 18 holes with a >>member of the Host) is Haagenti, though: he's got >>killer instincts and an excellent eye. >> >> I know, I know. Go figure, huh? >Not to mention he'd never have to worry about >landing his ball in the rough. Give Haagenti a few >moments and it's *all* fairway. Good point. :) On the Other Side (again, not that Heziel would know, of course), Marc's probably the best (most practice), with Dominic and Mike pretty much neck and neck for second - the former has a better knack at judging terrain and weather conditions, while the latter is much better at playing aggressively. Needless to say, they just _love_ playing together - it's almost at the level of ritual combat with these two. Getting a fourth for a round can be a hassle, though. Jean overanalyzes everything, and doesn't see the point of playing a full round anyway (he'll walk off the greens the second that he's gotten an optimum level of relaxation and healthy exercise). Janus thinks that playing holes in order is boring. Let's not even _talk_ about what Yves wears to the links: just think the word 'plaid', and shudder. Laurence is actually a pretty good golfer, but he rarely has _time_ to play. Novalis - well, calling it 'cheating' is unfair, but it does look awkward when the trees get out of the way of her shots. David - heck, they only now finally convinced him that a golf club wasn't a missile weapon, and he *still* waits for the ball to attack him before he hits it. All in all, Marc, Mike and Nikki were grateful when Khalid came back into the fold. Considering how much invocation of the Lord takes place on the average golf course on a Saturday, he must feel right at home. :) Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/01/01(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:57:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Golf. - --- Maurice Lane wrote: > All in all, Marc, Mike and Nikki were grateful when > Khalid came back into the fold. Considering how much > invocation of the Lord takes place on the average golf > course on a Saturday, he must feel right at home. I see you've met my father-in-law. 0;> ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "Holding a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee." -- William Walton (no relation) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:46:51 -0000 From: "cassandra benner" Subject: Re: IN> Golf. um, who's nikki? novalis? >From: Maurice Lane he hits it. > >All in all, Marc, Mike and Nikki were grateful when >Khalid came back into the fold. Cass - -There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole- Murphy's Law, Combatants Edition. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:04:06 -0400 From: damienw@juno.com Subject: Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:09:06 -0700 "Bevan Thomas" writes: > Laurence did lead the slaughter, I feel, a little more literally. He > was the > most loyal champion of Uriel, right at the front hacking right and > left. > Laurence is a devoted Catholic and feels that all the pagan spirits > are > affronts on the eyes of the Lord. Therefore, he would have nothing > but scorn > and hatred for the pagan gods, fairies, fabulous beasts, etc. Let's get one thing straight, here. Keep in mind that Laurence is a Malakite and his Word is strongly associated with honor. Laurence is honor manifest, the perfect knight. For that reason, I'd hesitate to say *all*. He'd kill the 'harmful' spirits gladly. He still might kill the honorable ones but it would be from perceived necessity, not hate. - --- damienw[et]juno.com "To kill a man between panels is to condemn him to a thousand deaths." - Scott McCloud ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:13:06 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) *William drops the whole court bit* >Does the defense wish to maintain that Uriel was *not* actually relieved of >his post? Or to maintain that being relieved for cause, forcibly retired, >and replaced is *not* an expression of a lack of confidence by one's >Superior in one's ability to continue to satsifactorily carry out one's >assigned duties? Caveat: I'm no fan of Uriel. He was pretty much written to spark questions about service to Heaven and one's ideals by offering an example of "Going Too Far"... ...maybe. You have to remember, Uriel wasn't stripped of his Archangelic status, didn't Fall, wasn't Outcast, and might not even have been Dissonant. He was taken to the Higher Heavens, something no other angel has achieved in a long time (that we know of). That might not be being "relieved for cause," or even being "forcibly retired." That could perfectly well be the ultimate reward for one's final service to God, performed under extreme political duress, prior to replacing Uriel with a lieutenant that Uriel himself might have seen would do a better job, requiring of Uriel's honor that he give up the post to the better angel. Of course, if *either* position is that simple, why didn't God just explain Himself? Fnord. William ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:16:35 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Golf. >um, who's nikki? >novalis? Dominic. (Just don't call him that to his face... ;^) ) >Cass ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:17:15 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" >>The world's got a problem. Novalis' Word and all the work she and hers >>did towards maintaining it was a very important part of keeping things >>nice down here >Not really. It's the people and their actions that support the Word, not >the other way around. Then what do angels do for a living? If they didn't have a significant effect, they wouldn't be working. >Did corruption stop on Earth when Legion died? Did it even get any less? Did its rate of increase suddenly go from "exponentially expanding" to "stopped"? Regardless of *how* it's going to work, what's going to happen is that a large part of Heaven's net effort is suddenly not going to be there anymore. The Archangel in charge of the effort has gone kaputski, and whatever organization she's left behind just lost its Superior-level support as well as its strategic guidance. Command-and-control shakeups alone will render the net output of Flowers angels significantly down from their prior averages for a while. Now, unless the Flowers angels were doing precisely spit and none to help the cause of Heaven (which they *weren't*), then that means that Heaven is going to lose more than a bit of ground. Given that Novalis and her angels were the bulk of Heaven's non-combat efforts, that means that in the non-combat areas they're going to lose a *whole* lot of ground. Or to put it another way -- in current canon, Heaven & Hell are effectively stalemated. With Novalis down, Heaven loses a Superior, thus breaking the stalemate. And that Superior wasn't any old minor one, but the leader of one of Heaven's two major political factions... as well as one of the hardest Superiors in heaven to replace. Oh yeah, the world has got a huge problem all right -- because the Host just took a major net loss. The only way Novalis' sudden absence could *not* be a major net loss for Heaven is if she wasn't actually doing anything useful or productive now... and even I, one of the chief cheerleaders for Heaven's militants, won't go that far. - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:26:01 -0700 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> The list and intellectual propery anything that's sent to the list becomes the intellectual property of SJGames, right? I'm double-checking here. - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. " - --Dick Cavett ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 21:03:51 +0100 From: "Genevieve Cogman" Subject: Re: IN> Golf. From: William J. Keith To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> Golf. >>um, who's nikki? >>novalis? > >Dominic. >(Just don't call him that to his face... ;^) ) Oh, and I should probably mention this... In the French, as you know, he's Dominique (INS/MV). The French verb "niquer" means "to screw or shag", basically. Slang. Rude slang. For some reason, Andromalius (DP of Judgment) refers to Dominique, when making notes on reports, as 'Nique... Genevieve (Dominique nique nique, c'est un classique) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:15:17 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) At 8:37 AM -0500 4/10/01, Charles Glasgow wrote: >Your Honor, let the record show that immediately following the incident in >question, God relieved Uriel of his command and forcibly retired him from >all serving duties with the Host. Your honor, Counsel is interpreting the actions of the Almighty through a Military viewpoint consistant with his own belief system, when there is no evidence that Military decisions were the driving decisions behind the Almighty's decision. It is as simple to postulate that the Almighty, seeing that Uriel could never rise above the scandel and hue and cry put forth by his peers -- not seeing the complete picture -- was offered the greatest reward that any Angel may aspire to as a sign of God's personal favor and approval of his mission. Ergo -- that Uriel, Archangel of Purity, so exemplified that which God wished that he was gathered to God's own bosom, the very complete opposite archetype of an Outcast (the typical punishment of loss of favor). > It is not merely a personal belief of >Counsel that being relieved for cause is indicative of a lack of faith in a >commanding officer's judgement and/or an expression of profound disapproval >in his recent performance. Unfortunately, that Uriel was 'relieved for cause' by his recall is, indeed, personal belief. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:17:38 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> "Gone to Graveyards" At 3:57 PM -0400 4/10/01, Jo Hart wrote: >>From: "Charles Glasgow" >> >>The world's got a problem. Novalis' Word and all the work she and hers did >>towards maintaining it was a very important part of keeping things nice down >>here > >Not really. It's the people and their actions that support the Word, >not the other way around. > >Did corruption stop on Earth when Legion died? Did it even get any less? Did knowledge stop when Raphael died? - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:46:39 -0400 From: "Rolland Therrien" Subject: Laurence [Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine] - -----Original Message----- From: damienw@juno.com To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 3:00 PM Subject: Re: IN> Re: Malakite Blandine > > >On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:09:06 -0700 "Bevan Thomas" >writes: >> Laurence did lead the slaughter, I feel, a little more literally. He >> was the >> most loyal champion of Uriel, right at the front hacking right and >> left. >> Laurence is a devoted Catholic and feels that all the pagan spirits >> are >> affronts on the eyes of the Lord. Therefore, he would have nothing >> but scorn >> and hatred for the pagan gods, fairies, fabulous beasts, etc. > > Let's get one thing straight, here. Keep in mind that Laurence >is a Malakite and his Word is strongly associated with honor. >Laurence is honor manifest, the perfect knight. For that reason, I'd >hesitate to say *all*. He'd kill the 'harmful' spirits gladly. He >still might kill the honorable ones but it would be from perceived >necessity, not hate. > The way I see it, Laurence's word embodies his attitude, which is that of the perfectly loyal knight/samurai. He considers himself nothing more then an extension of his direct superior, first Uriel and then God. He himself carries no personal judgement concerning various beings, other then the measure of their closeness to God, as seen by their Honor. His current attitude towards Ethereals may be tainted by the teachings and orders of Uriel before his "Retirement", but I believe that if Laurence had been placed in charge of the Purity Crusade in the first place, the outcome would've been different. For one thing, he would've made sure his targets were either Nightmares or servants of Nightmares, not wasting his time with innocent dreams. He also would've put a lot of work in trying to convert as many Ethereals as he could find to Christianity, so as to keep them away from Hell. ...Anything Less would not have been Chivalrous. ...Ok, now I'm tempted to resurrect my "Crusade of the Sword" story, just to prove the point. - -Exit the LoneWolf ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:06:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #2145 - --- in_nomine-digest Vessels >Some suggestions about what you can and can't tell >from examining a vessel thoroughly, amplifying canon >a little: I could see this being used as part of a new player's briefing pack (not necessarily what the _PC's_ know, but what the players should keep in mind). :) Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/01/01(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 21:14:03 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) >Your honor, Counsel is interpreting the actions of the Almighty >through a Military viewpoint consistant with his own belief system, >when there is no evidence that Military decisions were the driving >decisions behind the Almighty's decision. And Defense is now in the position of explaining the absurd contention that the removal and replacement of the Commander of the Hosts of Heaven immediately following a critical juncture in the War is "no evidence" that military concerns were related towards his removal. [snip "Gathered to the bosom of God" theory... fact, the War ain't over yet, and fact, that was the time at which it has been prophesied that the Host and humanity shall be so gathered.] - -- Chuckg _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:44:33 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) I got this before other folks did -- apparently by mistake. There's an irony in sending an e-mail expressing gladness someone moved to private e-mail even as they receive the public copy.... At 9:14 PM -0400 4/10/01, Charles Glasgow wrote: >>Your honor, Counsel is interpreting the actions of the Almighty >>through a Military viewpoint consistant with his own belief system, >>when there is no evidence that Military decisions were the driving >>decisions behind the Almighty's decision. > >And Defense is now in the position of explaining the absurd >contention that the removal and replacement of the Commander of the >Hosts of Heaven immediately following a critical juncture in the War >is "no evidence" that military concerns were related towards his >removal. > >[snip "Gathered to the bosom of God" theory... fact, the War ain't >over yet, and fact, that was the time at which it has been >prophesied that the Host and humanity shall be so gathered.] So, let's make the retort as public: Paragraph two is null. There is no Canon prophesy of that kind. The nature of Armageddon is CDaU, and blessed souls may climb Jacob's Ladder when they wish. Angels, apparently, may not. Paragraph one, *again,* filters your contention through your interpretation and your priorities. The War may be foremost on God's mind, and it may not. God may have intended this recall as punishment and He may not. It is *explicitly* CDaU, and therefore just as explicitly *not* evidence that God had Military Concerns in mind. Even *if* we stipulate it was, it doesn't mean God had any negative feelings towards Uriel or what he did. It may have been purely a concern that Uriel, having been subjected to a humiliation, could not be expected to be effective in his role, and as a Malakite couldn't step down as Michael did in his place before. Or it may have been God's way of making a management decision -- a department head had himself become a bone of contention, for good or ill reasons, so he was promoted out of that position to upper middle management and his lieutenant was put in charge. It wasn't that he was wrong, but it was the way to best improve overall morale. Reiterating a subjective opinion over and over does not make it fact. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:45:19 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Uriel (was Re: Malakite Blandine) I got this before other folks did -- apparently by mistake. There's an irony in sending an e-mail expressing gladness someone moved to private e-mail even as they receive the public copy.... At 9:14 PM -0400 4/10/01, Charles Glasgow wrote: >>Your honor, Counsel is interpreting the actions of the Almighty >>through a Military viewpoint consistant with his own belief system, >>when there is no evidence that Military decisions were the driving >>decisions behind the Almighty's decision. > >And Defense is now in the position of explaining the absurd >contention that the removal and replacement of the Commander of the >Hosts of Heaven immediately following a critical juncture in the War >is "no evidence" that military concerns were related towards his >removal. > >[snip "Gathered to the bosom of God" theory... fact, the War ain't >over yet, and fact, that was the time at which it has been >prophesied that the Host and humanity shall be so gathered.] So, let's make the retort as public: Paragraph two is null. There is no Canon prophesy of that kind. The nature of Armageddon is CDaU, and blessed souls may climb Jacob's Ladder when they wish. Angels, apparently, may not. Paragraph one, *again,* filters your contention through your interpretation and your priorities. The War may be foremost on God's mind, and it may not. God may have intended this recall as punishment and He may not. It is *explicitly* CDaU, and therefore just as explicitly *not* evidence that God had Military Concerns in mind. Even *if* we stipulate it was, it doesn't mean God had any negative feelings towards Uriel or what he did. It may have been purely a concern that Uriel, having been subjected to a humiliation, could not be expected to be effective in his role, and as a Malakite couldn't step down as Michael did in his place before. Or it may have been God's way of making a management decision -- a department head had himself become a bone of contention, for good or ill reasons, so he was promoted out of that position to upper middle management and his lieutenant was put in charge. It wasn't that he was wrong, but it was the way to best improve overall morale. Reiterating a subjective opinion over and over does not make it fact. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:39:30 -0700 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Terms of Address for Archangels > Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 13:06:07 -0400 > From: Mary > Subject: IN> Terms of Address for Archangels > > Normally even the suavist Mercurian (Creation) > doesn't have to face the > social nightmare of introducing people, or > addressing an Archangel or Demon > Prince oneself. Sure, the later probably doesn't > mean much--because you > have about .2 seconds to live anyway--but you might > as well be turned into > a puddle of ex-forces with *style*. Anyway these > things have been known to > happen occasionally to PC's because the Demiurge > (ie. the GM) has to get > their cheap thrills somehow. > > So how does one address various beings of power? These are all non-canon, I suppose. For many of the hard-liners (or new Princes seeking to appear more important than they actually are), it is preferable that all of their Distinctions be listed as part of their full titles. Included are Dominic, Laurence, Zadkiel, Ba'al, Belial, Saminga, Fleurity, and Furfur. Titles accorded to the Superior have been granted by either the Seraphim Council (in the case of Archangels) or by Lucifer himself (in the case of Demon Princes). All these should all be official in my game world. {introduction/presentation. forms of address} ARCHANGELS ° Blandine: Lady Blandine, Mistress of Hope, Archangel of Dreams. addressed as "M'Lady" or "Lady Blandine" ° David: David, Archangel of Stone. addressed as "David" ° Dominic: Lord Dominic (or Lady Dominique), Vassal of Conscience, Friend of Judgement, Master of Law, Archangel of Judgement. addressed as "M'Lord" or "M'Lady" ° Eli: Lord Eli, Archangel of Creation, addressed as "Dude," "Eli," or "Man," ° Gabriel: Mistress Gabriel, Chief Ambassador to Humanity, Divine Herald, Angel of Vengeance, Angel of Aspirtations, Angel of the Resurrection, Voice of God, Archangel of Fire. addressed as "Mistress" or "Lady" ° Janus: Lord Janus, Vassal of the Wind, Friend of the Unseen, Master of Motion, Archangel of the Wind. addressed as "M'Lord" or "Lord Janus" ° Jean: Lord Jean, Vassal of Lightning, Friend of the Illuminated, Master of the Machine, Archangel of Lightning. addressed as "Jean," or "Sir" ° Jordi: Jordi, Archangel of Animals. addressed as "Archangel Jordi" ° Laurence: Lord Laurence, Supreme Commander of the Heavenly Armies, Vassal of the Sword, Friend of the Lord's Troops, Master of the Armies of God, Archangel of the Sword. addressed as "Commander" or "Archangel Laurence" ° Marc: Lord Marc, Minister of the Heavenly Coffers, Archangel of Trade. addressed as "Marc," or "Sir" ° Micheal: Micheal, Who Is As God, Viceroy of Heaven, Guardian of Israel, Vassal of War, Friend of the Fighters, Master of Valor, Archangel of War. addressed as "Lord Micheal," "Micheal," "Archangel Micheal" ° Novalis: Lady Novalis, Mistress of Peace, Archangel of Flowers. addressed as "M'Lady" ° Yves: Sir Yves, Namer of the Ten-thousand Things, Keeper of All-Knowledge, Angel of Sources, Archangel of Destiny. addressed as "Yves" "Sir Yves" or "Archangel Yves" ° Christopher: Christopher, Archangel of Children. addressed as "Christopher" or "Archangel Christopher" ° Litheroy: Lord Litheroy, Vassal of Inquiry, Friend of the Quest, Master of Discovery, Archangel of Revelation. addressed as "M'Lord.""Lord Litheroy," or "Litheroy" ° Zadkiel: Lady Zadkiel, Vassal of Protection, Friend of the Guard, Master of the Watch, Archangel of Protection. addressed as"M'Lady," "Lady Zadkiel" or Zadkiel" DEMON PRINCES ° Andrealphus: Prince Andrealphus, Sexual Power Incarnate, Demon Prince of Lust. addressed as "Andre," "My Prince" ° Asmodeus: Prince Asmodeus, Commander of Lucifer's Secret Police, Knight of Judgement, Captain of Integrity, Baron of Justice, Demon Prince of the Game. addressed as "My Prince" or "Prince Asmodeus" ° Ba'al: Prince Ba'al, Commander of Hell's Armies, Knight of the Black Order, Captain of the Infernal Armies, Baron of Victory, Demon Prince of the War. addressed "Overlord," "Prince Ba'al," or "My Prince" ° Beleth: Princess Beleth, Mistress of Terror, Destroyer of Dreams, Djinn Princess of Nightmares. addressed as "Princess," or "Princess Beleth" ° Belial: Prince Belial, True Superior of Fire, Knight of the Infernal Furances, Captain of the Eternal Fire, Baron of the Demonic Brazier, Demon Prince of Fire. addressed as "My Prince," or "Prince Belial" ° Haagenti: Prince Haagenti, Swallower of Souls, Comsumer of All, Demon Prince of Gluttony. addressed as "Prince Haagenti" ° Kobal: Kobal, Master of Derisive Laughter, Demon of Broken Hearts, Baron of Hysteria, Demon Prince of Dark Humor. addressed as "Kobal" or "My Prince" ° Kronos: Prince Kronos, Breaker of Souls, Keeper of the Keys, He Who Sees All, Master of Time, Balseraph Prince of Fate. ° Malphus: Prince Malphus, Master of Messengers, Hell's Treaty Maker, Captain of the Broken Promise, Demon Prince of Factions. addressed as "Prince Malphus" or "My Prince" ° Nybbas: It's Nybbas!! The Freshest, Hippest, Most With-it Prince of Hell!! He's got Style, He's got Grace, He'll Wipe a smile Upon your face!! The Prince to whom you Dare not Frown, He'll turn this War just right around!! He's got the tele, the TV the Tube, if you want Air-Time, Here's your Dude!! He's the PRINCE OF THE MEDIA!!!!! . addressed as "My Prince" or "Prince Nybbas" ° Saminga: Prince Saminga, Lord of Vampires, Knight of the Dead, Captain of the Infernal Legion, Baron of the Undead Kingdom, Demon Prince of Death. addressed as "Overlord," "Prince Saminga," "All-powerful one" ° Valefor: Prince Valefor, Demon Prince of Theft. addressed as "Prince Valefor," "My Prince," "Valefor," or "Janus" ° Vapula: Prince Vapula, Master of Science, The Great Tinkerer, Demon Prince of Technology. addressed as "Prince Vapula" ° Lilith: Princess Lilith, Human Princess of Freedom. addressed as "Princess," "Princess Lilith," or "Mother" ° Furfur: Prince Furfur, Knight of Rock, Captain of the Mosh Pit, Baron of Hardcore, Master of Overdrive, Demon Prince of Hardcore. addressed as "Dude" or "Prince Furfur" ° Mammon: Prince Mammon, Keeper of All Things, Knight of Treasure, Captain of the Motherlode, Baron of El Dorado, Patron Demon of America, Demon Prince of Greed. ° Alaemon: Alaemon. addressed as "Alaemon" ° Fleurity: Prince Fleurity, Dealer to the World, Knight of Addicts, Captain of Chemistry, Baron of Good Trips, Demon Prince of Drugs. addressed as "Prince Fleurity," or "Fleurity" - -Perry. Kyriotate of Flowers in service to Creation perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. " - --Dick Cavett ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2148 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2001 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.