From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Apr 22 11:16:15 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 LAA03158 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:16:15 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id LAA18011 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:23:34 -0500 Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:23:34 -0500 Message-Id: <200104221623.LAA18011@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 #2173 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 Sunday, April 22 2001 Volume 01 : Number 2173 In this digest: Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness ... part3 Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness... Part Two IN> Corrected arcticle! EVE! IN> Random Balseraph Musing Re: IN> Rings Re: IN> Rings Re: IN> Random Balseraph Musing IN> Not-So-Evil Thoughts IN> hail mary... Re: Live bait (was Re: IN> Oannes) Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) Re: Just noticed... (was Re: IN> Laurence in the Land of the Kami) Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) Re: Just noticed... (was Re: IN> Laurence in the Land of the Kami) Re: IN> hail mary... RE: IN> Not-So-Evil Thoughts Re: IN> hail mary... Re: IN> hail mary... Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness... Part Two Re: IN> hail mary... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:49:49 -0000 From: "cassandra benner" Subject: Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness ... part3 We all run the game a little dirrently, this was my take on the sups response, tinged if you will by a little madness. Haagenti is i think one of the more mis understood sups, he has a lot of potential whichever way you run him, i like to have a little smarter than presented in the main books kind of haagenti. But my games have tended to have brief bright spots smothered in dark brroding murkyness. I'd also like to take this oppertunaty to thank -FallenSeraph- for allowing me to add to his creation, and warp his mind as per the standard way i do. Here's to our next project... bevan wrote >Strangely philosophical for Haagenti. I notice that many of the superiors >seem a little different then usual in these comments, though Haagenti is >the >most obvious. Very cool stuff. cass wrote >>Haagenti - *urrrrrrrrrrrrp*. He grabs the food like a slave deprived, hah, >>dirt not food, the fool eats the dirt and gets no fatter. Pass the >>Mustard. >> 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: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:58:36 -0000 From: "cassandra benner" Subject: Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness... Part Two FallenSeraph&Cass wrote > > Aballam > > Habbalite Archangel of Madness > > "The world will bend, then break before me. All shall be madness" Rev PeeKitty Wrote >Wow... GREAT writeup. I'm not into retroconning, but I'm tempted to >introduce Aballam into my existing group as a new Prince... I liked the >Kobal/Kronos angle a lot, though, so I'd have to have that happen later >and slightly differently... >This needs to be clarified more. "Insanity" in IN is generally a Discord >(or Disadvantage). I'd suggest something similar to the table in G:IN >(a wonderful table, I must say)... I don't have G:IN, never intend to get it, seen the posts on here about it and i just skip them. In the words of insaity i think perhaps we should say *grab a WW vampire book and pick the insanity from there* and have that as a dischord for cd hours/days which ever. FS wrote the attunements type stuff, i merely applied a mallet to him occasionally. He'd be better to answer this. >This should be restricted, methinks. Restriction at the GM's behest. >I *loved* this writeup - I hope the comments help. Thanks, and yup. Cass *we gladly feast on those who would subdue us* _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:55:46 -0400 From: Daniel Sauve Subject: IN> Corrected arcticle! EVE! (might help if I use the right names...) EVE GALAHAD "Majestic lady! Let me pledge my sword to her! Let me take up arms against all those that harm her or her word! For Eve, to Calvary!" /"Sweet child. He takes to his word with a serious passion. But sometimes, he fails to see the forest for the trees. He wishes to preserve a woman's Virtue? Help her find her path to Heaven, whether it fits his passions or not. He wants to do a great dead in my name? Save Gabriel's heart. I am only the Word, not that which the word contains."/ JAYMIEL "Minding holding this for a second?" /"Of course not, dear."/ (To elaborate: Jaymiel /likes/ Eve, because Eve knows the on switch has to work before you get the pretty lights. And Eve still has a very maternal side, which Jaymiel's tireless enthusiasm sparks. In fact, only Eli and Jean endulge her more...) DAISY "Oh! What a pretty lady! I'll get her daisies and poppies and rosses and clover and thistle...She'll like it *ever* so much!" /"Like all Habalites, deluding herself. The fact that the happiness she creates is so artificial, even to her... it is a deep tragedy."/ LYNOURE "So you want women to be safe. To be able to walk the streets at night. "Making Eve's life misrable is a unique... commitment... to keep." /"She would be wise not to attempt building her notch on the backs of women. It is with her as it would be with anyone Lucifer deemed the word to-- there is a nature strain bentween the two. "I shall slack this particular strain soon enough."/ Roland "What does a woman compare to a fine heffer?" /"I almost pity the boy. "I said, 'almost', Dominique. I have my limits."/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:48:43 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: IN> Random Balseraph Musing I've always been of the opinion that Balseraphs could self-resonate with a minimum of effort, that they were telling themselves convenient little lies on an almost continual basis. It makes sense. They aren't Seraphim anymore, so I don't see them adhering to the truth in any normal fashion. If Suaveiel the Balseraph has a role as Rico Cool, he doesn't need to resonate another person unless the person has reason to doubt that he is Rico Cool. He simply resonates himself "I am Rico Cool." for a couple seconds, and tells the person, "I am Rico Cool." If the person has no cause to doubt him, fine. Suaveiel only has to make a resonance roll to inflict his personal reality on someone else. I've heard people talk about how Balseraphs must make a resonance roll for any lie, no matter what. I think if that were the case, a Balseraph would either a) become a puddle of dissonance, or b) only use his ability on himself when necessary, thereby becoming very Seraph-like. I like to think of a Balseraph mind as a constantly shifting turmoil of lies, appearing and dissapearing as needed, kept under control by the Balseraph's paranoia and common sense. With this in mind, I present: Compulsive Self-Resonator (Celestial Discord, restricted to Balseraphs) This Discord causes a Balseraph to resonate himself much more often than necessary, often in dangerous and self-destructive ways. Whenever something unpleasant happens to the Balseraph, he must make a Will roll minus the level of Discord, to prevent himself from making himself disbelieve it. This can have several results, ranging from the confusing (Old Yeller had such a happy ending! Too bad they didn't have to kill the dog) to the blatantly self-destructive (No, there aren't half a dozen Malakim chasing me with shotguns! Why am I running?) Blatantly self-destructive beliefs can of course get a bonus to the roll, but this can be offset by high levels of the Discord. Anyway, I'm not Moe, but I like to think I can crank out a decent idea now and then. Rev. Brian ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:29:37 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: Re: IN> Rings >From: "William J. Keith" >...a ring. Within the ring, pi is exactly 3. > >Biblically supported as well as an object in Warehouse 23, I hasten to add. Not that I doubt you, but would you mind listing your sources for this? - -- Casca _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:16:10 -0400 From: "William J. Keith" Subject: Re: IN> Rings >>From: "William J. Keith" > >>...a ring. Within the ring, pi is exactly 3. >> >>Biblically supported as well as an object in Warehouse 23, I hasten to add. > >Not that I doubt you, but would you mind listing your sources for this? Well, as for Warehouse 23, just open enough boxes and you'll find it. ;^) As for the Bible... I Kings 7:23. "And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." Hence the circumference divided by the diameter is 30/10 = 3. It's an old math joke, since you can assume the passage either is giving the measurement to one significant digit (maybe the circumference was about 31.4159 cubits, e.g.) or that the "sea" (a vessel for holding liquids) was not precisely circular, i.e., "round all about." Mathematical historians care because the estimation of pi is an ancient and noble endeavor, whether or not the writer in this case knew that *every* circle would have a ratio of about 3. >-- Casca William ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:44:44 -0700 From: "Phillip" Subject: Re: IN> Random Balseraph Musing > I've always been of the opinion that Balseraphs could self-resonate with a minimum of effort, that they were telling themselves convenient little lies on an almost continual basis. It makes sense. They aren't Seraphim anymore, so I don't see them adhering to the truth in any normal fashion. Actually, I always felt that Seraphim had something to get out of self-resonating, myself. Step 1: Resonate self. Step 2: Make a statement that you believe to be true (Can't lie, that's dissonant, but if you think it's the truth, it works). Step 3: Your resonance will tell you the Truth of the matter. Well, it might, but it's better than nothing. Sort of a Seraph version of soul searching. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:59:42 -0700 From: "Kish" Subject: IN> Not-So-Evil Thoughts The Evil Thoughts thread made me start wondering about something: Which Demon Prince do all of you think is /most/ likely to redeem, and why, other than Lilith? (Lilith being excluded just because her differences from the other Princes are so obvious that the "why" part of the question is likely to be too simple.) My choice would be Haagenti, just because he doesn't seem very deliberately malicious, and he does seem to genuinely care about some beings (Kobal and Fleurity, but hey, you're got to start somewhere). --Kish ICQ# 28085879 AIM Kish K M ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 23:02:14 -0000 From: "cassandra benner" Subject: IN> hail mary... Just curious as to why Mary, Joseph, Mary Magdelane, John the baptist and the apostles are not mentioned in IN. Yeah i know it's only a game, but it's heaven/hell/angels/demons game, and the significant human part of it is severly underscored in it's absence. Is it perhaps because SJGames do not wish to offend any -major- mainstream relegion, or is it simply that they do not think the human element, nay, significant element is not really all that important in the game. A game that deals with the deities and -powers- beyond human reckoning i feel have the human side to it. Yes i know there is the corporeal players guide, and we can all grab a bible and read, but the books that we get online, in stores or whereever are written from a very onesided view, and really give little insight in to the historical and -real- figures. I really only thought about this matter as i'm reading several books about the knights templar and the black madonna -cults-. Thankyou for indulging my curiousity in this matter, i hope this will produce a very serious topic conversation, one that doesnt clip in to number crunching and other such things, which are fine in there own right, but this is i think a serious issue that bears some serious considering. Cas *blue apples* [;o) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:41:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: Live bait (was Re: IN> Oannes) - --- Charles Glasgow wrote: > *mildly puzzled look* > > Actually, I was having all parties involved being very > sincere with each other... I refer to the way that the situation was set up. ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "Holding a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee." -- William Walton (no relation) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:47:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) - --- Ryan Elias wrote: > Perry Lloyd wrote: > > > here's a question . . . > > > > Ethereals don't have a Celestial form, right? > > > > How do they engage in Celestial combat? > > AFAIK, they don't. Celestial combat is solely the > province of > celestials. Humans and Ethereals can't play. Not so. Ethereals can be engaged in Celestial combat while on the Ethereal Plane, with the same consequences that are faced by Celestials. Says so in The Marches. Also, killing an Ethereal in Ethereal combat while in their own domain really jacks them up. In any other domain, they just get ejected back to their own corners and hit with Discord (much like a Celestial being ejected from the Marches). ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "Holding a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee." -- William Walton (no relation) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:56:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: Just noticed... (was Re: IN> Laurence in the Land of the Kami) - --- "Rev. Pee Kitty" wrote: > There isn't any known Grigori style. That's because the Symphony has altered so that no one but the Watchers themselves remembers the Way of Eternal Vigilance. 0;> ===== Michael Walton, #9805-068 "Holding a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee." -- William Walton (no relation) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 00:52:41 -0700 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) > > Perry Lloyd wrote: > > > > > here's a question . . . > > > > > > Ethereals don't have a Celestial form, right? > > > > > > How do they engage in Celestial combat? Ethereals can be engaged in Celestial combat > while on the Ethereal Plane, with the same consequences > that are faced by Celestials. Says so in The Marches. > Also, killing an Ethereal in Ethereal combat while in their > own domain really jacks them up. In any other domain, they > just get ejected back to their own corners and hit with > Discord (much like a Celestial being ejected from the Marches). Well, yes . . . you and Elizabeth have both pointed out that Ethereals can, in fact, participate in Cel combat. I'm asking HOW it is that they are able to participate. :) Do Ethereals have celestial forms? . . . Is it that in the Marches you're both Ethereal and Celestial at the same time? . . . Is it that Ethereals and Celestials are made of the same sort of stuff? . . . Is it that Ethereals were once Celestials or vice versa? . . . Is it that Ethereal form (what you're MADE OF, not your appearance) is the same as Celestial form (i.e. a harmony of forces)? . . . And since Ethereals *can* participate in Celestial combat (a) can they enter heaven and/or hell, and (b) if not, why not? - -Perry, kfc perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be. " - --Kurt Vonnegut ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 02:41:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: Just noticed... (was Re: IN> Laurence in the Land of the Kami) On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Michael Walton wrote: > > There isn't any known Grigori style. > > That's because the Symphony has altered so that no one > but the Watchers themselves remembers the Way of Eternal > Vigilance. 0;> Aw, you *had* to go there, didn't you? Michael knows about Yephiel's "hidden knowledge", of course, but he's more than willing to refrain from mentioning it to the rest of Heaven... any strategic edge can help, you know.... The Way of Eternal Vigilance This Celestial Glory style takes advantage of the Grigori's natural size and perception. When combatting a (physically) smaller foe, the Watcher has learned to make exceptional use of leverage and size, adding +2 to the Power of his hand-to-hand attacks. When fighting any being which can cause disturbance (e.g., almost all celestials and ethereals), the Grigori can not only see his foe, but can also sense the movements of their body through the Symphony, as it disturbs it slightly with their presence. This adds +1 to the Watcher's Dodge rolls, and +1 to the Accuracy of their attacks. These bonuses only apply if the Grigori has heard the being (at some time) make a disturbance, and they are *doubled* if the being is currently echoing from creating a disturbance! - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian, Q4B4L! Meow! It is a sad commentary on today's society that this .sig file must be considered "offensive" simply because it contains the word "fuck". ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 01:22:00 -0700 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> hail mary... - ----- Original Message ----- From: "cassandra benner" To: Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 4:02 PM Subject: IN> hail mary... > Just curious as to why Mary, Joseph, Mary Magdelane, John the baptist and > the apostles are not mentioned in IN. Uh. Frankly, I believe it is because Steve Jackson Games does NOT want a *law suit* from the crazed and very fearful American psycho-Christians who are unable to tolerate ideas which might potentially poison the purity of the beliefs they're trying to imprint upon their children. > Yeah i know it's only a game, but it's heaven/hell/angels/demons game, and > the significant human part of it is severly underscored in it's absence. I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, in my campaign's history (http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo/tabletop/background.html), and I quote: "At their deaths, the four Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ascend into Heaven. They are just as confused as everyone else at the absence of Jesus Christ in Heaven, and so ascend to the upper reaches of Heaven." and "In 1212 A.D. the miserable failure of the Children's Crusade prompts Christopher being named Angel of Children, if only shut up the Demons of Kobal. In 1348 A.D. Dominic and Asmodeus collaborate openly for the first time to remove Makatiel, Renegade Demon Prince of Disease who, in his insanity, had intended to wipe out humankind with Black Death. With improved relations between Dominic and his former Servitor, Dominic is informed that Jesus did pass through Hell after his death, but had only stopped to speak with Lucifer and Kronos and then free a few choice souls before leaving. This evidence convinces Dominic that the file on Jesus the Christ must be reopened." and thus Eli becomes a target . . . later, unbeknownest to my players (none of whom get this list, SFAIK), Eli chose to leave heaven when Dominic's agents were beginning to come too close to discovering the truth: Eli was Jesus, Jesus is Eli. And so, preferring to sacrifice his connection to Heaven than possible undermine the very founding of Christianity in Heaven's eyes, Eli chooses to strip himself of his memories and wander the earth (on April 1st, 1957). > Is it perhaps because SJGames do not wish to offend any -major- mainstream > religion, or is it simply that they do not think the human element, nay, > significant element is not really all that important in the game. former > A game that deals with the deities and -powers- beyond human reckoning i > feel have the human side to it. Running a Soldier's campaign can be A LOT of fun. I'd recommend using GURPS In Nomine for it, though (unless you don't already own the GURPS Basic Set 3rd Edition, GURPS Compendium 1: Character Creation, in which case just get the Corporeal Players Guide) (And the Game Master's Guide - just 'cause its sodamnice) > Yes i know there is the corporeal players guide, and we can all grab a bible > and read, but the books that we get online, in stores or whereever are > written from a very onesided view, and really give little insight in to the > historical and -real- figures. > > I really only thought about this matter as i'm reading several books about > the knights templar and the black madonna -cults-. > Thankyou for indulging my curiousity in this matter, i hope this will > produce a very serious topic conversation, one that doesnt clip in to number > crunching and other such things, which are fine in there own right, but this > is i think a serious issue that bears some serious considering. well. When Americans can grow up and learn to be tolerant of religious beliefs other than their own (not all Americans, jeez), maybe we'll be able to be mature about these sorts of things. Until then, really . . . yeah. We'll suffer from the blind ignorance of the culturally illiterate and religiously egocentric inconsiderate people whose fear of being incorrect merely further Blinds them in their pursuit of Truth. [And if you've been offended by anything I've said, please respond to me *off-list* at pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu where I can express *my* egocentric and possibly inconsidate views in four-color for you.] - -Perry, Kyriotate of Flowers in service to Creation. perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be. " - --Kurt Vonnegut ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 00:48:23 -0700 From: "Julian Mensch" Subject: RE: IN> Not-So-Evil Thoughts > The Evil Thoughts thread made me start wondering about something: > > Which Demon Prince do all of you think is /most/ likely to > redeem, and why, other than Lilith? (Lilith being excluded > just because her differences from the other Princes are so > obvious that the "why" part of the question is likely to be > too simple.) I'd choose Vapula - he's a Habbalite, so he probably already thinks he's an angel. He's Hellborn, so he never really had a chance to do good. IMO, his Word has more inherant good to it then evil. And he doesn't seem to focus overmuch on the "punish the weak" theme of his Band, while he could almost be called... objective. I think it would take an outside agent to make him _feel_ something and see the world beyond his experiments, but honestly he would lose nothing going up and serving Heavan, unless you coun't human experimentation -- and my impression of his writeup is not that he's a sadist, just so completely wrapped up in his Word he doesn't see others' lives. But I'll agree that Haagenti is also a good candidate. - -- Julian Mensch ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 07:29:26 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> hail mary... > Uh. Frankly, I believe it is because Steve Jackson Games does NOT want a > *law suit* from the crazed and very fearful American psycho-Christians who > are unable to tolerate ideas which might potentially poison the purity of > the beliefs they're trying to imprint upon their children. Don't forget the Muslims either. Seriously, I think Perry explained it best. Genuine concern over a lawsuit, along with the negative stereotypes regarding role playing games should be reason enough. > Yes i know there is the corporeal players guide, and we can all grab a bible> and read, but the books that we get online, in stores or whereever are written from a very onesided view, and really give little insight in to the historical and -real- figures. Which is one of the great things about this list. If you have some insight on how they should be handled in the In Nomine world, you go right ahead and post them. > well. When Americans can grow up and learn to be tolerant of religious > beliefs other than their own (not all Americans, jeez), maybe we'll be able > to be mature about these sorts of things. Careful, Perry. Yer slipping into dangerous territory with that sentence. - -:-) > Until then, really . . . yeah. We'll suffer from the blind ignorance of the > culturally illiterate and religiously egocentric inconsiderate people whose > fear of being incorrect > merely further Blinds them in their pursuit of Truth. I prefer the Calvin and Hobbes quote on the matter. Hobbes: "Do you believe in God?" Calvin: "Well SOMEONE'S out to get me." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:24:56 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> hail mary... At 11:02 PM +0000 4/21/01, cassandra benner wrote: >Just curious as to why Mary, Joseph, Mary Magdelane, John the baptist and >the apostles are not mentioned in IN. Basically, as far as I understand it, their existance is linked with that of Jesus, to a large extent -- and Jesus Christ's nature is CDaU. So I can't really see what else there is to say about them. IIRC my Bible correctly, Salome is mentioned as a demon in Superiors 2 who got into the Bible, so there's certainly implication that -- just as there _was_ a Jesus in IN (nature unknown) -- there were other Biblical beings. >Yes i know there is the corporeal players guide, and we can all grab a bible >and read, but the books that we get online, in stores or whereever are >written from a very onesided view, and really give little insight in to the >historical and -real- figures. Everyone who's doing that research should feel free to write a Pyramid article about the topic -- there's an In Nomine Templars pair of articles in those archives... O:> (Basically, the plot lines that would involve such things haven't come up -- the historical support being somewhat lacking at this time -- and the other place where they would logically fall is in the GMG, which was space-short. Oh, there's also a net.book project on the .gurps board of the Pyramid message boards, which is being titled "GURPS Old Testement." If you have a Pyramid subscription*, the subject for those threads includes a [GOT]. If you don't have one, then the preliminary work appears to be linked to http://pages.prodigy.net/kdladage/jegame/ .) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:32:16 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals in Celestial combat (Was re: IN> Soul Killing a Remnant) At 12:52 AM -0700 4/22/01, Perry Lloyd wrote: >Well, yes . . . you and Elizabeth have both pointed out that Ethereals can, >in fact, participate in Cel combat. >I'm asking HOW it is that they are able to participate. :) > >Do Ethereals have celestial forms? . . . There is an implication in the main book that some of them _may_, but then again, this may be referring to _celestial_ spirits. It's unclear. O:p >Is it that in the Marches you're both Ethereal and Celestial at the same >time? . . . Or that, just as one is able to participate in ethereal combat on Earth, in certain circumstances, so can one participate in celestial combat in the Marches (it being a "level higher," so to speak.) This is probably what celestials say about it. >Is it that Ethereals and Celestials are made of the same sort of stuff? . . >. This is what ethereals tend to say about it. O:> >Is it that Ethereals were once Celestials or vice versa? . . . This is another thing ethereals tend to say about it -- the vice-versa. >Is it that Ethereal form (what you're MADE OF, not your appearance) is the >same as Celestial form (i.e. a harmony of forces)? . . . This is something some celestials and ethereals probably say about it. >And since Ethereals *can* participate in Celestial combat (a) can they enter >heaven and/or hell, and (b) if not, why not? A: not in canon. A.5: It is probably theoretically possible that a Superior could either help one in with personal attention to maintaining the "life support," or show a Song-of-Projection'ed one around. B: the angels say it's because they don't have _real_ souls (just some Celestial Forces); the Tsayadim (sub-catagory of angels) say it's because they're imPure; the ethereals say that it's because Yaweh closed off his Ethereal Domain (that he calls the celestial realm) to those other ethereals who were not of his own making (i.e., angels). - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:40:12 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Whisper not the name of Madness... Part Two At 10:23 PM -0400 4/20/01, Rev. Pee Kitty wrote: >This needs to be clarified more. "Insanity" in IN is generally a Discord >(or Disadvantage). I'd suggest something similar to the table in G:IN >(a wonderful table, I must say)... Table? Discord Table? I can't find this in my copy of GIN. (Do you mean the GURPS Basic Set's Fright Check table? Love that thing, I do.) Or was I looking in the wrong place? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:12:07 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> hail mary... Perry Lloyd wrote: > > Just curious as to why Mary, Joseph, Mary Magdelane, John the baptist and > > the apostles are not mentioned in IN. > > Uh. Frankly, I believe it is because Steve Jackson Games does NOT want a > *law suit* from the crazed and very fearful American psycho-Christians who > are unable to tolerate ideas which might potentially poison the purity of > the beliefs they're trying to imprint upon their children. A lawsuit? You can't be sued for writing things about (allegedly) historical figures who've been dead for thousands of years. Those figures aren't used in IN because (a) It would probably upset a small percentage of IN's fanbase, and (b) it would fill in a lot of the CDaU that's traditionally been left to individual GMs to decide, wrt actual theology. The same reason why Jesus doesn't show up in IN. Whether this makes IN better or worse than the French version (which does use all the actual personages involved, in a highly satirical fashion), I don't know. > well. When Americans can grow up and learn to be tolerant of religious > beliefs other than their own (not all Americans, jeez), Even with the disclaimer, I find that statement offensive. America certainly doesn't have a lock on religious intolerance. - -David ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2173 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2001 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.