in_nomine-digest Thursday, May 23 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2650 In this digest: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> Furfur in Hell Re: IN> Free Will & Lucifer's Word IN> Furfur in Hell IN> New Relic Re: IN> New Relic Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> New Relic Sympathy for the Devil (was Re: IN> Lucifer's Word) Re: IN> The Angel of Hate IN> Words for Angels Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> Words for Angels Re: IN> The Angel of Hate IN> Problems with IN Re: IN> New Relic Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> Words for Angels Re: IN> Problems with IN Re: IN> Problems with IN Re: IN> Sympathy for the Devil (was Re: Lucifer's Word) Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Re: IN> Problems with IN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:39:18 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate W S wrote: > > > > > You're assuming that angelic attitudes changed as > > human attitudes did. > > Well, since Word-shifts drastically influence how > celestials on both sides of the War view their Words, That's not correct. Word-shifts influence how celestials _wield_ their Words. If human attitudes change enough to alter a Word's place in the Symphony, the celestial holding that Word must either adjust, or lose Word Forces as his implementation of the Word becomes marginalized. But celestials are NOT shaped by human attitudes. If every human on Earth suddenly decided flowers were evil, it would not cause Novalis to Fall. It would probably reduce her so severely she might lose her Archangel stature. > See also:> Mercurian Angel of Eugenics- whose word was granted > before World War I (although not Cannon, he certainly > seems like a good example on the same lines, with the > Word-shift massively accelerated). Making up your own non-canonical example does not support your point, unfortunately. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:54:09 -0700 From: WonderGecko Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate [snippeh] > If every human on Earth > suddenly decided flowers were evil, it would not cause Novalis to Fall. > It would probably reduce her so severely she might lose her Archangel > stature. Cf. The conditioning used on the Deltas and Epsilons in _Brave New World_ to make them fear flowers. I was actually poking at a write-up for a 'dystopic' Brave New World/1984 sort of setting for In Nomine, where the War was being slowly lost on Earth. I may do that--and, given that the 'flavor' of Brave New World is very different from that of 1984 (It's Mammom, Haagenti, and Fleurity that are winning in BNW, while Malphas and Baal control the Lowerarchy in 1984), I'll probably do...separate write-ups! Muhaha. My thought is that when flowers became something to fear, it might cause Novalis to fledge Malakite as she made efforts to continue to support the new meaning of her Word--which, in Brave New World, would be something along the lines of fighting the influence of Mammon and Haagenti to make all activities those that consumed resources and supported the economy. Oh, yes--and fear. >) Lots and lots of lovely fear, which would be excellent for a Malakite Archangel trying to fight a losing War against Hell, but likely awful for a Cherub. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 18:30:11 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: Re: IN> Furfur in Hell > R3, "Heaven & Hell," states that he has a "dance club" called The Brimstone > Club in Shal-Mari. (even has its own sub-heading) Am I the only one who thinks the writers missed a perfect opportunity to use Pandemonium? - -- Casca "Many people hear voices when no-one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at the walls all day. Others are called writers and they do pretty much the same thing." --Margaret Chittenden, writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 19:06:00 -0400 From: "S.D." Subject: Re: IN> Free Will & Lucifer's Word >I don't know I don't like to let players comfortable with the fact that >they or humanity have free will. The way I look at it, Fate and destiny >aside (which are a plan given to celestials by God or the universe, take >your pick), Celestials are much more concerned with the fact that they have >no free will. First, I'm not quite sure I understand that last sentance. Elaborate please? Secondly, core rulebook, section on the Grigori. I don't have it with me to quote directly, but essentially it says that the decision on whether your PC believes s/he has free will is up to the player. My explaination of Lucifer presumes that everything sapient has some degree of free will; strongest in humans, weaker in celestials, but still present. Celestials tend to subsume it in either 'devoted selflessness' for angels or 'self-preservationist subservience / pure selfishness' for demons, but it's still *there*. Of course, I'd also assume that God has ways of getting What Must Be Done to come about *regardless* of an individual's choices... the question is, does He *choose* to. ~S.D. Ryukage ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Do as I say, ladies and gentlemen, not as I do. Because who wants to wind up being the one who sees everything and says nothing? It's not a comfortable role to play at all. "And sooner or later, you run out of cigarettes and music to play." Ruka Tsuchiya, 'Angels of the Silences' ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:32:30 -0400 From: BC Petery Subject: IN> Furfur in Hell >is there a canon answer as to where Furfur set up in Hell? I suspect Shal-Mari, >but there seems to be enough room in Abaddon or Perdition, but a great site for >his Word would be Tartarus... R3, "Heaven & Hell," states that he has a "dance club" called The Brimstone Club in Shal-Mari. (even has its own sub-heading) Help! I'm typing and I can't logoff! BC Petery http://www15.brinkster.com/ugwump/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 20:59:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> New Relic I've got a PC that would have shot a puppy to get one of these, last game session... well, no, he actually wouldn't, but it still would have been a serious temptation. Moe PS: Nothing personal, Ruth. :) Blockers Blockers - there are lots of different types - use a variant of the Ethereal Song of Shields to protect their owners from the effects of a specific Attunement or resonance (chosen when the artifact is created). For example, a Calabite of Nightmares Blocker, once activated, will completely shield against the Calabite of Nightmares Attunement - but not any other Attunement, or a regular Calabite resonance roll. A Calabite Blocker will block all regular Calabite resonance use, but not against the effects of the Calabite of Nightmares Attunement. This 'protection' works both ways, thus making these devices useful short-term containment devices. Very short term: duration is equal to the regular Ethereal Song of Shields. So far, frantic research has yet to come up with a one-way Blocker, or one that can protect an entire area. These relics pretty much have the same status in the War as poison gas did during World War II: both sides have them in stock, both sides are prepared to use them and neither side really wants to open up the can of worms that they represent. There are still a certain number of them out there: the usefulness of (for example) a Shedite of the Game or Seraph of Flowers Blocker are clear enough to both sides that individual celestials may very well decide to risk rocking the boat... Relic/6 (variant Ethereal Song of Shields): 6/12* Self-Powered: +0 Convenience: Can be worn +2 Visibility: Perception roll -2 Vulnerability: Celestial Artifact Destroyed when corporeal form destroyed -4 Final Cost: 3/8 *Breakdown for cost: the ability to block one specific resonance was deemed to be essentially a special effect, with no effect on points. The ability to block one specific Choir/Band/Servitor Attunement was deemed to be slightly limiting, resulting in a cost of 2/level. In either case, the Effect of "no range - self only" was deemed to be worth another -1/level, thus resulting in a final cost of 1/level for Attunement Blockers and 2/level for Resonance Blockers. GMs should feel free to adjust the final cost per level to one that best suits the individual campaign, or limit what Attunements/Resonances may be blocked, or both. Finally, this variant of the Song of Shields does not have any effect on Superior-level Resonance or Attunement use, mostly because it's more amusing this way. ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/13/02(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 00:22:57 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: Re: IN> New Relic I'd further suggest that these cannot be "stacked", ie you cannot have a Calabite Blocker and a Balseraph Blocker active at the same time. - -- Casca "Many people hear voices when no-one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at the walls all day. Others are called writers and they do pretty much the same thing." --Margaret Chittenden, writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 21:27:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate - --- David Edelstein wrote: > W S wrote: > > See also:> Mercurian Angel of Eugenics- whose word > was granted > > before World War I (although not Cannon, he > certainly > > seems like a good example on the same lines, with > the > > Word-shift massively accelerated). > > Making up your own non-canonical example does not > support your point, > unfortunately. Actually, that was one of mine. Well, a throwaway line, at least. (pause) Not that I'm disagreeing with your point, mind you. Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/13/02(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 21:30:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> New Relic - --- Eric Bertish wrote: > I'd further suggest that these cannot be "stacked", > ie you cannot have a > Calabite Blocker and a Balseraph Blocker active at > the same time. > That's a thought. Or, maybe you can ... if you're willing to pay [Insert Suitably Awful Consequences Here]... (cue evil laughter) Moe ===== Liber Licentiae Moeticae: http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html Last updated 04/13/02(this is usually way out of date) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 21:52:46 -0700 From: Vaughn Romero Subject: Sympathy for the Devil (was Re: IN> Lucifer's Word) "S.D." wrote: > Lucifer has never Fallen. He has never become dissonant, or Discordant. > He is still the Archangel of Light - but everybody assumes he is the > Balseraph Prince of Lies, or Darkness, or what-have-you. He just > hasn't gotten around to enlightening them yet. I suppose everyone on this list has at one time or another written or dreamed up a "Sympathy for the Devil" piece. Since you showed us yours, I'll follow suit and show y'all mine. Note: Canon has left the building... - - - - LONG DARK ROAD TO DESTINY "Can God create a rock even He can't lift?" In my heresy game idea, every being has a Destiny and a Fate - even God - and just like every other being, God's Destiny or Fate will be the result of choices. To enact these choices God essentially split himself in two forming a Destiny-track entity (called 'God') and a Fate-track entity (called 'The Beast'). For most of history, the Destiny-track entity has been running the show creating the universe and generally setting up the playing field for the big choices to come. Just like in canon, things get interesting around the time of humanity's creation. The hand-waving short explanation is that humans are the instrument by which God can achieve His Destiny or embrace His Fate. Yves, being the shepherd of Destiny, is the first to figure out that God has given Himself a choice between Destiny and Fate and that the actions of celestials and humans will determine the final outcome. To complicate matters, I made Michael a key element in God's Fate. Essentially, Michael's vulnerability is pride and if he ever thinks so highly of himself that he questions God's plans, he will tip the scales toward Fate. To further complicate matters, I also made Michael the unwitting vessel of The Beast. The reason Michael has never lost a competition or conflict is that he literally has God on his side, although in this case, he has God's Fate's riding him like a Shedite. Using further hand-waving, I decided that Yves figures out what The Beast plans. The Beast wants to tempt Michael with the leadership of a rebellion in Heaven. In an effort to thwart this Fate, Yves talks to Lucifer in confidence and tells him about the existence of The Beast. If left unchecked, The Beast will likely cause Michael to rebel, and Michael will likely destroy Creation and possibly even Heaven. Why doesn't Yves tell Michael about his role and end this whole nonsense? God forbid him to. Michael must make his own choice - War for God or War against Him. Upon hearing the truth in Yves' words Lucifer transforms into the first and only Malakite of Light. Yves then offers Lucifer a choice: wait for Michael to rebel and stand against him as the general of God's armies or take Michael's place and lead a 'controlled' rebellion engineered to keep Michael struggling for God rather than against him. Since I like drama, I envisioned Yves and Lucifer naively believing that they could engineer a bloodless rebellion by having Lucifer challenge Michael to a contest. The loser of the challenge, which of course would be Lucifer, would then be exiled to Hell. During the exile Lucifer would consul the fallen and convince them of the error of their ways and they would redeem upon their eventual release. To thwart this happy little plan, I had The Beast corrupt the Metatron and begin using it to speak in Lucifer's voice. Unknown to Lucifer, the corrupted Metatron convinced the rebels that Michael would never consent to a 1-on-1 challenge. Instead, it encouraged Baal to launch a bloody first-strike to force Michael to accept Lucifer's challenge. So, on the day of the rebellion, Lucifer talks to the Metatron and God reveals that it has been corrupted by The Beast. God, speaking through the Metatron for the last time, informs Lucifer that a bloodless revolution is impossible, and that Lucifer must slay the Metatron to keep it out of the control of The Beast. God also informs Lucifer that he will have a long dark road to Destiny. Part of this Destiny will be acting as a credible adversary to Michael. As long as Michael Wars for God and focuses the power of The Beast towards Lucifer, then there is hope for Destiny. To add a bit of foreshadowing and prophesy, God concludes with, "Your sister Light must not fall." Lucifer slays the Metatron and the rebellion begins. After much bloodshed, Lucifer makes his way to Michael and issues his challenge. Michael accepts and commences to thrash Lucifer within an inch of his life unknowingly using the power of The Beast. For more gratuitous drama, I have The Beast tempt Lucifer by exposing a soft spot on Michael during the fight. Lucifer knows that if he strikes the soft spot, he will win the battle but damn Michael to Hell. Not giving in to the temptation, Lucifer suffers the evil of The Beast to live in Michael and merely touches the soft spot. Thereafter, Michael has a softly glowing spot on every form he assumes (I dubbed this "Lucifer's Light touch"). Of course, Michael wins the fight and Lucifer and the rebels are exiled to Hell. This leaves us with a Malakite Lucifer leading the forces of Hell who can lie all he wants with no dissonance. He has a mission from God to act as Michael's adversary. He also has the ability to grant words because both God and The Beast want him to have that ability (although for different reasons). Lucifer accepts no servitors because he has a big secret to maintain. And speaking of Secrets, whatever became of that wayward Demon Prince Gebbeleth? Well, he discovered first hand that the very much still Archangel of Light can channel the light of Heaven anywhere he darn well pleases - including directly on Gebbeleth. Haven't I just replaced the Devil-as-Lucifer with the Devil-as-The-Beast? Um, yeah - your point? Why are the Higher Heavens closed? To preserve God's choice and to keep The Beast from corrupting them. Who is the sister Light? Gabriel is the obvious choice, but what if Novalis was a former Servitor of Light? Or perhaps the sister Light refers to the light of Hope, Blandine? You can decide for yourself. Where did Kronos come from? Ask The Beast. Why doesn't Kronos expose Lucifer for the traitor he is? Because he wants Lucifer to embrace his Fate and cause Michael to Fall. Why did Lucifer let Kronos live when he found him? I don't know. Maybe because he reminded him of certain voice come back from the dead or maybe because Lucifer got hit with a God-level Balseraph resonance at the wrong moment. Oh, and speaking of Balseraphim, Baal was the first Balseraph, but you knew that right? The whole band is named after him after all... - -Vaughn - - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - This is not the sig you're looking for. Move along, move along... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:11:17 -0700 From: Vaughn Romero Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate BC Petery wrote: > It may be this (relativly) new enlightenment that is causing The > Angel of Hate so much trouble. David Edelstein wrote: >You're assuming that angelic attitudes changed as human attitudes did. Given that an angel can hold a word view different from the way humans think about it, isn't BC Petery correct to say that there could be an Angel of Hate? Granted, I still think any such angel would Fall or beg for death because human attitudes about hate are currently so woefully un-angelic. IMHO any Angel of Hate has a big uphill battle. Humans can hate what they should love, and can love things they should hate. It takes a strong angel to teach humans to only hate the right things. Add to the difficulty of the task the fact that at any moment a demon can swoop in and steal the word by capitalizing on all the humans who are currently hating all the wrong things. Vaughn - - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - This is not the sig you're looking for. Move along, move along... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:55:52 -0400 From: "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" Subject: IN> Words for Angels W S wrote: > See also:> Mercurian Angel of Eugenics- whose word was granted > before World War I (although not Cannon, he certainly > seems like a good example on the same lines, with the > Word-shift massively accelerated). amadan@amadan.org replied : Making up your own non-canonical example does not support your point, unfortunately. - -David So, here's my question. Does every word get a Celestial bound to it? I didn't think that was the case. Certainly a word like "Eugenics" existed before Word War One, and the concept of being from a superior species has existed as long as man has been more than one tribe; but is a word like "Eugenics" something that as a concept supported or eroded the symphony strongly enough for either side to care about putting a Celestial on it? DS1 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 06:50:24 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate Vaughn Romero wrote: > Given that an angel can hold a word view different from the way humans think > about it, isn't BC Petery correct to say that there could be an Angel of > Hate? Granted, I still think any such angel would Fall or beg for death > because human attitudes about hate are currently so woefully un-angelic. > IMHO any Angel of Hate has a big uphill battle. IMO, the Seraphim Council would never grant such a Word. "Divine Wrath," "Righteous Vengeance," "Punishment," yes. "Hatred," no. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:49:04 -0700 (PDT) From: W S Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate - --- Vaughn Romero wrote: > BC Petery wrote: > > It may be this (relativly) new enlightenment that > is causing The > > Angel of Hate so much trouble. > > David Edelstein wrote: > >You're assuming that angelic attitudes changed as > human attitudes did. > > Given that an angel can hold a word view different > from the way humans think > about it, isn't BC Petery correct to say that there > could be an Angel of > Hate? Granted, I still think any such angel would > Fall or beg for death > because human attitudes about hate are currently so > woefully un-angelic. > IMHO any Angel of Hate has a big uphill battle. Note: Osor, Outcast Malakite. And when he was granted the Word, he was serving Purity- them angels what never Fall. So it was a double layer of insurance. I'm not saying that Hate, in it's modern form, is a terribly Angelic Word. But anything can be made to serve God's Plan, properly used. The fact that Hate is presently mis-used doesn't mean it has no place in the Plan. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 06:52:41 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Words for Angels "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" wrote: > So, here's my question. Does every word get a Celestial bound to it? No. There are an infinite number of Words. There are not an infinite number of celestials. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 08:02:15 -0400 From: Cameron McCurry Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate W S said unto us: > Note: Osor, Outcast Malakite. And when he was granted the Word, he was > serving Purity- them angels what never Fall. So it was a double layer > of insurance. One other small problem. "If a Malakite is ever Outcast, he is hunted ruthlessly by every Malakim who can be spared. They would rather slaughter a few of their less cautious numbers than run the risk of sullying their ranks." (Angelic Player's Guide) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 14:07:52 +0200 From: "Donato Ranzato" Subject: IN> Problems with IN As a GM of the game In Nomine I consider it a difficult game to GM. I am the GM of a local IN group since it was published and I have encountered a number of "problems" with the game. These problems are not necessarily related to the rules-system but have to do with the setting and how it is resolved within the game. I am interested to hear if other GM's encountered the same problems and maybe how they have solved them. Many Choirs have special abilities (like honor, relationships, truth, emotions) which means that for each and every NPC the group encounters you have to know all these things in advance in case the PCs use their resonances on him/her. And all GMs know that players will use their resonances in the strangest of situations (e.g. resonate on a person sitting behind the reception of a major law firm). It is very difficult to improvise this and the Virtue and Vice table from Pyramid is somewhat helpful but not when you need to improvise on the spot. Also, preventing to disturb the Symphony is an important part of the setting but the rules to calculate it are a nightmare and it isn't really made very clear what the consequences are, except that you draw attention from other celestials nearby. At the moment I use the disturbance the PCs make as an abstract concept (no rules) but I feel that so much more could be done with it. A "random disturbance encounter table" would probably go too far but some additional clarifications would be appreciated. In contrast, there are a lot of clarifications/suggestions for Divine and Infernal Interventions while these would happen far less in frequence then disturbances in the Symphony. Also, an important part of the background is dissonance and there are lots of rules for dissonance and discord (how to gain them, how to get rid of them, consequences) but the resonances and Words of most angels are so specific that they hardly go against them so that they can gain dissonance. My players are smart and experienced roleplayers so they will avoid dissonance. They only way I could let them become dissonant would be if I wrote scenarios around the idea. Is dissonance a much more frequent occurrence in the games of other GMs? And because most PCs follow an Archangel their abilities are related to that Word and are often only useful in very specific situations (e.g. writing a contract, punishing a betrayer, defend someone in a court of law) which means that these abilities are useless unless I write my scenarios around their abilities which limites creativity. My players use their Choir resonances 99% of the time and their Word-resonances only 1%. Is this correct according to background? Don't get me wrong I love the setting, and my players love to play in it, but sometimes I think everything is too specific and therefore useless for many scenarios/situations. I don't have a solution as I think the specific abilities fit the background but from a roleplaying point of view some of them could have been more general or flexible. Donato ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 05:49:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> New Relic Yeah, I can see PC's wetting themselves at the prospect of getting these. :) ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 05:59:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate - --- Vaughn Romero wrote: > Given that an angel can hold a word view different from > the way humans think > about it, isn't BC Petery correct to say that there could > be an Angel of Hate? Of course he is. The disagreement is over whether or not Hate is a good translation of that angel's actual Word in the Celestial tongue. "Righteous Anger" and "Divine Wrath" are both better choices IMO. The word Hate, with its hellish connotations, isn't a good term for the concept that this angel embodies. At least, not in my opinion nor the opinions of several other people. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 06:03:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Words for Angels - --- "Bergeron, Robert F., DS1(SW)" wrote: > So, here's my question. Does every word get a Celestial > bound to it? I'm pretty sure that canon comes right out and says, "no." No books with me, but I think that's in the GMG. > is a word like "Eugenics" something that as a > concept supported or eroded the symphony strongly enough > for either side to care about putting a Celestial on it? I can certainly see Factions having a use for that Word; the Demon of Eugenics could be subordinate to the Demon of Racism. Technology might also want it -- the Demon of Biotechnology could use a Demon of Eugenics to erode resistance to human experimentation. I don't see Heaven having much use for Eugenics, though. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 06:12:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> Problems with IN - --- Donato Ranzato wrote: > > Many Choirs have special abilities (like honor, > relationships, truth, > emotions) which means that for each and every NPC the > group encounters you > have to know all these things in advance in case the PCs > use their resonances on him/her. Or you have to be really good at winging it. > Also, preventing to disturb the Symphony is an important > part of the setting > but the rules to calculate it are a nightmare I use a highly simplified Disturbance mechanic with standardized Perception rolls to notice a Disturbance at each level. I don't have the file with me right now, but I'll track it down and post it. > My players are smart and experienced roleplayers so they > will avoid > dissonance. They only way I could let them become > dissonant would be if I > wrote scenarios around the idea. Is dissonance a much > more frequent occurrence in the games of other GMs? Nope. Avoiding Dissonance usually isn't that hard. Presenting the PC's with tough moral decisions can help, though; Cherubim are especially vulnerable to this (just threaten their Attuned), as are Malakim with too many Oaths. > And because most PCs follow an Archangel their abilities > are related to that > Word and are often only useful in very specific > situations (e.g. writing a > contract, punishing a betrayer, defend someone in a court > of law) which > means that these abilities are useless unless I write my > scenarios around > their abilities which limites creativity. A co-worker of mine once said, "It's not options that produce creativity -- it's limits." Find ways to work within the limitations presented and you'll find that, when you solve the problems, you'll have a much better scenario than you'd write if you had no hurdles to jump. ===== Michael Walton, #US2002023848 If your principles don't inconvenience you from time to time, you don't really have any. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 13:31:06 +0000 From: "Fallen Seraph" Subject: Re: IN> Problems with IN >From: "Donato Ranzato" What i've done in the past is pre-prepare a set of tables for each info-gathering resonance, which i keep in my core book. this tends to work for most of the resonances. I know a few people like to use tarot to generate personality and backgrounds for the mercurian resonance. This problem is easy to deal with if you simply prepare in advance. I think almost everyone on the list will agree that the disturbance mechanics are clunky, but i find that they only really come into play when someone is trying to diliberately be quiet. I assume a general background level of disturbance at all times, and reduce the mechanic to a GM device. If theres a disturbance then usually you either want them to hear it or not. so let them hear it or don't. Only really worry about disturbance if the players are being unsubtle in a heavily opposition held territory (liek a tether). again, you can arbitrarily decide if your npcs hear it. I haven't made disturbance rolls for or against more than three times in the last 8 months, and i've not had any complaints. >My players are smart and experienced roleplayers so they will avoid >dissonance. They only way I could let them become dissonant would be if I >wrote scenarios around the idea. Is dissonance a much more frequent >occurrence in the games of other GMs? The point of IN is NOT to gain dissonance or Discord. both are a Bad Thing(tm) if you have experienced players, then they are playing sensible angels. in general, dissonance for demons is easier to come by since they get it by failing rolls. In an angelic game, dissonance comes from three places. One: Players not playing well (in which case, politely suggest that player X might like to try playing a malakite rather than a mercurian) Two: Players making a concious choice to act against their nature (Good fodder for the GM to play with later. that concious choice is often selfish. one ticket. straight down.) Three: Situations engineered to force the player to act dissonantly. (often ends up with players getting angry at being shoehorned. It can work if you are playing a game where redemtion and falling are knife edges) I think (from my games) that a healthy balance is about 70%(resonance)/30% Attunement - remember, the resonance is What You Are. the Attunement is more What You Do. I always impose restrictions on my players as to what superiors they can take (I banned all War-faction except gabby in my current campaign) I also like to have the players characters before i plan the game, so it can be tailored to what they can do (no point planning a demon stomping tether assault if your players all want Mercurians of flowers, destiny and dreams). If you plan the campaign this way, they will start using their Attunements more, since the campaign requires it. >Don't get me wrong I love the setting, and my players love to play in it, >but sometimes I think everything is too specific and therefore useless for >many scenarios/situations. >I don't have a solution as I think the specific abilities fit the >background >but from a roleplaying point of view some of them could have been more >general or flexible. Despite being very plexible in many ways (contrast, brightness etc...) the characters themselves are limited by the fact that they are embodiments of a narrow band of concepts (Seraph of fire = Truth + Punishment. not much else) it takes good players to trancend these boundries, and a good GM to give them the opportunity to do so but it can be done. Not every IN campaign can be suitable for every IN character. but there are many many battlefields in The War, and some require a more delicate touch than others. Summing up: I have personally found that the Worst thing to do in an IN game is have a party with wildly cross purposes or divergent (not differing) abilities. A party 50/50 split between War and Peace (or Justice and Mercy, as seems to be the current Vogue) often results in the warriors bitching when they have to stand back or get touchy-feely when they'd rather be smiting hellspawn, and the more metaphysical players bitching when theres nothing but wave after wave of rabid calabim to pound. the secret is, Tailor your game to your players and characters, not try to mold your players to your game. just my 0.01999999999(recurring) cents worth. - -FallenSeraph "tausend graue M䵳e mit blauen M䵳eh䵳ern" http://www.geocities.com/archangel_nine ICQ: 110193631 _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:34:04 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Sympathy for the Devil (was Re: Lucifer's Word) At 9:52 PM -0700 5/22/02, Vaughn Romero wrote: >I suppose everyone on this list has at one time or another written or >dreamed up a "Sympathy for the Devil" piece. Since you showed us yours, I'll >follow suit and show y'all mine. > >Note: Canon has left the building... [snip, trim, etc.] Very nice. The best kind of kick-the-canon, in my mind, because you can run a "canon" game for as long as you want, and then Reveal The Hurting Right Fun underbelly of it at a dramatic opportunity! *wicked grin* - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:37:23 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The Angel of Hate At 5:59 AM -0700 5/23/02, Michael Walton wrote: > At least, not in my opinion nor >the opinions of several other people. (And, as a _friendly_ reminder, it's not worth getting up in arms about; if you like him, with _whatever_ translation, then good. If not, hey, that's fine too. It's not like the Malakim of Canon are going to come after you!) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 10:03:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Problems with IN At 2:07 PM +0200 5/23/02, Donato Ranzato wrote: [...] >Many Choirs have special abilities (like honor, relationships, truth, >emotions) which means that for each and every NPC the group encounters you >have to know all these things in advance in case the PCs use their >resonances on him/her. [...] It is very difficult to improvise [...] There's also the appendix in Liber Servitorum, which gives a selection of sample Needs, Deeds, fates, and destinies. Myself, I actually don't have a hard time improvising on the spot (admittedly with a quick stare at the ceiling), but then I'm a very character-driven GM. (The Mercurian resonance is the worst; it's not just "fill in a few interesting bits," it's actually, "Make up everything IMPORTANT about the character. Now." Or so I find. Tacking something like the Judgment Mercurian Choir Attunement onto it makes it even more scary.) >Also, preventing to disturb the Symphony is an important part of the setting >but the rules to calculate it are a nightmare and it isn't really made very >clear what the consequences are, except that you draw attention from other >celestials nearby. A lot of people make up their own rough chart for "how far away you can hear something," I think. If you know where Disturbance X is, and PC Y, the calculation isn't so bad: just plug in the numbers. It's if PCs Y make disturbance and you need to know if NPCs X will hear it that it's a frappin' nightmare. Though you could pre-figure where your main NPC bases are, and make circles on your map: at range X, they hear Disturbance Y. At range Z, they hear disturbance Q... The other thing disturbance does is de-stabilize Tethers. Some angels probably believe that causing disturbance pains the Symphony, and therefore God. (Some demons believe this too, and probably gravitate to Belial's service, thereby...) >My players are smart and experienced roleplayers so they will avoid >dissonance. They only way I could let them become dissonant would be if I >wrote scenarios around the idea. Is dissonance a much more frequent >occurrence in the games of other GMs? Dissonance is really, far as I've been able to tell, an in-game punishment for bad roleplaying. That it also can cause Tough Choices is an added benefit. O:> While it can add spice to craft a scenerio around a Tough Choice, I'd say that you don't need to worry about _making_ your characters dissonant if the PCs are playing them well. Example of a Tough Choice that I am remembering... (Hi, Eric!) The PC/NPC battle had raged on a bit, and one demon got a Divine Intervention (IIRC) which was making it boggle a bit at the Kyriotate of Destiny in human host. One of the demon's buddies had aimed a truck at the group and was about to plow into everyone. The Kyriotate could either get away clean, or try to help the boggled demon -- and risk smooshing its host (dissonance) if it failed its rolls and got pulled into the truck's path instead of pulling the demon out. Another Tough Choice (well, it was meant to be!) from the same game: a Cherub of War, rather outnumbered by Baalites and Bal-convinced that it was a losing proposition. Retreat? Call for orders to retreat? (Though being hit by the Sadness Habbalite resonance effect kind of made retreating even less of an option than fighting...) [Fortunately for the Cherub, the smooshed Malakite of Dreams had another vessel, and brought back friends. Friends with a rocket launcher. I'm not sure I want to know what one of Blandine's Malakim was doing with it...] >And because most PCs follow an Archangel their abilities are related to that >Word and are often only useful in very specific situations (e.g. writing a >contract, punishing a betrayer, defend someone in a court of law) which >means that these abilities are useless unless I write my scenarios around >their abilities which limites creativity. My players use their Choir >resonances 99% of the time and their Word-resonances only 1%. Is this >correct according to background? Depends on your setup. Servitor Attunements are much more useful than Choir ones -- often. Some Choir Attunements are much more useful than others. Compare, say, Seraphim of Jordi to Kyriotates of Lightning. Or, frankly, Kyrios of Jean to just about anything else. In our games, the resonances get used whole bunches, but Choir Attunements are only used when the PCs manage to maneuver or luck into a situation where they're useful. Some PCs build their Roles around such things, such as an Ofanite of Trade who runs a small-plane private shipping business. (Hi, Liz!) She takes on cargo and gets it there in a jiffy. A Malakite of Trade might be a private investigator, providing a cover for taking down corrupt businessmen. ("I'm a PI. I've been hired by someone to investigate your boss. My employer? I just call him Marc.") Of course, some PCs build their Roles around their Choir resonances, such as the Elohite bartender, or the Ofanite acrobat. And, also, PCs can buy non-Restricted Choir Attunements from their Archangel, and thus snag the Really Useful stuff. Meanwhile, Songs are more flexible... Let's see: in the last game I ran, the PCs used... Ummmm... Seraphic resonance, Seraph of Destiny true name ability (once via GM fiat, because of a Divine Intervention -- look, an ethereal!), Kyrio of Lightning (and just plain Kyrio), Elohite resonance, Ofanite resonance, Move Silently skill, Mercurian resonance (some), and the NPC Lilim resonance and Ethereal Song of Healing. >I don't have a solution as I think the specific abilities fit the background >but from a roleplaying point of view some of them could have been more >general or flexible. Why do I have an urge to suggest you should get a Pyramid account and check out the EPG....? O;> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor RPG links; Random name list, Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2650 ********************************