in_nomine-digest Sunday, September 22 2002 Volume 01 : Number 2782 In this digest: Re: IN> A Day in the Marches Re: IN> The DUCKS! I just saw THE DUCKS! IN> Jane, stop this crazy thing! Re: IN> Jane, stop this crazy thing! IN> Adventure ideas? =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_IN>_Adventure_ideas=3F?= Re: IN> Restaurant of Lost Souls Re: IN> Ofanim angels? IN> Re: Nephallim and Grigori ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 15:11:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Walton Subject: Re: IN> A Day in the Marches This is good stuff. Muchas gracias! =====

Michael Walton, #US2002023848

"Don't repent. Stop sinnin'." -- old cowboy saying

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 19:14:54 -0400 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> The DUCKS! I just saw THE DUCKS! > >2 things: > >1, that's freaky. > >2, Why can't I predict something a little more useful, >like stock prices? Should think it obvious: Marc's still bitter about that your Sitting in Judgement: Chicken Run write-up. Josh ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 20:25:24 -0400 From: "Eric Bertish" Subject: IN> Jane, stop this crazy thing! Just now I recieved a digest from the list. I have never s u bscribed to the digest. I hate digests. That fact that it was done without notification, and *without my permission*, is galling to me. I have gone to the IN home page to find direction on how to un-digest myself, but there are no clear directions. I will attempt to re-s u b using the old format, but I am not certain if this will work. I am currently unhappy. This is what will make me happy: 1) Not getting the digests and being re-s u bscribed to the regular list. 2) The flogging of those responsible. Sacking, with or without references, is entirely optional, but such an act would engender good feelings within me. That is all. - -- Casca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 20:41:58 -0400 From: "Josh Moger" Subject: Re: IN> Jane, stop this crazy thing! >I am currently unhappy. This is what will make me happy: > >1) Not getting the digests and being re-s u bscribed to the regular list. >2) The flogging of those responsible. Sacking, with or without references, >is entirely optional, but such an act would engender good feelings within >me. > >That is all. > >-- Casca Did a six-fingered digest kill your father and scar your face when you were a youth? Josh ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 12:41:21 -0600 From: "Rampaging Crypto-Man" Subject: IN> Adventure ideas? Hello, again. :) I am running an In Nomine adventure set before the creation of mankind. The angels, so far, are a Cherub of Light and an Elohite of Creation. They will be adventuring with Kobal (who I assume was an angel of Light back then?) under the direction of Lucifer. The idea is that we'll fast-forward the game every session so we'll play through the Fall, ancient history, and so on, until the modern day. What I'm stuck on is a few adventures (including fighting, socialization, and a chance to use abilities) for the first session. I need stuff for the players to do before mankind is even around. I've got a few ideas -- helping get fire to mankind, saving rodents from the dinosaur-killing asteroid so they can evolve into humans, and so on -- but I want a little more. Help, please! :) Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 21:02:01 +0200 From: "santaro@inwind.it" Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_IN>_Adventure_ideas=3F?= cool!!! (well instead I ran a game set during the 1st crusade... it was nice) I think that you can consider also the presence of the Grigori, and why not, their evil parents, the Nephilim... And there's also Uriel! Well and what about the first human shamans (and the first soldiers of god). and remember that maybe Jordi will want to save the dinosaurs! I think that the relationship among the first Archangels and Princes will be interesting.. (for example between Baal and Micheal) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 21:24 +0100 (BST) From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) Subject: Re: IN> Restaurant of Lost Souls In article <20020919213556.27913.qmail@web13205.mail.yahoo.com>, thunderdog_sa@yahoo.com (Michael Walton) wrote: > Yikes! The scary thing is, this could work. What do you mean "could"? This is what outside-US branches of US fast-food chains /do/. - --- John Dallman jgd@cix.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 21:24 +0100 (BST) From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) Subject: Re: IN> Ofanim angels? In article <5.1.1.6.2.20020919134316.038934f8@pop.earlham.edu>, anthoch@earlham.edu (EDG) wrote: > I've looked through those, and they are quite good. (Honestly, what > I'd *like* is a resource that tells me different classes of ship - > cutter, cruiser, destroyer, etc. - and tells me, in specific terms, > what the characteristics of that class are (e.g., why is this ship a > cruiser and not a gunboat?).) This has changed, in several overlapping ways, over the last few hundred years. A quick summary: As of the beginning of the 19th century, there were ships of the line, with 50 up to 120 guns, which fought in battles. Frigates were for scouting and maintaining a presence in areas where the enemy had no ships of the line, and had 24 up to 40 guns. Both of those were "ships" in that they were "ship-rigged" - they had three masts with multiple square sails on each mast. Sloops were an even smaller edition of frigates, Brigs did the same jobs as sloops (anything that they could manage) but had a simpler rig and thus needed smaller crews. As of now, cruisers, destroyers, and frigates are all the same basic kind of general-purpose ship, differing in size, speed, and armament. Cruisers are bigger than they used to be, and only the US has them any more, Destroyers are as big as cruisers used to be, and are usually designed as air-defence ships, and Frigates are the size that destroyers used to be and are usually anti-submarine ships. All of these have occasional variations because the changes in name have one simple purpose - to convince politicians that you aren't getting bigger and better ships and that the increased cost is entirely because of better technology. Politicians aren't very good at reading the sizes of ships off a document. Aircraft and submarines are the attacking branches of navies now. - --- John Dallman jgd@cix.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:06:45 +0930 From: "G N E Z D A" Subject: IN> Re: Nephallim and Grigori Actually, the Nephallim are the children of the Grigori, not their parents. Personally, I've never really seen them as being evil as such, more like totally insane. Not that I blame them, given how mutilated (both physically and mentally) they are. I suppose that's what you get when you try to interbreed two totally different species (ie human and angel). ;) - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 2/08/2002 ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #2782 ********************************