From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jul 8 20:03:44 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 UAA05339 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 1997 20:03:44 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA27991 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:36:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:36:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199707081636.LAA27991@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 #240 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Tuesday, July 8 1997 Volume 01 : Number 240 In this digest: Re: IN> GenCon Revisited Re: IN> Attunements Re: IN> people who run In Nomine IN> The Invisibles? Re: IN> GenCon Revisited Re: IN> people who run In Nomine Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki IN> Double Messages Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malakim) Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions IN> Habbalah question Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions Re: IN> Dean of Wuse Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki Re: IN> people who run In Nomine Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki Re: IN> GenCon Revisited Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... Re: IN> people who run In Nomine Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malakim) Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... IN> Night Music---Yes! Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:19:47 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> GenCon Revisited On Jul 2, 8:56pm, Donald G Bixler wrote: > Subject: Re: IN> GenCon Revisited > > I would be up for a game, just tell me the time and place and I'll > > be there. > > Well, if no one else is going to do one, my wife and I may do > one Thursday night in our hotel room. It would be demon-preferred. If > you are interested, please email me (mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu) or my wife > (mudmh10@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu). We are currently arguing over who gets stuck > Gming; it may end up with the two of us con-Gming. I think I might be up for this... _I_ never get to play IN.... rats! ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:41:38 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Attunements On Jul 3, 7:47pm, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Subject: Re: IN> Attunements > At 9:57 AM -0400 7/3/97, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > >> But could the Impudite get the "wicked cook" part, where he spent > >> a while in the kitchen and made something so delicious that the > >> victim would have a hard time resisting eating it? > >> > >> Or is that (the cooking) hooking into the Lilim Resonance > >> in a subtle way, as the "favor" that will enable the Geas > >> to be laid? > > > > The cooking sets up the potential for the Geas, but > >only a Lilim can take advantage of it. The actual _cooking_ > >attraction/skill itself is a gift from Haagenti. > > So if you want to poison food, you *could* set up something > which seemed so delicious that it took a will roll to resist > eating it, even if the victim suspected he shouldn't? > > Without being a Lilim, that is... Exactly! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 1997 08:39:36 -0400 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: Re: IN> people who run In Nomine >Ever had somebody roll an intervention when summoning their Superior? >It can get ugly... Yup. In a demonic one-shot I ran a group of angels of Novalis got a 111 when trying to summon her to help them with this strange PC Habbalah they were dealing with. Instead, the Habbalah was hit by a white light and instantly Redeemed... -Loki - -- Kirt A. Dankmyer --- Academic Computing Specialist http://www.wfu.edu/~dankmyka/ -- (910) 759-4202 -- PGP public key available. For the Snark _was_ a Boojum, you see. --Lewis Carroll ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:04:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Austin George Loomis Subject: IN> The Invisibles? On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, at 10:37:48 EAST, Peter Frederick wrote: [...] >On the topic of "Secret Human Interferance" I was trying to tinker with a >version of "The Inivibles" from the comic of the same name created by Grant >Morrison and published by DC. If it solidifies at all I'll post it, not to >try to stop anyone else having a hack . I was thinking about it myself, but I was going to wait until (a) _Night Music_ comes out with the expanded rules on Soldiers and (b) whatever supplement (if any) is going to have the info on Lilith comes along. (My take on the Invisibles in the IN world, y'see, is that they're the Soldiers of Freedom.) >Might still try to do >something along those lines in my campaign, love it when I joke with a >player about something and then put it in for real anyway :) . > Feel free. Your idea may actually be better than mine. >Thanking you for your indulgence. > You're welcome, and thank *you.* Austin George "Which side are you on?" Loomis, MiSTie #84029 and Blank Badge wearer ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:11:26 -0400 (EDT) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> GenCon Revisited " Well, if no one else is going to do one, my wife and I may do one Thursday night in our hotel room. It would be demon-preferred. If you are interested, please email me." And, so I'm doing. I believe we should be there on that day. yours, Jason Schneiderman Associate Editor, InQuest Magazine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:36:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> people who run In Nomine > > White wolf aren't that great at rules either IMHO. However, I *do* > > No, they're not. I wanted In Nomine in WW rules so I could run it as > a crossover with Mage, though. (Would put a whole new slant on your > Enochian-style Order of Hermes characters, wouldn't it?) > It certainly would! This might be a lot of fun, but it sounds like it has lots of pitfalls to avoid too. In particular, Order of Hermes mages can be so powerful that it might disrupt the Celestials view that reality is about a war between God and the Devil. Order of Hermes mages seem to serve neither. At the very least, they would have to accept Mages as having a huge part in the War. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:38:55 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki > I would think that anything from the celestial plane is a celestial, but it > raises an interesting question. > > I know that Humans do not become angels or demons, but is a formerly deceased > human who achieves Destiny or Fate properly considered a "celestial"? Nope. 'Celestial' implies a certain _type_ of soul, not certain abilities or accomplishments. Just wait til the supplement with Saints comes out and there will be markedly less desire to make humans into Celestials! ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:32:21 -0500 (CDT) From: Shadowcat Subject: IN> Double Messages Is anyone else getting double messages, or is it a problem at my end?? Shadowcat All cats may look upon a king. No comment on the Queen ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:12:05 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malakim) > > Suuuuuuuuure, why not? O;) > Actually, thinking about it, it just says the Balseraph > can take the Resonance of any Angel...I don't see any reason it couldn't > be from among the Fallen. (I'd still say they probably couldn't take the > Lilim Resonance, though, because they aren't Angels to start with..) > > {Of course, THAT brings up the amusing twist of a Balseraph of Kronos > choosing the Balseraph Resonance...supporting, perhaps, two entirely > different views of reality, able to use whichever suits his current > purposes, and as long as they don't conflict within themselves, they can > probably conflict between each other...hmm...nah.} Naughty, naughty! It says specifically any _Choir_ of Angel (emphasis mine). Whether or not you are willing to call the Fallen 'angels', they certainly aren't choirs! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:14:14 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions On Jul 4, 3:07am, Walt Mazur wrote: > Subject: Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction quest > On Thu, 3 Jul 1997 09:37:50 -0400, "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" > wrote: > > > Okay if a Cherubim/Djinn suspects that the above > >might be a problem, they can _at the time of attumement_ > >try to attune to the soul, rather than the body of a being. > >This has a -4 penalty but will track independent of the body. > >Remember if the soul leaves the Corporeal plane, the tracking > >doesn't work. > > Ok. Any particular reason for the choice of -4 as the penalty? One point worse than the worst penalty on the Celestial Resonance chart. You don't even have a visual reproduction... you are _assuming_ that there is a soul there to bond to and taking your chances. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:28:20 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Habbalah question Do Habbalah get along, or do they snipe at each other mercilessly, probing for weakness? Or does it depend on the Habbalah in question? [Hey, it's not a Lilim or Kyrio or Shedite question! It has nothing to do with Kyrios!] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:43:34 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party At 3:52 PM +0000 7/4/97, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: >> >My error: IOU, where U stands for university. I stands for Illuminati. >> >You're not classified to know what the O stands for. (I'm not sure that >> >anyone short of the ArchDean is. :)) >> >> If anyone else knew, I suspect it would be me. And she won't tell me, >> either.... > >Actually, if anybody knew, I'd suspect Archangel Beth would (is the >Archdean a manifestation of Beth, or vice versa?). (Yes. O;> ) And yes. > I have my guess, but I'm keeping it to myself, so the >AD's CIB (Cats In Black) don't come after me. It's not "online," though agents of disinformation have claimed such from time to time. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 00:20:22 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions On Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:14:14 -0400, "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" wrote: >> > Okay if a Cherubim/Djinn suspects that the above >> >might be a problem, they can _at the time of attumement_ >> >try to attune to the soul, rather than the body of a being. >> >This has a -4 penalty but will track independent of the body. >> >Remember if the soul leaves the Corporeal plane, the tracking >> >doesn't work. >> >> Ok. Any particular reason for the choice of -4 as the penalty? > > One point worse than the worst penalty on the Celestial >Resonance chart. You don't even have a visual reproduction... >you are _assuming_ that there is a soul there to bond to and >taking your chances. Makes sense. What if the Celestial *knows* it's a celestial in a host? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 15:53 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Dean of Wuse >Walter Milliken claimed: > >- ---Walter (aka Dean of WUSE) > >Would that be the Silly Dean, the Wierd Dean, or the Darkly Illuminated >Dean? Usually the I'm the Weird Dean, but I've got the Humanity attunement, so it's not all that obvious.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 13:38 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki >> be from among the Fallen. (I'd still say they probably couldn't take the >> Lilim Resonance, though, because they aren't Angels to start with..) > >Lilim aren't celestials, if you ask me. They certainly share all the characteristics of celestials, but if you're saying they aren't angels or fallen angels, then I'd tend to agree with you -- Lilim (and Lilith) are unique. This does bring up the interesting point that Lilith herself should originally have been something close to human, though since she predates the exile from Eden, she's still an immortal. (If my vague memories of the story from childhood are right....) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:40:05 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> people who run In Nomine > >Ever had somebody roll an intervention when summoning their Superior? > >It can get ugly... > > Yup. In a demonic one-shot I ran a group of angels of Novalis got a 111 > when trying to summon her to help them with this strange PC Habbalah they > were dealing with. Instead, the Habbalah was hit by a white light and > instantly Redeemed... Had a group at ConMan playing angels in the Feast of Blades adventure. They decided to storm the Langrine House in the middle of the demonic party (80+ seven force demons - they were not too bright about odds). One of them, a Kyriotate of War, summoned Michael, and rolled Divine. I decided that a Malakim war party would help immensely - getting Michael involved personally would be problematic, because he would have eaten Gebelleth for breakfast. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten. -George Carlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 15:51 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party >> >My error: IOU, where U stands for university. I stands for Illuminati. >> >You're not classified to know what the O stands for. (I'm not sure that >> >anyone short of the ArchDean is. :)) >> >> If anyone else knew, I suspect it would be me. And she won't tell me, >> either.... > >Actually, if anybody knew, I'd suspect Archangel Beth would She does. > (is the >Archdean a manifestation of Beth, or vice versa?). Yes. > I have my guess, >but I'm keeping it to myself, so the AD's CIB (Cats In Black) don't >come after me. Actually, you can guess all you want -- she'll just smile smugly. BTW, the usual guess for what the "O" stands for is "Online", which the ArchDean has said is *not* the Answer. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 16:12 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malaki >> I know that Humans do not become angels or demons, but is a formerly >> deceased >> human who achieves Destiny or Fate properly considered a "celestial"? > > The answer is yes - but they ascend to higher planes of Heaven, >according to cannon... As for Hell, I suppose they would be a lot more >accessible, once it's all in the low celestial plane. Actually, I think in the narrow sense the rules usually use the term "celestial", those human souls that inhabit the Earthly Heaven, and Hell are *not* celestials. It's canon that human souls and celestial souls are qualitatively different. I would normally interpret "celestial" as meaning someone with a celestial-type soul, regardless of where they happen to "live". - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:02:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Donald G Bixler Subject: Re: IN> GenCon Revisited > > Well, if no one else is going to do one, my wife and I may do > > one Thursday night in our hotel room. It would be demon-preferred. If > > you are interested, please email me (mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu) or my wife > > (mudmh10@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu). We are currently arguing over who gets stuck > > Gming; it may end up with the two of us con-Gming. > > I think I might be up for this... _I_ never get to play > IN.... rats! Oh, poor thing. Sure thing. Just come up with an Infernal character, Celestial or Soldier, and let one of us know. So far, other than you, we have one definite, one probably, and two maybes. Hopefulyy that tally will improve with everyone returning to their computers from the holiday weekend. > ;) Oops da Ogre, who understands the "Always a GM, never a player" lament mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:40:05 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Adventure : Graduation Party > >> >My error: IOU, where U stands for university. I stands for Illuminati. > >> >You're not classified to know what the O stands for. (I'm not sure that > >> >anyone short of the ArchDean is. :)) > >> > >> If anyone else knew, I suspect it would be me. And she won't tell me, > >> either.... > > > >Actually, if anybody knew, I'd suspect Archangel Beth would (is the > >Archdean a manifestation of Beth, or vice versa?). > > (Yes. O;> ) And yes. "Yes on one, no on two." "Uh, which one was that?" > > I have my guess, but I'm keeping it to myself, so the > >AD's CIB (Cats In Black) don't come after me. > > It's not "online," though agents of disinformation have claimed > such from time to time. Well, that is the first, obvious conclusion. Which means it is obviously wrong. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "I seem to have forgotten what families are actually for...Families seem to be a form of SM relationships without safewords." - Neil Hudson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:08:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Kyrio/Shedim/Possession vs. Cherub/Djinn/Attraction questions At 3:07 AM +0000 7/4/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >On Thu, 3 Jul 1997 19:50:00 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy >wrote: > >>>OK, what if that piece of the Kyrio *does* go to the Celestial plane but >>>the rest of it stays on the Corp. plane? >> >>[Listens to Karakash sobbing in the background...] >> >>Be kind -- let the Cherub/Djinn track the remainder, if it's all in >>one place besides other realms. > >Ok, so what if the part of the Kyrio that went to the Celestial plane comes >back to some other place on the Corporeal Plane and then the part of the >Kyrio that was tracked goes to the Celestial Plane? ;> Well, even if it's flipping like a see-saw, it's still all part of the *same* see-saw. The attunement just skews around to track the part that's in the corporeal realm. Mind you, a Kyrio could drive a Djinn nuts with that sort of thing, I suspect... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:43:34 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... From: Kingsley Lintz > Hehe...seen Men In Black yet? I've been really liking the idea of looking at In Nomine from the human point of view, with a secret organization that exists to keep the Celestials under control as best they can...("Look, son...you've heard of the Great War between Good and Evil, right? Well, it's real. There are Angels and there are Demons, and they spend a lot of time fighting each other..and frankly, neither side usually much cares if we get in the way. Our job is to keep an eye on these people - you'll be learning how to listen for them later - and keep them from doing too much collateral damage to humanity. Don't be fooled into thinking the sides matter...Mercurians are usually okay, but most of the Angels are just as focused on their War as the Demons are.") < The MiB's are Malakim in Black attempting to protect us from Vapula' s Flying Saucers. The Priory of Zion, the Dragon and Phoenix Society, Thule Brotherhood or the Society of Assassins on the other hand.. Adam Dahak@Compuserve.Com Except of course that the Priory of Zion works for Yves, The Dragon and Pheonix society for Valefor, The Thule Brotherhood are sorcerors and the Assassins work for Gabriel. The Knights Templar work for either Baal or Lawrence but its hard to tell and the Roscrucians work for Novalis. Possibly the Illuminati arn't working for a Superior but possibly they work for Lucifer [after all they are all about seeing the light...] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 15:08 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... [on the Children of the Grigori] > > They may be a "third side" in the War. >> > You mean that there's actually somebody fighting on the *human's* >side in the War? ;-) The description of the Children certainly gives the impression that they aren't really on either side. For another take on the "third side" concept, look at: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/IOUInNom.html [OK, it's a shameless plug... though the IN conversion is strictly Elizabeth's work.] >> > The >> >Nephallim were children of the Grigori: "Legends say that the children of >> >the Grigori created were... known... as the Nephallim...." >> >> And legends aren't always right. This seems to be a very weak >> statement, for canon. >> >Well, the book further says (toward the bottom right of p. 105) "What few >angels know, even today, is that beyond their gigantic spawn, the >malevolent Nephallim...." That seems to imply that the legend got at >least *that * right. That some of them are Nephallim, yes. But the initial statement implies that most angels believe that that's *all* of them. >> after all, they shouldn't be *significantly* more powerful than humans, >> or they'd stand out more. The tack I'm taking is that they may have >> "intrinisic" Songs of any type, but not attunements. I.e., they may use >> some Song or fixed set of Songs (chosen at character creation) > >Apparently there are other people in agreement with you. The general >consensus seems to be that the Children would not have any Choir >Attunements, since they aren't truly a choir to begin with. I am thinking they have some sort of basic resonance, though, which would explain their stated instinctive reaction to demons. This leaves open the possibility of having a "choir" attunement, but since angels are supposed to stay away from the Children, it seems unlikely that any Archangel would devise or grant such attunments. Children may have the same resonance as the Watchers -- one which is not given in the book. I would assume it's something to do with observing or teaching. The former would fit better with the instinctive dislike of demons. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jul 97 15:08 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... [on the Children of the Grigori] > > They may be a "third side" in the War. >> > You mean that there's actually somebody fighting on the *human's* >side in the War? ;-) The description of the Children certainly gives the impression that they aren't really on either side. For another take on the "third side" concept, look at: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/IOUInNom.html [OK, it's a shameless plug... though the IN conversion is strictly Elizabeth's work.] >> > The >> >Nephallim were children of the Grigori: "Legends say that the children of >> >the Grigori created were... known... as the Nephallim...." >> >> And legends aren't always right. This seems to be a very weak >> statement, for canon. >> >Well, the book further says (toward the bottom right of p. 105) "What few >angels know, even today, is that beyond their gigantic spawn, the >malevolent Nephallim...." That seems to imply that the legend got at >least *that * right. That some of them are Nephallim, yes. But the initial statement implies that most angels believe that that's *all* of them. >> after all, they shouldn't be *significantly* more powerful than humans, >> or they'd stand out more. The tack I'm taking is that they may have >> "intrinisic" Songs of any type, but not attunements. I.e., they may use >> some Song or fixed set of Songs (chosen at character creation) > >Apparently there are other people in agreement with you. The general >consensus seems to be that the Children would not have any Choir >Attunements, since they aren't truly a choir to begin with. I am thinking they have some sort of basic resonance, though, which would explain their stated instinctive reaction to demons. This leaves open the possibility of having a "choir" attunement, but since angels are supposed to stay away from the Children, it seems unlikely that any Archangel would devise or grant such attunments. Children may have the same resonance as the Watchers -- one which is not given in the book. I would assume it's something to do with observing or teaching. The former would fit better with the instinctive dislike of demons. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:08:27 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> people who run In Nomine At 9:10 PM -0600 7/3/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: [...] > Celestials, Soldiers of God, and Undead have the potential to have >more than 100 hits, of course, for which a lot of the Power bonuses cease >to matter..but when you consider this is five times any reasonable human >maximum, it's similarly reasonable to presume that humans just don't have >weapons in that range. What *SHOULD* be in that range are Songs...my >personal feeling on it is, with Songs that do damage, forget about >counting Essence as a +1...use it as a multiplier. Songs should be able >to seriously rip through things, since they were designed by and for >people capable of reaching that level... A notion I and my spouse were kicking around (but haven't tried yet) was that damage from things like Artifacts and Numinous Corpus should have bigger damage bonuses -- or that there should be things that do, things that are meant to take on, not humans, but other celestials. (Okay, so somebody just sang six-inch claws onto their fingers -- maybe they *should* be able to slice and dice concrete with those things!) Celestials can already trash mortals -- it's mostly the Noise factor that prevents it, I suspect. Why not allow them to do it even quicker? At 6:45 PM +0100 7/4/97, David.Evans wrote: >Kingsley Lintz said:- [...] >there are always ways and means to get around powergamers in a group. >First and foremost is "The Rule of NO", Isn't that one of Laurence's Distinctions? At 11:11 AM -0600 7/5/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> > Strength5 - relatively beefy for a human - would have 20 body >> > hits..most will range from more like 4 to 12..). >> Yeah, that's a good point. The Celestials are hugely superior if >> we compare them to humans. [...] > > Hm...actually, now that you mention it, the skills system leaves >humans more blatantly underpowered than anything else...with an average >Attribute of three, it's virtually impossible for a human to do -ANYTHING- >by Default, and with an average skill level of three as well, they'll >still be outright failing more than half the time. I think someone suggested a while back that humans get a "Doing Things/6" skill -- it's only under pressure that they start having problems. E.g., anyone can climb a chain-link fence; don't roll -- unless you have to see if they can climb it fast enough to escape the guard dog coming up behind them... [] >[And besides, think how happy your player'll be when you >suddenly start telling him, "Oh, you can just do that.." Watch the >Celestials get green with envy. "How do Angels ever get anything DONE?"] I like it. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:33:53 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Calibim of Kronos with Belseraph attunement (Malakim) > > > Suuuuuuuuure, why not? O;) > > Actually, thinking about it, it just says the Balseraph > > can take the Resonance of any Angel...I don't see any reason it couldn't > > be from among the Fallen. (I'd still say they probably couldn't take the > > Lilim Resonance, though, because they aren't Angels to start with..) > Naughty, naughty! It says specifically any _Choir_ of > Angel (emphasis mine). Whether or not you are willing to call > the Fallen 'angels', they certainly aren't choirs! Well...so what if one took the Angelic Resonance, and then picked up Dissonance according to those rules? Wouldn't they be at risk of `Falling', logically? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:09:25 -0700 (PDT) From: nightgaunt@earthlink.net (Alexander Shearer) Subject: Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... >Is this Dictionary a web resource, or a book? Either way, what is >the ISBN/URL? I don't know the ISBN, but it's referred to on p. 204 of your IN book, in the Primary Sources section. I found it in the infocenter of the Berkeley main library (Doe). Alexander Shearer nightgaunt@earthlink.net gaunt@uclink4.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:21:42 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: IN> Night Music---Yes! According to the ineffable Scott Haring, Night Music is printing like mad... The advance copies are sitting in the SJG offices right now (if they haven't already been distributed to the author/Steve/etc) and the main shipment will be at SJG on Monday. This _is_ in time for Origins (and GenCon of course). Delivery to your local retailer depends on the efficiency of the distributors and shippers. Yes! ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:46:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Davidson Subject: Re: IN> Some Free Roaming Thoughts... On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Walter Milliken wrote: > [on the Children of the Grigori] > > You mean that there's actually somebody fighting on the *human's* > >side in the War? ;-) > > The description of the Children certainly gives the impression that they > aren't really on either side. > > For another take on the "third side" concept, look at: > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/IOUInNom.html > [OK, it's a shameless plug... though the IN conversion is strictly > Elizabeth's work.] > That's okay... you're allowed 1 shameless plug a week (as long as it's In Nomine related, that is). :-) > > >> > The > >> >Nephallim were children of the Grigori: "Legends say that the children of > >> >the Grigori created were... known... as the Nephallim...." > >> > >> And legends aren't always right. This seems to be a very weak > >> statement, for canon. > >> > >Well, the book further says (toward the bottom right of p. 105) "What few > >angels know, even today, is that beyond their gigantic spawn, the > >malevolent Nephallim...." That seems to imply that the legend got at > >least *that * right. > > That some of them are Nephallim, yes. But the initial statement implies > that most angels believe that that's *all* of them. > Umm... No. This wasn't what I was driving at. What I was driving at was that not all Grigori were Nephallim, and vice versa. At least, that's what the passage seems to imply to me. > > > > >Apparently there are other people in agreement with you. The general > >consensus seems to be that the Children would not have any Choir > >Attunements, since they aren't truly a choir to begin with. > > I am thinking they have some sort of basic resonance, though, which > would explain their stated instinctive reaction to demons. This leaves > open the possibility of having a "choir" attunement, but since angels > are supposed to stay away from the Children, it seems unlikely that any > Archangel would devise or grant such attunments. > > Children may have the same resonance as the Watchers -- one which is not > given in the book. I would assume it's something to do with observing > or teaching. The former would fit better with the instinctive dislike > of demons. > No arguments here. :-) Thomas Davidson tdavidso@suffolk.lib.ny.us - -------------------- Don't panic! I have a new .sig! - -------------------- Instruction Booklet for this message: STEP 1: Open mouth. STEP 2: Insert foot. STEP 3: Chew vigorously. STEP 4: Repeat as needed. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #240 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.