From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Jul 18 03:45:06 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 DAA19669 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 03:45:06 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA23833 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 02:20:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 02:20:17 -0500 Message-Id: <199707180720.CAA23833@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 #249 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, July 18 1997 Volume 01 : Number 249 In this digest: IN> Risk Re: IN> Moral Decisions IN> Really short story Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus Re: IN> Malakim of Creation Gaby and Dominic (Re: IN> Celestial Age) Numbers of Celestials (Re: IN> Celestial Age, again) Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus Re: IN> Moral Decisions IN> Back to celestial populations again.... Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus Re: IN> Malakim of Creation IN> Celestial Age Re: IN> Malakim of Creation Re: Gaby and Dominic (Re: IN> Celestial Age) Re: IN> Malakim of Creation Re: IN> Moral Decisions Re: IN> In Nomine font Re: IN> Malakim of Creation Re: IN> Back to celestial populations again.... Re: IN> Age of Celestials (was Items and Age) Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus Re: IN> Moral Decisions Re: IN> Malakim of Creation ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 12:23:13 -0500 (CDT) From: Martin Leslie Leuschen Subject: IN> Risk Topping out Risk at +/- 1 seems too restrictive to me. Here's my proposal: Risk CD -/+ Description (+/- to skill roll) 1 1 A little Risky (Shooting for the tire) 3 2 Really Risky (Shooting for the Driver) 6 3 DareAngel (Shooting for the driver's eye) 10 4 Insane (Shoot for the Carburator) Note that the rules for auto-success make any higher amount of risk on this progression pointless, and make it unlikely that the last two levels will ever be used. OTOH, the existing auto-success rules are a little abusive - check out: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/net.character.book/In-Nomine/Angels/Ofanite.Combat.html on Beth's character list to see what I mean. Maybe you one use this pregression all the time. Regards, Martin Leuschen martinl@rice.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 12:04:58 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Moral Decisions > > "You two are both disgusting -- okay, so you can do what you want to > the humans, but don't you *dare* damage the rainforests!" > > (Other two demons look at each other, sigh, and mutter, "Habbalah. > He still thinks he's working for Jordi.") Hey, wouldn't this a cool eco-terrorist? Do whatever you have to to save the trees, including murder, destruction, mayhem and ruined lives! }=) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 13:12:38 -0400 (EDT) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: IN> Really short story At the University of Michigan, we have a bulliten board system called "Confer", and I've been using it to organize my game. A really goofy conversation about internal security goons, Dominic, and Asmodeus came of it, and the coup de grace was this little tiny bit I posted at the end of it. This was a spur of the moment thing, really. But now, I think my players are scared. See, we start on Monday. I'm Zenith in the postings. - - - - - - Jul17/97 10:59 47:196) Thanatos: Goons in Heaven? I suddenly get this picture of Gabriel walking around in a black suit with sunglasses to the music of Pulp Fiction. - - - - - - Jul17/97 11:03 47:197) Michael Shade: That would be the Prophecy...almost. Walken didn't have sunglasses. but he was definitely a member of the wierd angels club. - - - - - - Jul17/97 11:10 47:198) Zenith Mirszky: I can see it. Yeah! Gabriel, in a male vessel in a black suit and sunglasses, walks into an almost empty bar. He stands behind the one guy sitting at the bar, and stands behind him for a good solid hanging moment before he speaks. "I know what you did, Sanchez. I know you shot that guy up the ass back on fifth and raped his old lady. You're a sinner, Sanchez. Can't have sinners like you walking our streets on God's Good Earth. 'Fraid I'm gonna have to do something about that. May God have mercy on what's left of your soul." As Sanchez turns around during this little speech, Gabriel whips out a gun faster then the eye can see, and he pops him twice, once in the forehead, once in the throat. Sanchez goes wheeling back and falls across the bar, blood splashing across the fake wooden panelling and chrome behind. The bartender doesn't look phased. He starts mopping up the mess. Gabriel nods to him. "Remember your prayers, Bartender. And this one is on the Big Guy." He flips some coins onto the bar and walks out the door. - - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 11:47:35 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus Oscar Rodriguez pleaded; > >I'm looking for a little bit of support on this topic. A > >Malakim of War wants to take the proficiency attunement in claws. To which Walt Mazur, and numerous others, replied; > Claws are a weapon, no? I'd allow it. (Oscar; ever going to ask for our support again? ) Alright, first off, I have to say my inclination, also, is to go ahead and give it to them...I think the limitations the player probably isn't considering (primarily the need for Essence to use them) are likely to balance out the advantages...and Michael is known for fighting dirty, so if one of his people suggests a twist like that, I think he'd go along with it fine. HOWEVER, I can see a case against it...Walt's reaction, particularly, brought to my mind the immediate response, "Well, no...it's a Song." I think there's a definite difference there...for one, NC work in Celestial combat, which is a significant boost over the average sword. Granted, you can GET a sword that will, but it takes some special effort. Beyond that is the question Beth touched on; could they take the Proficiency in unarmed combat? Claws kind of straddle the two...at 6+ inches, they definitely extend a little further than usual and might therefor be used more as a weapon, but the way they're firmly attached suggests to me they be considered more as Fighting...(of course, I'd put brass knuckles there, too, along with things like broken bottles, but I model it after Nightlife's Brawling skill.) {Though, Oscar, one other thing I don't think the player has quite thought of that you may want to point out as discouragement, at least; as both of these are Powers, they probably have to be `invoked' separately, so it's going to take two turns to get ready to use Claws Proficiently, compared to one for a hunk of sharpened metal you just have to pick up...} ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 11:52:06 From: Jeff Miller Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation At 12:48 AM 7/17/97 GMT, you wrote: >On Wed, 16 Jul 97 09:29:54 CDT, Oscar Rodriguez >wrote: > >>I have a player who wants to play a Malakim of Creation. An issue >>came up, obviously. It says that these Malakim are supposed to >>fight creatively. The rules say: >> >>"Anything they pick up can be used as a weapon with a power equal >>to the check digit of a successful Perception roll, for the length >>of a single combat." >> >>The problem is does the character receive penalties to use such a >>weapon. The weapon skills all require specifics. So should he >>come up with small weapons (spoon) or should we go broad with >>small weapon (blunt)? Or do we drop that all together given the >>nature of his attunement? > I like the small weapons (imporvised) skill already suggested on this list. >This is also going to require a certain amount of improvisation on the GM's >part. He needs to think what objects are likely to be around where the >fight is. In a garage, it might be a tire iron (Small Weapon) or some >equipment the opponent could be thrown into (Fighting). At a construction >site, you might find a nail gun (Ranged), rebar (Small or Thrown), or >dangerous items to push people into (Fighting). Or in lieu of improvising, >you need to think what will be around the sites you expect to be in. > I don't see this as much a job for the GM as for the player. See below. >But what to do about sites with various weapons or no weapons of a >particular type? A question would be whether to make the Malakim of Eli use >his attunement once for all or to declare, "I look for a large weapon," one >turn and have to use it again for another class of weapon if there isn't a >good large weapon available. Given the need for multiple weapon skills, the >attunement isn't that powerful, so I'd be tempted to give the Malakite the >whole story in one shot. My assumption is that he's been trained to look >for this stuff always, so he always knows what's there--the attunement just >gives him an exact reading on everything. So, at a construction site, the >GM may announce something like, "You see a nail gun/2 (Ranged), a claw >hammer/3 (Small), a six foot length of pipe/3 (Large, usable with >quarterstaff skill), a big plate glass window/6 (Fighting, usable only >once), and three steel L brackets/2 (Thrown)." On a clean street, the list >might be shorter, "A couple plate glass windows/5 (Fighting, usable once >each), and some parking meters/1 (Fighting)." Essentially, I'd think up the >list beforehand, but only give him the weapons with powers at or under his >check digit unless they were extremely obvious: if he's atop a tall >building, I'm going to tell him, "Using Fighting to throw someone off the >building is more powerful than any weapon your attunement perceives," >though I might assess a bad accuracy number, too. > I see the attunement differently. Instead of a perception roll to spot likely weapons in an environment, I see it as a perception roll to see how to use the object creatively. This would be extreemly situational. Thus, the MoE might pick up a hammer in one instance and see how it could be used with the effectiveness of a weapon/5. On another occasion he picks up a hammer and either the weight of the hammer is different or the opponents/fighting conditions are different and he can only see how to use it as a weapon/3. Thus, The GM isn't stuck coming up with powers for everything around, or even every potential weapon around. The player, if the character is in a garage (who's contents have been generally described by the GM) says, "I pick up the torque wrench, I can fence with it as a force 3 weapon." Later the Angel is in dire straits (on his third demon in that garage), "I reach out and grab the first thing I can pick up." The GM says "You pick up a piece of broken glass, it'll break on the first successful hit." The Malakite then rolls to see how effectively he csan use it. I think that this is closer to what they intended in the rules and brings it closer to a couple of old martial arts movies I've seen. -- Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 14:33:09 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Gaby and Dominic (Re: IN> Celestial Age) At 9:54 PM -0400 7/17/97, Stacy Stroud wrote: [...much good stuff, which I'm tempted to put on the INC with her permission...] >(The possibility of a Seraph getting a 6 check digit on its resonance does >undercut my previous statement somewhat. But since we are to believe that >Dominic has never gotten a 6 CD when Inquiring into Gabriel's alleged >heresy -- this despite off-the-scale attribute scores -- we can believe the >same here.) [...] >I realized, "Waitaminnit, lady, he's a Seraph. Go *talk* to him, and >eventually he'll realize the Truth. And once he knows you're innocent >(assuming you are), he can't lie about it or he'll eat Dissonance. If you >think he'll try to keep mum on the issue and continue to persecute you, >lobby for a hearing before the Seraphim Council. He can't lie to *all* of >them." There's about one thing that can foil this -- if the truth or falsity is purely personal opinion. Dominic can *know* that Gabriel is heretical, bordering on Outcast or Falling, because of how she's acting. He's sure of it, positive of it. She should have refused to contaminate the purity of the existing religion, refused to carry the message. Gaby, on the other hand, has stomped off in a huff that anyone could *dare* to accuse her, when she *knows* she was doing her job, and how could that no-good ^%$*&^ Seraph think otherwise?! Now, if there's no Truth about which *opinion* is right, all a 6 will tell you is: "This is opinion, as much as whether _Men In Black_ was a terrific movie or not." The other thing that might foil it is if Dominic has, for whatever reason, *refrained* from using his resonance -- his mind made up, and refusing to listen to any dissenting opinions, even from the Symphony... (I like option 1 for some atmospheres, where it's a tragic difference of opinions, but option 2 would make things very... Illuminated, perhaps? ) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 14:33:22 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Numbers of Celestials (Re: IN> Celestial Age, again) At 10:24 PM -0400 7/17/97, Stacy Stroud wrote: >Walter Milliken said, RE PCs having more Forces than most Celestials: > [...] >Of course, I'm also one of the people who think the PCs should be the >*only* representatives of their Side in their city. That may just be a >personal backlash against supernatural overpopulation in Vampire games I've >played, (Seen "The True Mundane" writeup on one of the WoD pages? 'S funny.) >but it does seem to be supported by the "Bright Dream" and "Dark >Dream" stories. And then he goes and writes Night Music, which has the opening segment with, oh, what was it -- 6, right there, and more "coming to town" soon. Probably depends on where the game's set -- I can see both things co-existing: something important happens and an angel/demon is assigned to an area. Eventually, the Other Side finds out about that celestial, and *they* put in one or two of their own. Slowly, over time (years, decades, centuries), you've got the potential for at least a half-dozen of each, not to mention a selection of lesser spirits, Soldiers, and servants. And this is just to keep the stalemate. Of course, many of those celestials won't associate with *each other* much -- especially in a large city -- since they're too busy with *their* Superior's spin on things. So you can start at a point where the area is small enough or already under control enough that there's a few demons and a couple of angels around (Bright/Dark dream) and the angels just moved in last week. Or you can go to a large, complicated place where you've got (retired PC?) celestials all over the city, who may or may not be involved with their own jobs when the (current) PCs need a hand. And of course, this is all dependant on the GM wants to run the game. O;> I kinda like having *both* the "it's our city, and we're going to have to deal with countless humans and maybe 3-4 demons to keep it clean" *and* the "there's a stalemate here -- we hold these parts of the city, there are demons holding these parts over here, and then there's the conflict-zones..." options. (A bunch of "it's our city" people are reassigned to a "stalemate" city, and have to deal with politicking... "Yeah, so you cleaned up a city and now you're the experts? Lemme tell you kids, it's not so easy when you have to watch who you upset -- you see that guy over there? He's a demon, but you can get him to help you. That lady over there, on the other hand, is the local Judgment suit -- she'll drag you to the Tether for questioning if you look crosseyed at her." Or vice versa: "What do you *mean* we're on our own? There's *no* Servitors of [x] to call on? How do you cope when you need backup? What do you mean you don't know anything about the local demons, haven't you even *talked* to them?") And there's *my* opinion. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 97 14:58:08 CDT From: Oscar Subject: Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus >(Oscar; ever going to ask for our support again? ) Sure, I have no problem being with differing opinions. :) >{Though, Oscar, one other thing I don't think the player has quite thought >of that you may want to point out as discouragement, at least; as both of >these are Powers, they probably have to be `invoked' separately, so it's >going to take two turns to get ready to use Claws Proficiently, compared >to one for a hunk of sharpened metal you just have to pick up...} I didn't even think of that. This may be enough to make it unattractive. I'm thinking about it and it isn't that unbalancing. So the list convinced me to let it stand. I let him have it with the understanding if I felt it unbalanced things we would change it. He's only been in one combat situation (which he was stupid to jump in) but it did help save him. Oscar ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 97 17:47 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Moral Decisions >> "You two are both disgusting -- okay, so you can do what you want to >> the humans, but don't you *dare* damage the rainforests!" >> >> (Other two demons look at each other, sigh, and mutter, "Habbalah. >> He still thinks he's working for Jordi.") > > Hey, wouldn't this a cool eco-terrorist? Do whatever you >have to to save the trees, including murder, destruction, mayhem >and ruined lives! }=) So how is this different from Jordi's servitors...? - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 97 17:38 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: IN> Back to celestial populations again.... > Given that the PCs are described as special quasi-autonomous >agents of the Superiors, granted the rare perk of Earth duty, it does seem >likely that most of the population of Heaven is made up of sub-angelic >spirits. These would be the administrative and support staff of Heaven, as >well as the Relievers who are assigned to minor tasks on earth. I actually like this notion, but so far canon has been silent on the issue. Another question I have is whether the celestial populations grow roughly at the same rate as the human population, or whether the numbers of angels and demons have been relatively fixed over time. Either way, it has some interesting implications. A fixed population would be getting spread pretty thin by now -- perhaps that explains why miracles are less common than in the past.... > I definitely think there should be far >more angels at the PCs' level than above it, with the numbers growing >correspondingly smaller as each new Force is added. And there shouldn't be >all that many 9-Force angels, at least not when compared to the numbers of >lesser spirits. I also agree with this notion -- should be some kind of pyramid, with the imps/gremlins/relievers at the bottom, and the Superiors at the top. (God is probably outside the pyramid, or *is* the pyramid. Gee... this is beginning to sound illuminated....) The rate of advancement of PCs is the main drawback to this theory -- they'll gain Forces fairly rapidly, I suspect. (Our games haven't been going on long enough for me to get a feel for how players are likely to treat cp awards.) One can argue that this is a consequence of front-line Earth duty, which is fine, but it means the PCs are scaling the food chain pretty fast, relative to most celestials. I'm not sure I'm happy with this. >Of course, I'm also one of the people who think the PCs should be the >*only* representatives of their Side in their city. For me, it depends on the size of the city. I'm figuring a population of maybe 100-200 celestials in eastern Massachusetts, about 60 in Boston proper. This means that our groups are maybe 10-20% of the angels in the immediate Boston area. That gives me some room to bring in "unknown" celestial NPCs fairly easily. But those other people still have plenty of territory of their own to cover. I'm not comfortable with the PCs being the *only* representatives of their side in town, though I can easily see them as 50% or more in a smaller metro area than Boston. > That may just be a >personal backlash against supernatural overpopulation in Vampire games I've >played, but it does seem to be supported by the "Bright Dream" and "Dark >Dream" stories. Marcus and his three associates seem to be the *only* >local demons of consequence, and they seem quite shocked when a *single* >angel is rumored to be prowling their territory. But we don't know how big a town/city they're in. And I don't necessarily think that they're the only ones in the area, just that they're one group that hangs out together. I'm still sticking with about a 1/10,000 ratio -- at that rate, a lot of smaller places in the US won't even rate *one* celestial, much less a pack of them on both sides. My main problem is that I don't want all the action concentrated mostly in the cities/seats of power -- to me, *that* violates the source material, too. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:33:58 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus On Thu, 17 Jul 1997 11:47:35 -0600 (MDT), Kingsley Lintz wrote: > HOWEVER, I can see a case against it...Walt's reaction, >particularly, brought to my mind the immediate response, "Well, no...it's >a Song." I think there's a definite difference there...for one, NC work >in Celestial combat, which is a significant boost over the average sword. But not over a relic sword. NC and a Fiery Sword cost points and essence; average swords don't cost either. >{Though, Oscar, one other thing I don't think the player has quite thought >of that you may want to point out as discouragement, at least; as both of >these are Powers, they probably have to be `invoked' separately, so it's >going to take two turns to get ready to use Claws Proficiently, compared >to one for a hunk of sharpened metal you just have to pick up...} While it takes one round to invoke the NC, the Proficiency is a preparatory attunement, which can be used on the same round--but has to be re-invoked every round. (Per p. 68 combat summary.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 23:17:37 +0100 (BST) From: maya@tcp.co.uk (GR Cogman) Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation >I think that this is closer to what they intended in the rules and brings >it closer to a couple of old martial arts movies I've seen. Slightly tangential note: if anybody out there owns the Feng Shui RPG, one of the fun things in it is interesting ways to stage fights, and exotic things to use in them. For instance, in the scenarios in _Marked For Death_, a scenario pack for it, they suggest fun things to do in the setpiece fights, or interesting weapons to use. So, in a fight in a bank, one can pick up the metal posts that hold the chains which are used to divide up queues and hit people with them, use the chains as whips, throw spare bundles of cash or coins, chuck people through the glass windows, throw them into the automated teller machines, use the pens from the counters like throwing knives, and so on. I have the feeling that this may be something like the spirit of the thing. YMMV. More concept than rule, I suppose, the way I'm looking at it. Maya - --- Maya, Elohim of Eli in service to Blandine maya@tcp.co.uk - -- "There are those who say that wizards are subject to temptations and addictions beyond the understanding of ordinary men: the addiction to shape-changing, or to meditation under the influence of certain herbs and conditions of the stars; the obsession with knowledge, and the development of power. Yet this is not so. Temptation is temptation, obsession is obsession, and choice is choice." - Isar Chelladan, Precepts of Wizardry. -- "Dog Wizard", Barbara Hambly. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 18:43:08 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Celestial Age >>>(Were there Celestials watching over the Americas before the monotheistic religions spread there? Or merely pagan spirits of the Marches?)<<< Why not? The angels and demons are not limited only to Judeo-Christian-Islamic cultures. I assume they have always been involved wherever there are humans present. >>>After reading this I realized, "Waitaminnit, lady, he's a Seraph. Go *talk* to him, and eventually he'll realize the Truth. And once he knows you're innocent (assuming you are), he can't lie about it or he'll eat Dissonance. If you think he'll try to keep mum on the issue and continue to persecute you, lobby for a hearing before the Seraphim Council. He can't lie to *all* of them."<<< You are assuming there is an objective truth to be found, here. Gabriel's actions may be quite justifiable to her, and still heretical to Dominic. It's not a question of whether she's in conscious rebellion against God, which Dominic surely *would* know by now if that were the case. It's a question of whether Gabriel's explanation for her behavior will satisfy Dominic. I don't think Dominic believes she's an agent of the dark side- he believes she's dangerously insane and possibly close to Falling, no matter what her intentions are. As for "just talking" to Dominic, he's likely to have her imprisoned the moment she shows up. Since she can't be sure what the outcome of her trial would be, she's not likely to take the risk. And, Gabriel is proud. Why should Gabriel, the very embodiment of the Fires of Creation, submit to Dominic's authority? Dominic is not God. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 23:05:26 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation On Thu, 17 Jul 1997 11:52:06, Jeff Miller wrote: >I see the attunement differently. Instead of a perception roll to spot >likely weapons in an environment, I see it as a perception roll to see how >to use the object creatively. This would be extreemly situational. Thus, >the MoE might pick up a hammer in one instance and see how it could be used >with the effectiveness of a weapon/5. On another occasion he picks up a >hammer and either the weight of the hammer is different or the >opponents/fighting conditions are different and he can only see how to use >it as a weapon/3. Well, suppose the player is in the office of Demonic Arts. The MoE gets into a Situation, and grabs a bust off a table to use as a weapon. The GM has predetermined that the bust is hollow papier-mache, weighing an ounce. It isn't about to hurt any mildly healthy sparrow. Perhaps I'm trying to be too realistic, but I'm not going to allow that hollow bust to be used as even a weapon/1 any more than I'd allow the MoE to pick up a sheet of paper and use it to give paper-cuts/1. >I think that this is closer to what they intended in the rules and brings >it closer to a couple of old martial arts movies I've seen. I realize I'm not following the exact wording of the attunement, but the exact wording lets you pick up a wet-noodle/6 or for that matter a mote-of-dust/6. I'm just not going to go there. I think my solution is fair to the player. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 19:31:20 +0500 From: "James Rand" Subject: Re: Gaby and Dominic (Re: IN> Celestial Age) > Now, if there's no Truth about which *opinion* is right, all a 6 will > tell you is: "This is opinion, as much as whether _Men In Black_ was > a terrific movie or not." All, well now the problem has more to do with philosophy than game mechanics, doesn't it? An easy out for some of us, but what if you do happen to believe in absolute Truth? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 20:32:45 +0500 From: "James Rand" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation > Well, suppose the player is in the office of Demonic Arts. The MoE gets > into a Situation, and grabs a bust off a table to use as a weapon. The GM > has predetermined that the bust is hollow papier-mache, weighing an ounce. > It isn't about to hurt any mildly healthy sparrow. Perhaps I'm trying to be Aw, come on. I kind of like the Malakim of Eli attunement as it is. Haven't you ever read the Amber DRPG? Malakim of Eli are just like Benedict, that's all... "Anything can be used as a deadly weapon... A pencil, a butter knife, or a sharpened twig can be used to thrust. Anything from a piece of sharpened rock, to the edge of a piece of paper can be used as a cutting weapon.... A piece of cloth, a length of rope, or virtually anything else can be used... as a means of damaging or killing the enemy." (page 23 of the ADRPG) And about that bust... you should read Feng Shui. One of the rules for running a Feng Shui fight is that "the map is your enemy". Don't detail anything that's not immediately important to the fight, and that way you can make the environment whatever is most dramatically appropiate. For instance, in a Feng Shui fight, if a PC is in someone's office and wants to throw through the window and out onto the street below, then obviously this must be happening on the second floor because that way you get a cool move that does some damage, enough to take out a mook but which an important NPC could still survive. In a Feng Shui fight, a player could say "I'm going to pick up the bust on that desk and smash it upside his head" even if you never said there was a bust on his desk, because there COULD be a bust on his desk and it's fun for the players when they break stuff. > too realistic, but I'm not going to allow that hollow bust to be used as > even a weapon/1 any more than I'd allow the MoE to pick up a sheet of paper > and use it to give paper-cuts/1. Or paper-cuts/5 or 6? What's wrong with that? You want realism? In a game whose premise is that angels and demons walk the earth amoung us fighting a cold war against each other, using all kinds of magical powers, and yet somehow humanity hasn't noticed? > I realize I'm not following the exact wording of the attunement, but the > exact wording lets you pick up a wet-noodle/6 or for that matter a > mote-of-dust/6. I'm just not going to go there. I think my solution is fair > to the player. I say, ask the player to explain to you how he's going to hurt someone with whatever he's picked up. And if he can give you an answer... not necessarily a realistic answer, or even a sane answer, but just an answer... then let him do it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:55:40 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Moral Decisions > >> (Other two demons look at each other, sigh, and mutter, "Habbalah. > >> He still thinks he's working for Jordi.") > > > > Hey, wouldn't this a cool eco-terrorist? Do whatever you > >have to to save the trees, including murder, destruction, mayhem > >and ruined lives! }=) > > So how is this different from Jordi's servitors...? PR, and the name of the Superior that will track down your ass if you screw your side over. (At times I wonder if name really *is* the only thing seperating Dominic and Asmodeus.) 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: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:55:40 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine font > > Do you know what that $49 entails - nonprofessional use, professional > > use, inclusion in free/commercial images? > > No idea... Then again, that _is_ a '1-800' number... O;) Nah - I've found a pretty good way of replicating it. There is a freeware font called Morpheus that I have. If I put it through the wind effect of Adobe Photoshop, it looks pretty close. Not perfect, mind you, but good. 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: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 23:15:42 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation > Well, suppose the player is in the office of Demonic Arts. The MoE gets > into a Situation, and grabs a bust off a table to use as a weapon. The GM > has predetermined that the bust is hollow papier-mache, weighing an ounce. > It isn't about to hurt any mildly healthy sparrow. Perhaps I'm trying to be > too realistic, but I'm not going to allow that hollow bust to be used as > even a weapon/1 any more than I'd allow the MoE to pick up a sheet of paper > and use it to give paper-cuts/1. You know, it can't be coincidence that the character involved in this example is nicknamed MoE. I how a Cherubim of Uriel with the Resonance Lami Yodel (celestial for getting hit) would fare against said Angel? (Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck) 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: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:55:40 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Back to celestial populations again.... > From: Walter Milliken > The rate of advancement of PCs is the main drawback to this theory -- > they'll gain Forces fairly rapidly, I suspect. (Our games haven't been > going on long enough for me to get a feel for how players are likely to > treat cp awards.) One can argue that this is a consequence of > front-line Earth duty, which is fine, but it means the PCs are scaling > the food chain pretty fast, relative to most celestials. I'm not sure > I'm happy with this. Remember - they are Heroes. It's a symptom of every RPG - most games, whether they like it or not, are cinematic. The PCs are destined for great things. > For me, it depends on the size of the city. I'm figuring a population > of maybe 100-200 celestials in eastern Massachusetts, about 60 in Boston > proper. This means that our groups are maybe 10-20% of the angels in > the immediate Boston area. That gives me some room to bring in > "unknown" celestial NPCs fairly easily. But those other people still > have plenty of territory of their own to cover. Sounds good - I'd say about 2/5 Angelic, 3/5 Demonic, with the vast majority of the Demons being 7 Force. Incidentally, are you *physically* near/in Boston? If you are in Boston or north of it, email me in private - we may be able to get together. > I'm still sticking with about a 1/10,000 ratio -- at that rate, a lot of > smaller places in the US won't even rate *one* celestial, much less a > pack of them on both sides. My main problem is that I don't want all > the action concentrated mostly in the cities/seats of power -- to me, > *that* violates the source material, too. It makes sense, though - you go where the action is. Countrysides will be mostly province of high-Forces Kyriotates, especially of Jordi, and Ophanim trucker/bikers - to deal with their "territory", they need to be everywhere at once, figuratively or literally. 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: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:16:02 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Age of Celestials (was Items and Age) > Demons go... out of the frying pan, > from demonic spirits (e.g., Imps & Gremlins) to demons (7 > Forces) to PC-level demons (9 Forces). And straight on into the fire... > >and suggest that *Someone* must know..but we know who that One is. > >(Archangel Beth, yes, but that other guy, too.) > SJ, you mean? Still, you have to get into the I thought He was above that sort of thing? (Much more important things to do than run a silly little universe...) > Restricted Stacks before you can find any of *those* answers. And > when you do, there's this little slip of paper that says, "Checked > Out 100 AD by Uriel; Overdue." Darn that Uriel...we should've known he'd consider it Purely checked out.. > Not to mention librarians of Destiny complaining about > visitors who misfile records, get in the way, and generally waste > *their* time asking stupid questions of doubtful utility. Oh, dear...the Librarians of Destiny? Dear, oh, dear...well, not that there's ever been such thing as a mundane librarian, but...oh, dear. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:54:20 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Proficiency and Numinous Corpus > >particularly, brought to my mind the immediate response, "Well, no...it's > >a Song." I think there's a definite difference there...for one, NC work > >in Celestial combat, which is a significant boost over the average sword. > But not over a relic sword. NC and a Fiery Sword cost points and essence; > average swords don't cost either. Well, yes..I said that, I believe, though I may have forgotten...regardless, the point to that is that getting a relic sword is a significant expense, even over NC (3:1 strikes me as significant, anyway..) > >going to take two turns to get ready to use Claws Proficiently, compared > >to one for a hunk of sharpened metal you just have to pick up...} > While it takes one round to invoke the NC, the Proficiency is a preparatory > attunement, which can be used on the same round--but has to be re-invoked > every round. (Per p. 68 combat summary.) The way I read it, you can invoke the Proficiency and strike with a sword in the same turn..but since invoking any power comes on the same step, you CAN'T invoke a Song and Attunement simultaneously. So, to use Proficiency with a sword, you just pull your sword out and have at 'em; one turn, pow. To use it with Claws, you first Sing up your NC; that's an action, end of turn. THEN you can start using Proficiency and having at them; two turns. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 00:18:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> Moral Decisions On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Walter Milliken wrote: > > > > Hey, wouldn't this a cool eco-terrorist? Do whatever you > >have to to save the trees, including murder, destruction, mayhem > >and ruined lives! }=) > > So how is this different from Jordi's servitors...? > Pit some servitors of Jordi against some Habbalah who used to work for him - it would be interesting to find out what the differences really *are*. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 00:31:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> Malakim of Creation On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, GR Cogman wrote: > > >I think that this is closer to what they intended in the rules and brings > >it closer to a couple of old martial arts movies I've seen. > > Slightly tangential note: if anybody out there owns the Feng Shui RPG, one > of the fun things in it is interesting ways to stage fights, and exotic > things to use in them. True, although the most useful idea from Feng Shui (which absolutely ROCKS guys) for In Nomine (which ROCKS too, don't get me wrong) G.M.s, or for any G.M. running a rules-low but somewhat cinematic game, is that any flamboyant and interesting way of performing an action is no more difficult than a mundane way of performing the same action, provided that no benefit is gained. In Nomine combat is not too complex and is reasonably fast moving. It can be spiced up without losing speed by allowing dramatic maneuvers and actions provided that nothing more is desired as a result than would be gained from a simple action. Never let a player just say "I attack". Make him describe the action even if the rules don't accomodate his deeds perfectly - then just roll as normal to resolve the assault without penalising him for flamboyance. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #249 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.