From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Jun 13 06:02:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA23962 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 06:02:16 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA20926 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 03:34:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 03:34:43 -0500 Message-Id: <199706130834.DAA20926@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 #208 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 Friday, June 13 1997 Volume 01 : Number 208 In this digest: Re: IN> Big Sad Kyrio Question Re: IN> Supes Re: IN> Character Types Re: IN> Smif Re: IN> Choirs and Bands Re: IN> Loose thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 1) Re: IN> ED> Re: Joshua & Tan's next move Re: IN> Smif Re: IN> Character Types Re: IN> Character Types Re: IN> Choirs and Bands Re: IN> Smif Re: IN> ...And I Thought I'd Never Ask a Kyrio Question... Re: IN> Loose Thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 2) IN> Body Bagging Re: IN> Body Bagging Re: IN> Loose thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 1) Re: IN> ...And I Thought I'd Never Ask a Kyrio Question... Re: IN> Omigod! a NON- Kyrio question! Re: IN> Omigod! a NON- Kyrio question! Re: IN> Body Bagging Re: IN> Choirs and Bands Re: IN> Smif Re: IN> need help!! Re: IN> Body Bagging ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:13:51 From: Jeff Miller Subject: Re: IN> Big Sad Kyrio Question At 12:04 PM 6/11/97 -0400, you wrote: >> > Here's another one, how much damage can an insect swarm take? >> >> Use the standard calculation for computer Body Hits >> when a host is possessed. > > "... for COMPUTING Body Hits..." >Argh, my job is beginning to affect my brain! > Well, now that you mention it.... How many body hits *does* a computer have. -- Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:32:42 -0400 From: Donnellys Subject: Re: IN> Supes Um, uh, hi, I've seen the previous postings on DC superheroes (tm, I still dont believed they copyrighted that word, yet I digress), kinda hard to miss actually. However, I feel, in this, a critical cosm has been slighted. So I will hazard this realm to bring forth the incarnations in In Nomine: Tick (what were you expecting, Marvel? Acuse me of some taste why don't you.) Tick - Cherubim of Arthur - Elohim of American Maid - Malakim of Dominic. She fights, she battles, she chops, she makes julian fries, she even sings. But she does not suffer the existance of demons in her city, Der Fletermaus - Mercurian of Marc. He's not a very good angle of marc, nor is he a very good mercurian, but when he goes cruising in the DerFeterMobile in the hope of finding chicks, sitting out the battles in an attempt to be just like everyone else, just in a costume, I think he fits. (after all, "somebody DerFletermaus) Sewerurchin - Cherubim of David. He is defense personified, protecting the sewers against Filth. Not very good with people or personal hygene, he has, none the less, a solidity due to stone (definately always hit in combat, yeah, definately...) The Human Bullet - Ofanim of Janus. Ok, ok so he lives in the burbs and has a family, however, how else do you describe someone who gets a kick out of being shot out of a massive gun? Sure, it beats commute, but still... There is little enough info on other characters of the forces of light Ok, so I dont have all the names right (they took it out of the midnight timeslot, so I cant see it all that often.) The UberClown - El Seed Idea Men The Terror Brainchild Chairface Chippendale Aphrodite (?) Pinapple faced dictator of Pinapplesia Multiple (Evil) Santa ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 16:37:53 -0400 (EDT) From: The Quixotic Ninja Subject: Re: IN> Character Types (Spoilers for my campaign, again...) > It's also the GM's game, and he has not only the right, but the > responsibility, to turn down character concepts that won't fit well. Definitely. I've done this once or twice already. > For instance, I'm highly unlikely to allow a Bright Lilim, much less > anything more oddball like an ethereal spirt. In my online game, I > disallowed Outcasts and Renegades; I just didn't want to deal with them. Fair enough. > Unusual characters can be fun, but a lot of times players automatically > jump for something that's not part of the standard rules because they like > to tweak the campaign and because they think it will give them special > abilities the others don't have. There is plenty of variety in the > "standard" character options; anyone who can't come up with an original, > unusual character concept using them isn't trying. I differ with this a bit, though. If the players' motives are as described ("tweaking" the campaign or being oddball kinds of munchkins), then they're probably players I don't want in my game to start with. Now, among my crowd of players I have one who is playing a pagan god "promoted" to angel status, one who will probably wind up playing a renegade Calabite, and one who (if she plays, she's not yet confirmed) might play a Bright Lilim. Now, none of these players are out to make my life difficult, and none have in any way "insisted" that they play these characters instead of something more normal. Since I had not yet determined a setting (or even a style, beyond mostly-serious) for the campaign, I wanted to let the characters shape it -- and they have. I've steered people and plots toward Archangels with the capability to deal with "unconventional" angels (Gabriel, Eli, Yves, etc.), and set the action in a locale that can handle the fringes of Celestial society as well as the more normal parts (a variant of In Nomine IOU, superimposed over a variant of my alma mater). There will be no Malakim or servitors of Laurence played by the PCs, and the team will be something of a Rogue's Gallery... but it'll work, and it will do so without resorting to goofiness or parody. Now, I'm not arguing with your initial point -- if this wasn't something I had *wanted* to try, the players would have had absolutely no right to pressure me to let them do it. But I've gotten askance glances from a couple of GMs in the past who have rolled their eyes when myself or others have come up with an "unusual" characters, usually making comments like "why can't you just follow the freakin' rules?" and complaining that such oddballs don't belong in a serious gaming universe, and I'm a little defensive about it. My players aren't taking any "easy ways out" -- if anything, they're making their lives more complicated. I'm forcing those playing "weird" characters to do a happy heck of a lot of preliminary writing (backstories, mostly) to justify their existence, and once we get going, they're going to quickly find out just how many problems a "fringe" Celestial has to deal with on a day-to-day basis... - -- John Trussell truss@gweep.net / truss@io.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 97 17:44 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Smif > There has been some criticism of Smif's art in In Nomine, on the ground >that it gave the book too much of a comic book feel instead of a more >World of Darkness atmosphere. However, I recently discovered than many of >the best pictures in Mage 2nd Ed are done by Smif. Is it, then, the >colouring process which causes problems? What do people think? The art in In Nomine seems relatively decent to me. (I should add that I've never been a fan of the "look and feel" of WoD.) Most of the impact for me comes from Dan Smith's style, which I admit I'm not terribly fond of -- the color seems to be an improvement, to me. I don't strongly *dislike* his work, either, but for line art, I much prefer the Foglios (who did GURPS IOU). Of course, IOU is more suited to a "comic book feel". I probably would have preferred someone with a less harsh style, and with more subtle coloration. My favorite artists in the general field are probably Robin Wood and Susan van Camp, though I'm not sure how well their work would have survived the color printing process used in IN. Other artists who might have been good for IN might be Heather Bruton (who's done some interesting angel prints, but with a more classical style of angel) and NeNe Thomas, who has a very nice style of line art with limited watercolor coloring, from what I've seen of her work. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:50:07 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Choirs and Bands Hermes Trismegistus wrote: > > Does anyone else think that this is probably the same for Superiors? I would > probably only ever serve Jean or Yves (being a techie), although in Hell this > theory falls down because I really do like Kobal, Saminga, Haagenti and > Nybbas, with Vapula well upo there too. They are just so much FUN. And for > Superiors I hate, well Blandine & Dominic, and in Hell Beleth and Lilith. Maybe _hate_ is too strong a word (Word?), but there are definitely Superiors I find more or less interesting. On the good side, I like Yves a lot, and I think Michael is pretty keen. David, Marc and Litheroy are very dull. Novalis and Jordi are below average, the rest are OK. In demons, I haven't the same level of interest, but Valefor, Baal, Beleth and Kronos seem alright. No interest in Belial, Nybbas or Haagenti. The rest are adequate. Of course, I look at this less from a gaming viewpoint than a writing viewpoint at the moment, and Superiors that work well as a concept in fiction may not be great in a roleplaying context (and vice versa). - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia Glass jaw, alcohol whore Cardboard cut-out lying on the floor Lame-brain's drunk again Stupid dumb-dumb cold plumb insane POP WILL EAT ITSELF, "Wake Up! Time to Die..." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:03:49 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Loose thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 1) John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > > On Jun 12, 7:22am, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > > Subject: Re: IN> Loose thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 1) > > John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > > > > > > > Batman - Seraph of Dominic. > > > > > > No way! Batman lies ALL the time about what he's up to. > > > > > Hmmm... actually, _Bruce_Wayne_ lies about what he's up to, but Batman > > rarely does... if you make that distinction it makes sense, but you do > > make a good objection. > > Heh. If I were 'Bruce's' GM I would look askance at > anyone trying to weasel out of their essential nature in such > a way. ;) > Well... okay, let's look at this. Now, if you're maintaining a Role, you have to tell lies occasionally - even if only to the extent that you say "My name is Bob Simth", rather than "My name is Arglebeth, Seraph of Yves". Now, that kind of lie doesn't net you dissonance, I assume, unless you worked for Litheroy (in which case you couldn'y have a Role, so the point is moot). Now, if Batman is a Celestial, he'd probably have two roles - Millionaire Playboy /6 (Bruce Wayne) and Vigilante/6 (Batman). Would lying in the service of those Roles cause Dissonance? A recent issue of "Detective Comics" had Bruce Wayne secretly foiling a theft at an awards banquet, and excusing his absences in appropriate ways. Would that cause dissonance if he was a Seraph? If Bruce Wayne is asked "Are you Batman", he'd possibly be entitled to say 'no' simply because _he's_ not Batman - Batman is another Role he maintains. As a GM, I'd probably allow something similar if a PC wanted to maintain multiple Roles. And of course, we're assuming that in this imperfect mapping of DC to IN, we'd have the Billionaire/Bruce Wayne aspect intact. Maybe Batman is just a full-time vigilante, and hasn't got to worry about a secret ID (although that seems rather boring to me). Actually, this is going past a simple Batman point to a bigger question. Just what does a Role entitle you to get away with? - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia Glass jaw, alcohol whore Cardboard cut-out lying on the floor Lame-brain's drunk again Stupid dumb-dumb cold plumb insane POP WILL EAT ITSELF, "Wake Up! Time to Die..." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:56:31 GMT+10 From: "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> ED> Re: Joshua & Tan's next move Damn damn damn damn damn. Sorry folks, sent this to the wrong person. Damn. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:39:35 -0400 (EDT) From: gibsonc@nku.edu Subject: Re: IN> Smif > There has been some criticism of Smif's art in In Nomine, on the ground > that it gave the book too much of a comic book feel instead of a more > World of Darkness atmosphere. However, I recently discovered than many of > the best pictures in Mage 2nd Ed are done by Smif. Is it, then, the > colouring process which causes problems? What do people think? > > I don't think the art matters. It is good art and I appreciated it but it in no way inspires the way I perceive the mood of the game. I for one was glad to see a game book made with art drawn from mind instead of from a photograph as in the WoD books. Jahon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:11:23 -0300 From: Andre Ribeiro Subject: Re: IN> Character Types The Quixotic Ninja wrote: > Now, none of these players are out to make my life difficult, and none > have > in any way "insisted" that they play these characters instead of > something > more normal. Since I had not yet determined a setting (or even a > style, > beyond mostly-serious) for the campaign, I wanted to let the > characters > shape it -- and they have. > My players aren't taking any "easy ways out" -- if anything, they're > making > their lives more complicated. I'm forcing those playing "weird" > characters > to do a happy heck of a lot of preliminary writing (backstories, > mostly) to > justify their existence, and once we get going, they're going to > quickly > find out just how many problems a "fringe" Celestial has to deal with > on a > day-to-day basis... I'm with you 100%. Andre ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:51:28 -0300 From: Andre Ribeiro Subject: Re: IN> Character Types David Edelstein wrote: > It's also the GM's game, and he has not only the right, but the > responsibility, to turn down character concepts that won't fit well. Of course he has! But he doesn't need to forbid, say, Kyrios, just because he assumed they're too much of a trouble... If there are no surprises for the GM, what's the fun?? We already know how the plot ends! Driving Mr. Character is also part of the game. > For instance, I'm highly unlikely to allow a Bright Lilim, much less > anything more oddball like an ethereal spirt. In my online game, I > disallowed Outcasts and Renegades; I just didn't want to deal with > them. Ok, I do that myself - anything too weird I just say NO. But I was speaking in a more general sense... > Unusual characters can be fun, but a lot of times players > automatically > jump for something that's not part of the standard rules And they do this every time they can... > because they like > to tweak the campaign and because they think it will give them special > > abilities the others don't have. It's up to us showing them how wrong they are... ;-) Andre ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:56:02 +0930 From: "Damian O'Dea" Subject: Re: IN> Choirs and Bands The Quixotic Ninja wrote: > > (Note from Truss to anyone who's playing in his upcoming IN campaign > -- Anne, Eric, Marian, Ford, Josh, etc. -- I don't think any of you > read this mailing list, but if I'm wrong, DON'T READ THIS MESSAGE.'k?) > > One of my players, meanwhile, is on a big-time "I can't *stand* > Novalis" kick. I find it amusing. :) And don't put either of us in > a room with Uriel, if he ever comes back. ;) > I can see one of my players starting on this kick RSN. He's been running rampant recently as a Malakite of Dominic, beating the hairy blue hell out of any Demon they encounter and even killing off human NPCs that the others in the group have worked hard to redeem, simply because he judged them to be "guilty" and deserving of punishment. Until the latest player joined the group: Katty decided that she wanted to play an Elohite of Novalis. Cool, says I. Character creation nears to a close and she had five points remaining. Stuck for what to do with them, she has bought the Seraphim attunement of Novalis as well. Thus far, poor Marneus has been reduced to politely asking the Elohite to - the next time the group encounters any Infernals - "go away"... ;p ;p ;p ODie... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 17:50:45 -0700 From: zingaro@PEAK.ORG Subject: Re: IN> Smif > There has been some criticism of Smif's art in In Nomine, on the ground > that it gave the book too much of a comic book feel instead of a more > World of Darkness atmosphere. However, I recently discovered than many of > the best pictures in Mage 2nd Ed are done by Smif. Is it, then, the > colouring process which causes problems? What do people think? Why does In Nomine have to be World of Darkness? White Wolf seems to be generating quite enough WoD gaming supplies on its own, even without the supplemental SJG GURPS conversions. There's no reason that a GM can't run an In Nomine game in 'four colour' mode, is there? This is, after all, supposed to be the epic battle of all epic battles in western society -- the epitomes of good and evil confronting each other toe to hoof on a battleground that consists of the entire planet. Stop me when this sounds like a comic book. - ------- zingaro@peak.org We surrender to the momentum of mediocrity. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:42:05 +0930 From: "Damian O'Dea" Subject: Re: IN> ...And I Thought I'd Never Ask a Kyrio Question... Kingsley Lintz wrote: > {The short story on the list > recently about the Interlude in Austin had some good basis for that, > though offhand I don't know where you could still find it.} Isn't that the opening vignette to "Night Music"? ODie... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:05:28 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Loose Thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 2) Shadowcat wrote: > > > Now, who have I missed? The Ventiloquist... the Mad Hatter... > > Tweedledum & Tweedledee... Mr Freeze... yep, all the stupid ones I don't > > like. Someone else can bother with them. > > What about Harlequin, and Lock up? Harley Quinn and Lock-Up are both from the Animated Series, which I don't watch (I don't think it's playing in this country right now). However, Lock-Up has appeared in DC continuity now, and I'd forgotten about him... Lock-Up: Djinn of Asmodeus He tracks down criminals and imprisons them - sounds like the perfect Band/Prince combo. Obviously, he's rather an unusual servitor - perhaps Asmodeus has had to bend his rules a little for his servitors in Gotham. - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia Glass jaw, alcohol whore Cardboard cut-out lying on the floor Lame-brain's drunk again Stupid dumb-dumb cold plumb insane POP WILL EAT ITSELF, "Wake Up! Time to Die..." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:36:34 +0930 From: "Damian O'Dea" Subject: IN> Body Bagging John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > On Jun 11, 11:45pm, Kingsley Lintz wrote: > > Subject: Re: IN> Omigod! a NON- Kyrio question! > > > Two angels break into an apartment that belongs to a demon. In > > > the apartment they find a body bag with a vessel in it. One > > > angel asks to vacate his own vessel, steal the vessel in the > > > bag, put his vessel in the bag and then steal the bag. > > > Afterwards he plans to pay the demon's fiendish friends a visit > > > wearing the demon's form! > > Heh heh. Oh, if I were GM, I'd -DEFINITELY- allow this one. Bear > > with me here.. > > Angel steals Demonic vessel, puts his own in Demon's body bag. > > Angels leave apartment and go visit Demon's cohorts. > > Meanwhile, off-stage, the Demon in question runs afoul of a Djinn > > and a pair of Malakim. Gets whupped. > > Demon's soul immediately reverts to Vessel in body bag... > > This is a sticky point. The only reason someone was able > to 'steal' a vessel was with a Resonance or with the Song of > Possession. Just because the _bag_ belongs to someone, doesn't > give them any particular power over the contents. The bag's > sole purpose is to keep a vessel fresh. When a > Celestial's current vessel gets trashed, the Celestial is drawn > to its remain vessel. Each to their own. I prefer to think that because this is a Celestial Artefact that the "owner" has some particular attachment to it. With this in mind, I prefer to think that the vessel inside the bag is the one that the owner will return to if killed in another vessel. The bag's power: (a) keeps the alternate body fresh, (b) allows a "quiet" Celestial manifestation, (c) serves as a 'bed' (a la Shirow, Black Magic M66) for the Celestial to return to in case of misadventure, and (d) allows possession of the body within the bag. Of course I'm biased because I want to have a story where the angel finds the bag and steals the body within, then the owner/demon gets hurled unwittingly into the angels form. Now they're both in trouble as the angel stands out as a demon thanks to the corporeal discords that affect the body he stole and the demon is in strife with his new body's allies because of the celestial discord that came with him as he inhabited the angel's vessel. Of course, I can get around canon by just making the Body Bag in my game a more unique variant of the book version, I guess. Is it just me or is the need for "canon" answers a little too much like all those CCGs where the rules and being able to use or abuse them becomes more important than the game? Personally I prefer a v. fast and loose game, setting and style, where the story is paramount, there's no such thing as precedent unless I choose to allow it, and hang what the book says, what Moriah says, what anyone says if it gets in my way ;p Anything else smacks of an obsessiveness that I have other outlets for, along with my wallet being devastated - Weatherlight for MtG came out day before yesterday, I am poor again :( ODie... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:03:48 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Body Bagging > Of course, I can get around canon by just making the Body Bag in my > game a more unique variant of the book version, I guess. A very good solution. Make it a coffin instead of a bag. ;) Artifacts can have many different forms and still work the same. Hell, you can make it a deep-sea diving suit, a shroud , a telephone booth, whatever. Have fun with it! > > Is it just me or is the need for "canon" answers a little too much > like all those CCGs where the rules and being able to use or abuse > them becomes more important than the game? Personally I prefer a v. > fast and loose game, setting and style, where the story is paramount, > there's no such thing as precedent unless I choose to allow it, and > hang what the book says, what Moriah says, what anyone says if it > gets in my way ;p Please, please, please ignore anything that cuts into the pleasure of your game! I, admittedly, am one of those nit-pickers who sit behind the scenes and try to close off the loopholes in a game (or at least make the loopholes consistent with the rest of the universe). One of my other hats is as a secret master of INWO to keep _really_ bogus combinations from coming into existence. Many of the rulings were to make the vast majority of GM's life easier. To reduce the amount of possible munchkinism. To keep things balanced. To be consistent. To provide a coherent worldview, etc. More experienced (or foolhardy) GMs ignore these guidelines with gay abandon. I've made several canon rulings that I ignore in my own campaign (buying extra forces at character creation is one big one). As with everything printed or appearing on here, they are only guidelines. Hopefully useful and well thought-out guidelines! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | "A fundamental principle of economics is that the | | more you tax something, the less you get of it. | | In this country we tax success most of all." | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:54:53 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Loose thoughts on Gotham City... (Pt 1) > Well... okay, let's look at this. Now, if you're maintaining a Role, > you have to tell lies occasionally - even if only to the extent that you > say "My name is Bob Simth", rather than "My name is Arglebeth, Seraph of > Yves". Now, that kind of lie doesn't net you dissonance, I assume, > unless you worked for Litheroy (in which case you couldn'y have a Role, > so the point is moot). This is not actually a lie. A person may have many names and use the one that is most convenient. In game terms, if you have spent points on a Role, then you are just as much 'Bob Simth' as you are Arglebeth. > Now, if Batman is a Celestial, he'd probably have two roles - > Millionaire Playboy /6 (Bruce Wayne) and Vigilante/6 (Batman). Would > lying in the service of those Roles cause Dissonance? A recent issue of > "Detective Comics" had Bruce Wayne secretly foiling a theft at an awards > banquet, and excusing his absences in appropriate ways. Would that > cause dissonance if he was a Seraph? A lie is a lie. If 'Bruce Wayne' claimed he had to jet off to the Carribean to debauch himself on the beaches there when instead he converts to into the caped crusader, it's still a lie. If, instead, he says that he has to take off suddenly after mentioning how lovely the Carribean is this time of year, he is not responsible for whatever conclusions the listeners will draw. However, most of the time 'Bruce' just lied. > If Bruce Wayne is asked "Are you Batman", he'd possibly be entitled to > say 'no' simply because _he's_ not Batman - Batman is another Role he > maintains. As a GM, I'd probably allow something similar if a PC wanted > to maintain multiple Roles. This does count as a lie. It's not so much that he _isn't_ Batman when he's dressed as Bruce Wayne, it's that he's _both_ at the same time. Of course, any GM is free to adjudicate these things for their campaign. It's more fun to watch the Seraphs squirm if you treat them more strictly. Most Seraph-players seem to enjoy walking that fine line between creative truth-telling and outright lies. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | "A fundamental principle of economics is that the | | more you tax something, the less you get of it. | | In this country we tax success most of all." | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:56:03 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> ...And I Thought I'd Never Ask a Kyrio Question... > > points. One, a lot of these people KNEW each other before the Fall. > This sounds cool - I think I'll stick with it. You don't > terminate a friendship just because one of you... well... Fell, do you?? Well, *I* sure didn't, anyway, but...er, wait, that's a secret. Fnord. Nevermind. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 01:43:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Omigod! a NON- Kyrio question! In a message dated 97-06-12 17:56:28 EDT, you write: << This is a sticky point. The only reason someone was able to 'steal' a vessel was with a Resonance or with the Song of Possession. Just because the _bag_ belongs to someone, doesn't give them any particular power over the contents. >> I think you may be misunderstanding the point of the original hypothetical situation. The bag itself is a moot issue, important only in terms of keeping an empty vessel alive. Let's say the angel is in a room, wearing a vessel 3 and has a vessel 2 which he bought with his own character points. He can inhabit either vessel. He doesn't need the song of possession for that. If the vessel 2 belongs to someone else he can evict them with possession. But what if the someone else in question isn't home? What if the hypothetical demon is off somewhere else wearing some other form entirely, but left this form laying around empty? The original question was if the body could be stolen under these circumstances. It may be that I do you wrong. Your earlier reply seemed pretty clear, but this reply is less so. Hey, let's play a game! What sort of mischievous fun would YOU have with a demon's body when it's not home? - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:53:07 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Omigod! a NON- Kyrio question! > > Demon's soul, of course, immediately reverts to Vessel in body > > bag... > This is a sticky point. The only reason someone was able > to 'steal' a vessel was with a Resonance or with the Song of > Possession. Just because the _bag_ belongs to someone, doesn't > give them any particular power over the contents. The bag's I don't know...the actual description just says he'll wake up `in the bagged body'. If that's not the one he put there, I don't see any reason for this to change, personally. In general, I'd say yeah - you can't STEAL a vessel without Possession. If someone's dumb enough to GIVE it to you like that, it's another matter entirely... > The Celestial's mind is tossed into the Marches. If S'just like a human, then. No offense, but that strikes me immediately as too boring a solution...Celestials should react differently. I'd certainly give them the opportunity, if they have the Essence, to try jumping straight to Celestial form and staying right there, when it happens...or to manifest in another Vessel, if they have more than one. (If only for the amusement of having someone get taken over, and then appear next to themselves and pop them in the nose...) And whether they go Celestial or to the Marches, I think a Celestial should be able to DISSOLVE the Vessel, even with someone else in it, though the possessor should similarly be able to resist with their own Will. (You might kick their mind out, but it's still -their- Vessel. I'd base their chance of doing it more on the Vessel Level than just Will, though...Vessel + Corporeal Forces, maybe.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:26:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Body Bagging In a message dated 97-06-13 01:24:42 EDT, you write: << s it just me or is the need for "canon" answers a little too much like all those CCGs where the rules and being able to use or abuse them becomes more important than the game? Personally I prefer a v. fast and loose game, setting and style, where the story is paramount, there's no such thing as precedent unless I choose to allow it, and hang what the book says, what Moriah says, what anyone says if it gets in my way ;p >> Y'know, it's funny, but you're right. In Nomine is, by it's nature, fast and loose. At every point that I need to make a ruling I ask what's fast, what's loose, what's fun. The strange thing is that while I'm not in the least bit shy about making a non canon, heretical ruling I find that I do need to know what the canon answers *are*. - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:05:40 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Choirs and Bands > >I was talking about this with Micah up at SJG the other day. It seems as > >though everyone has two Choirs and Bands that they really feel an affinity > Does anyone else think that this is probably the same for Superiors? I would Huh...not me, I'm afraid. I go through little phases of liking some more than others, but...while I'll admit I wasn't overly eager to play a Djinn until getting into the conversation about them here, I like all of 'em. Of the Superiors...alright, a couple of them didn't really catch my interest, but there were enough of them that was bound to happen. {If anyone's keeping score; David, Janus, and Haagenti.} I'd be real hard pressed to single out a particular Choir/Band that I like especially...the Lilim just edge it out for looking good in leather and lace, as Elizabeth so succinctly put it. > If it looks like I'm on a Lilim bash, you're probably right. I think they are > too easy to abuse, and all of the posts about "Lilim aren't evil, they're just Of course you can abuse a Lilim if you want...you'll just have to pay her for the privilege later on. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:11:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Smif In a message dated 97-06-12 19:18:10 EDT, you write: << There has been some criticism of Smif's art in In Nomine, on the ground that it gave the book too much of a comic book feel instead of a more World of Darkness atmosphere. However, I recently discovered than many of the best pictures in Mage 2nd Ed are done by Smif. Is it, then, the colouring process which causes problems? What do people think? >> Personally I think Smif's art really cooks! He's outstanding! I can think of a few other people's art that I might want to use, but these people are very very good. Any book with them in it would be really expensive... Seriously, if you don't like Smif, then who *would* you get? Remember! only name artist's who appear regularly in rpg's. Don't go picking some fantastically great mainstream artist that no gaming company can possibly afford! A fair number of people attack Smif's art as being too light hearted. Look at pages 3, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 24, 29, 87, 90, and 156. These pictures don't strike me as particularly light hearted. I don't think the ruined the mood, I think they set the mood. If I were going to take a shot at criticizing I would have to say I have a problem with pages 11, 19, 47, 51, 52, 54, 74, and 79. In all cases they annoy because I have no idea what is being communicated, or how they connect to In Nomine. Their main function seems to inflate page count. But here I have to say that this is an editing thing, and not an artist thing. In another book this pictures might make perfect sense. As for color, I like Smif's art, but in my opinion it's a style that just doesn't work in black and white. I've seen one or two B&W's I liked, but only because it clicked mentally and I started thinking of all the really cool ways you could color them it. (His art in Gurp's Vampire...) I love Smif, and if I were SJG I'd keep 'em. If I felt compelled to fix the book I'd start with those damned typos and then look at introducing new songs. - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:18:33 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> need help!! > Both for me and my players. The ones I would like input on are one for > Lilith herself, and the Big D, Lucifer. These need to be tricky, I have a Lilith needn't be that big a problem, and may not have to be `used up' before the Lilim can `safely' go Bright...I'd more tend to suggest leaving that one hanging over her head, though if you really want it called in, I'd suggest having the Lilim show her commitment to freedom by agreeing to use her `in' with the angels to work at least one of them towards it..(eg., she'll have to try to make someone go Outcast.) Lucifer's likely to try to do something specifically to keep her from being able to go Bright, so make his flat out nasty. (`Taking out' that Seraph of Dominic might be a thought, if you don't mind the inter-player rivalry and if the Geas is a high enough Level, but otherwise it should just be something that's going to very seriously annoy at least one Archangel, near permanently, and probably one like Dominic or Laurence who just isn't going to take, "But I had to" for an excuse. Or he might try to manipulate things so that she picks up several points of Dissonance {for her favor to him, she has to Geas several other people into little things..people he's specifically chosen for having a high Will, and specifically ordered to refuse the Geas}, on the grounds that Angels really don't like Discord...) Especially with that Seraph around, I'd more see Lucifer's as being cripplingly blatant than any kind of highly subtle... (Alternatively, I suppose he might just wave her off and say, "Don't worry about it." He'd be lying, of course, but what can she do about it...until he calls it in?) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:31:20 +0930 From: "Damian O'Dea" Subject: Re: IN> Body Bagging John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > > > Of course, I can get around canon by just making the Body Bag in > > my game a more unique variant of the book version, I guess. > > A very good solution. Make it a coffin instead of > a bag. ;) Artifacts can have many different forms and still > work the same. Hell, you can make it a deep-sea diving suit, > a shroud , a telephone booth, whatever. Have fun with it! > I like the telephone booth, but its not really portable enough for the story to work ;p > > Is it just me or is the need for "canon" answers a little too much > > like all those CCGs where the rules and being able to use or abuse > > them becomes more important than the game? Personally I prefer a > > v. fast and loose game, setting and style, where the story is > > paramount, there's no such thing as precedent unless I choose to > > allow it, and hang what the book says, what Moriah says, what > > anyone says if it gets in my way ;p > > Please, please, please ignore anything that cuts into > the pleasure of your game! I, admittedly, am one of those > nit-pickers who sit behind the scenes and try to close off > the loopholes in a game (or at least make the loopholes > consistent with the rest of the universe). Whoops. Must have posted before my first coffee of the day. I seem to have been a little on the "snippy" side there. No offence intended, & none taken I hope. Memo to myself: Do the dumb things I gotta do. Touch the puppet head. Um. No actually that's : ODie, remember to have coffee before posting to IN-L, otherwise the flames of Belial will seem as nothing unto the flames I may reap from the words I sow ;p > Many of the rulings were to make the vast majority > of GM's life easier. To reduce the amount of possible > munchkinism. To keep things balanced. To be consistent. > To provide a coherent worldview, etc. Ah. Good and well intentioned aims all. Welp, that means we all know where you're headed, John ;> Of course, munchkins in my game only get to play gremlins and other little creatures that the Morning Star himself might play with ;p If there's one thing CP2020 taught me it is that the GM always has a bigger stick :) > More experienced > (or foolhardy) GMs ignore these guidelines with gay abandon. I wonder which class I have been lumped into, eh? Actually it may be best to not think about this, perhaps. > I've made several canon rulings that I ignore in my own > campaign (buying extra forces at character creation > is one big one). As with everything printed or appearing > on here, they are only guidelines. Hopefully useful and > well thought-out guidelines! Many of the things that I read on this list are excellent in aiding me in my games. I just seemed to get the impression that some of the bandaid-patches being applied to the games that SJG publishes - numerous errata, etc - could be construed as indicating they believe their audience/market to be very heavily rules-lawyer oriented. This is merely a comparison to other companies. IN, I should explain, is the first SJG game that I have run/played in any real fashion, but I note copious errata on all sorts of games on the Web site... Not that I want to start a debate on the quality of SJG publications, other companies efforts, the nature of SJG players or those of other games, etc etc etc. Perhaps I should end this by saying that one might also be able to construe this as meaning that (a) SJG cares about their games more than any other publisher, (b) SJG consider their games to be more living or evolving documents and every edition is a prelude to a more fine-tuned and tighter next edition into which the errata et alii are being incorporated. What I was really trying to do was get around to complementing some of the excellent contributors; Archangel Beth, yourself, GreyDragon, the Quixotic Ninja, etc (to name those I remember on the spot) and all the little relievers and gremlins who post such ideas to the list. Several of these are being incorporated into my campaign even as we speak / read / post, and so thanks to the collective mind. Should be picking up a copy of Storm Constantine's first two books in the Grigori trilogy tonight. If I get time (HAH!) in the near future I might be able to post a review (if interest is indicated). Hm. Rambled far too much today and I already have a massive backlog to deal with. Decoy Run, ODie... ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #208 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.