From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Aug 15 03:58:44 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 DAA05641 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 03:58:44 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA32502 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 14 Aug 1997 23:58:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 23:58:24 -0500 Message-Id: <199708150458.XAA32502@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 #294 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 Thursday, August 14 1997 Volume 01 : Number 294 In this digest: Re: IN> Daddy, where do angels come from? Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Fluff (Superiors' Appearance) IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Lilim Geases IN> Chains of Command IN> Geasa Re: IN> Humans and Skills IN> Humans and Skills Re: IN> Ladislas Budnarzik in Night Music IN> Motel 666 (4/9) Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: FW: IN> Immortal soldiers. Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels Re: IN> Lilim Geases IN> Grwoth Spurts. IN> Immortal Humans IN> Lucifer's Word IN> Immortal soldiers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 12:14:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Daddy, where do angels come from? On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 dwood@skipjack.bluecrab.org wrote: > The "classical" angel has 9 forces, but there are a great many lesser > beings in both Heaven and Hell. These beings have less than 9, and may > have special powers of their own related to whatever duties they might > have. Imps, relievers, familiars, etc. are all working toward the day > they get extra forces, attract the attention of a superior, and enter > service as full-fledged angels and demons. This is just a personal quirk of mine, but I don't like the concept of Relievers. I have no problems with gremlins or imps, though. I justify this position with the "quality vs. quantity" argument: each angel is handcrafted for a specific purpose, and therefore starts out at 9 Forces. Lucifer, however, needed troops in a hury, and so slapped together a few Forces and told the resultant demonlings "Work hand, and some day you may become a demon." This accomplishes three things: 1) It's a more economical expenditure of Forces. 2) It ensures that the weak are weeded out. 3) It ensures that only those who are sufficiently dedicated to evil become demons, thus cutting back on the possibility of going Bright. (Think about it for a moment: if you had to work your way up the demonic food chain, you'd be less likely to give up your hard-fought position by going Renegade than a demon created wholecloth that has nothing to lose.) > This is precedented, too. Remember Haagenti, Prince of Gluttony? He > started out as a frequently abused familiar. He got elevated through > demon right to prince on one swell foop. His is something of a cinderella > story (one which Kobal still gets chuckles out of once in a while, I > bet), but the fact that it did happen says it could happen again. I was using the Lilith precedent, m'self. Still, that's not to say we can't use both, as illustrated above. - -- Casca (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of this robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 23:49:53 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases At 1:52 PM -0600 8/13/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: [...] >> > Despite multiple *failed* invocations of a Geas, K.K. is dissonance >> > free. It was a little complicated, but her resonance is unimpaired > Now, Beth has a good point HERE that a Lilim could >seriously abuse a Servant this way...but hey, that's what Servants are >for, right? It's still way too easy. (Listen to me, arguing *against* a way for my favorite Band to escape dissonance forever...) >> Perhaps we can make giving a Geas to a non-Lilim require >> an expenditure of energy (since the non-Lilim doesn't have quite >> the right 'soul' to accept it). This would stop easy gifts >> to trusted servants, but still allow Lilim to do the baseball-card >> thing. Hmmmm... I think I like this idea. One essence per >> level sounds reasonable. What do you think? > I dunno...I'm not liking this, myself. This is largely because I >don't like the idea of Lilim as being the only ones who can possibly do >Geasa...they have the Resonance for it, which lets them do it `easily' >(eg. without a Superior or some other effect - the back of my mind just >started on a Song of Binding concept which I'll put up when it finishes >out), but...it's like the Seraph resonance compared to the Detect Lies >skill. ANYONE can learn to tell if you're lying to them; Seraph don't >HAVE to. While a Song can probably be substituted in for any of the Choir/Band resonances... There aren't really any of those per se in the book right now. Currently, *only* Seraphim get the Whole Truth bit, *only* Elohim (and Habbalah) can sense emotions, *only* Mercurians spot social ties, *only* Balseraphs impose their lies on others, etc. (Though if such Songs do start showing up, it will still be *only* the Choir/Band that can do it *quietly*... Unless they're boosting skill with Essence.) > How about just this - only Lilim get that bonus of subtracting >the Level of the Geas from the victim's Will to resist? That's a POWERFUL >advantage; most people won't bother resisting the little 1 and 2 Level >Geasa, and by the time you're to Level/3, most mortals are straight out of >the running...(Consider a pretty strong Will of 4 for a human, subtract 3, >and try to roll it on 2d6? Hah.) For a Level/6 Geas, even the strongest >willed Celestial (on the PC level - eg 12) has less than a 50 percent >chance of resisting and inflicting that Dissonance on the Lilim...but if >it's just her Servant, he just shrugs it off and sticks a sword through >'em. ('Course, he can spend that Essence, but don't forget - Lilim have >Essence, too.) Lilim Essence doesn't matter -- it's not a Will contest. It's rather one-sided that way. At 2:25 PM -0600 8/13/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> >don't see why they couldn't swap a Geas to someone else. (How often are >> >they going to *want* to trade a Geas for which the Need has been fulfilled? >> When you need a favor, you need a favor -- better to trade away a >> Geas on someone than bind yourself in the future... > But for that, you need to need a favor from someone who CARES. >(As Andrealphus looks at you quizically and asks, "But darling, what do >*I* need from Ed, the mechanic, Joe, the Zookeeper, and Sherryl the >racecar driver? Frankly, nothing, and if in the future I do, well, I'll >contact them. From YOU, however, my sweet..") Ah, but if you have a favor from Willard, the local mayor, President Clinton (don't ask), or something on that cute little Servitor of Creation who's operating the rival brothel.... >> If they can do it without risking dissonance? You bet! They just >> go around finding folk who want to order someone *else* around, > There's an interesting point...the Lilim COULD work her >way up the chain. ("Hmm..now, YOU have a Level/3 Need for a Level/2 Favor >from this person I happen to have a Geas on, and HE has a Level/5 Need for >a Level/4 favor from you, so if I can just do a TEENSY favor for you and >let you boss this poor slob around, I can have HIM, and HE knows the >passcodes..") Which is a little bit of a side point, I know, but sounds >like fun... Exactly.... And that's the sort of thing that makes being a Lilim *fun*! >> She goes to her human servant and says, "Okay, I'll give you that >> new motorcycle you've been wanting, in exchance for some potential >> Geases on a Malakite. And, if you invoke them the way I tell you to, >> I'll sweeten the deal with a new Song." > I don't know...sending a human servant to invoke Geasa on a >"strong-willed Malakite" sounds like a quick way to not only avoid >Dissonance, but also lose a loyal Servant. Granted, you can get another, >but it takes time... It all depends on how you work it. Go up to them in the department store, and watch them grit their teeth. Might be a good idea to have them disguised, though.... > Otherwise, unfortunately, with your logic, it really comes down to >that the dissonance has to hit HER, or Lilim will never invoke their own. No, the dissonance has to hit *someone* -- no free lunches. (And I've decided that letting non-Lilim invoke untested Geasa is A Bad Idea. Too many weird effects.) >(In this example, f'rinstance, the Servant is pretty much toast anyway, >even if he thinks he can dodge an annoyed Malakim - what does she care if >he picks up a few notes of dissonance first?) And, as you noted, if it >hits her, the Lilim will never trade 'em, which comes into a bit of a >Catch-22 and all the Lilim suddenly vanish in a puff of logic... They'll never trade *untested* Geasa, at least. But I don't like that one either, as much. >> into the "karma" section of the Symphony... But if it fails, then >> they have given something for nothing, and the imbalance hurts them. [...] > I'm thinking of going with both, myself...I've never been quite >comfortable with the Lilim getting Dissonance strictly for having their >Resonance resisted. Balseraph get it for being resisted OR contradicting >themselves. Calabim and Haballah get it not so much from being resisted >as from `eating' the results, while both Djinn and Impudites get it for >pretty much the same reason their Choir counterpart does, if with a bit of >a lemon twist...so the Lilim Dissonance mechanics struck me right from >the beginning as not quite right. I can certainly see the "something for nothing" argument... () I'm just thinking that letting non-Lilim invoke untested Geases is a Can'O'Worms that will generate lots of nastythings -- if they *can* invoke them, then you have to explain why (when it's not in their natures), and then you have to decide if they take dissonance/damage and why... I prefer to think that an untested Geas is too fragile for trading around except to those who instinctively know how to handle Geases anyway (other Lilim), or those who have power and skill enough to cope anyway (Superiors). As a side note, I generally think that untested Geasa don't "show" in celestial form. Or at least not obviously. A Superior might notice (probably will, unless he's distracted), but yer buddies (and you!) likely won't.... This makes it easy for me to justify that they're fragile. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 13:54:07 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Fluff (Superiors' Appearance) At 12:46 AM -0400 8/14/97, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>However, it does sort of conflict with the "appearance of a Superior" >Disturbance modifiers, as given in the book -- a Superior appearing is >pretty noticable, especially in celestial form....<<< > >Superiors undoubtedly have ways of avoiding that too, if they really want >to. Of course they won't always do so. ("You chose to invoke me in the >middle of New York City-- so, I assume you already took into account the >fact that half the celestial population of Manhattan will be converging on >this location after I leave....") ("Uh, boss, can't we *both* leave? Please?" And then there's the "if Eli's in town" setup. [The cab drives up, the scruffy-ish fellow hops out. "Hey, I was in the area and heard you wanted me to drop by. Let's talk about it over lunch. Where's the best pizza around here?"]) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 14:33:02 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Lilim Geases >Various ideas on Lilim trading Geases< What if Lilith's the only one who can give a Geas to a Non Lilim. That way the Lilim could trade them among them selves but risk dissonace when tehy call tehm in and if tehy want to give a geas to some one els they have to ask Mom to do it for them and are thus going to owe her one [probably only a Geas/1 but still enough to make it hurt to do it.] Then any non Lilim could recieve a Geas and ignore any dissonance effects for not being a Lilim [Malakim of the Archangel of Confusion ecepted.] but the cost is resonably high. On a related point any Superior can remove a geas [since it is discord] though they are reluctant to. Does loosing a geas this way cause dissonance to the Lilim? Do Malakim think this is Honourable? Adam Canning Dahak@Compuserve.Com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 14:02:19 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases >As this is the seventh post I've seen on the topic...is there an official >reason why 'geases' was chosen over 'geasa'? One of the Head Honchos at SJG doesn't like Geasa and we couldn't find enough "definitive" dictionary references to look innocent. O;> At 11:32 PM +0000 8/13/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >On Wed, 13 Aug 1997 12:45:29 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy > wrote: > >>>How about this: The Geas can be traded, but if it's traded to a non-Lilim, >>>it doesn't act either way: it won't cause dissonance if resisted, and it >>>won't cause dissonance or hits if not satisfied either. The threat is that >>>if the victim doesn't satisfy the Geas, the holder will go find a Lilim to >>>enforce it. [...] > >What I'm suggesting is that the Geas would be there, tying the Geasee to >the non-Lilim Geas-holder. If the Geas-task is asked for and performed, the >Geas poofs. Until then the Geas-holder has the Geas (and can track the >Geasee?) and the Geasee has that embarrassing Discord. It's just that the >Geas-holder doesn't have the Lilim resonance to enforce the Geas on an >unwilling victim. The advantage I see in this is allowing Geases to be >traded to anyone without either escaping the Dissonance or imposing a Lilim >Dissonance condition on non-Lilims. Except, if a Geas can't be enforced, it's not a *Geas* anymore. It's a tracker, and perhaps an inclination of goodwill to the asker, but it's not a *Geas*. (If a disad isn't a disad, it's not worth points.) If the will-reduction still works, then it's a silent tracker/Song-of- Charm/reason-to-get-a-favor combination. But it's not a *Geas*. Which makes it kind of... messy. >>Yeah. But I still think this is more complicated than is useful. Easier >>to just restrict untested-Geas-trading to Lilim and Superiors. IMO, of course. > >But what about stories like Aladdin's lamp? Gotta have human Geas-holders! Bound Discord. (And a *guarenteed* Geas will work fine -- it's only the untested ones that can't be traded to humans. A human can hold a Geas for a Lilim, or on anyone who was inflicted with one via a Superior or relic or something... ...and celestials (and maybe Soldiers?) can *agree* to let a Lilim put an indefinite favor on them, though *that's* house-rules. "I'll give you [x], but you have to promise a day-Geas for it." "Curse you, Lilim. We must have the [x]. I agree." "Got it. And, as I promised, the [x]. See ya later.") At 10:46 PM -0400 8/13/97, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>If *NOBODY* takes the dissonance, then Lilim will *never* invoke >an untested Geas they got on someone! They'll *trade* their untested >Geases around, and never get dissonant! BAD mechanic, no donut!<<< > >I don't agree they'd never use their untested Geases. Often, Lilim are >going to try to get Geases on specific people because they want something >from that specific person. So? They buy a loyal servant to invoke it for them, in that case. Do you want *all* Lilim running around with servants because the game mechanics make that the best thing to happen? Heck, get your vessel to look just like the servant... And they'd probably stop fulfilling needs for anyone but the "high-bid" sorts -- as you say, who needs Fran the Waitress or Jesse the Bus Driver? If it's trivial for the Lilim, she might hang onto it. Never know when your servant might want a date, right? But otherwise, they'll never care about those bitty ones, true. And *they* won't invoke the Geases on the nobodies. >I just can't see resisted Geases inflicting dissonance on non-Lilim. Neither can I, entirely. Which is why you can't trade an untested Geas to a non-Lilim. At 12:46 AM -0400 8/14/97, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>Geas the person to do it (it's a trade!). Get something "right now" >(perfectly valid!). Buy a servant -- a wimpy servant, very >loyal, and never experience dissonance again! Bad mechanic, no >donut. Dissonance goes somewhere.<<< > >Sure, buy a wimpy, very loyal servant to invoke all your Geases for you. > >Unless your GM is just as wimpy, the servant will probably survive that >trick twice, max. ;) > >As has been said elsewhere, the best antidote to munchkinism is not more >rules, it's a good GM. And a good GM will let a well-thought-out trick work as long as it's well-thought-out, because to do otherwise is pretty crummy. "It doesn't work anymore because I say so" is a lousy thing. (Negotiating "It doesn't work anymore because it's munchkin, please stop doing it" is different.) Besides, who says it's only for Malakim-geasing? Use your "twin" servant to invoke your Geases on other humans, on other demons, on the neighbor's dog, whatever. (And people think it's you... Heh.) If you must Geas an angel: Walk up to the angel in a dark alley and try it, you've got a dead servant. Sit down behind one on the bus and murmur, "You know that lady who gave you a lift? Well, she wants you to..." IOW, if the rules allowed it, Lilim would have been doing this from day one. Angels would have learned that killing the messenger made lots of noise. They'd never trust anyone, never accept favors. The logical outcome just isn't in the current state of the game, therefore, it doesn't happen. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 15:12:06 -0500 (CDT) From: Martin Leslie Leuschen Subject: IN> Chains of Command > Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 01:34:13 -0600 (MDT) > From: Kingsley Lintz > Subject: Re: IN> Humans, Relic Weapons, and a Lonely Goatherd > > > In the section on Soldiers, it says humans *must* have 2+ Corpreal > > forces. No weak humans? Legit? (IDHNMIFOM, but I could look it up if > you > > need the reference.) > I have the impression this is mostly to emphasize that Soldiers > are fundamentally based in the Corporeal realm...but I'm personally > inclined to ignore it. (I tend to think the fact that they just ARE > fundamentally based in the Corporeal realm is reminder enough..) > That's how I see it. > > Scoobiel the Angel buys a Servant/1 (2) for 1 CP. Making up stats for > > that servant he uses 8 of it's 16 CP to buy two Servant/4 (2), and they > > use their CP to buy a bunch of Servant 6 (3)... > Well, apart from..argh, it's out of my scrollback, but I think it > was Will Mazur who had a very nice response to this about the > chain-of-command aspect Scoobiel has evidently neglected... > I'd be inclined also to point out that the class of Servant also > reflects its type, which entails a bit more than just Forces-and-CP count. > So what you've got here is a Zombi or a puppy ordering around two basic > humans (or vampires) who in turn are each ordering several experienced > Soldiers (or Mummys)...with the first step being the most obviously > ludicrous. ("Here go, Spot! Here's your treat! Now go order George to > tell his troop to take out the enemy command center. GOOD boy!") The > Zombi is probably the best-case scenario here, though I could see a case > for a small child as well... Well, Scoobiel might *want* a puppy - perhaps Scrappy? ;) > Anyway, I'd just add it to Mazur(?)'s note - IF the player can > actually come up with a reasonable explanation for this, I don't see any > reason not to allow it...("Well, my Servitor of Marc here works for a > major corporation, so of COURSE the least competant is at the top of the > hierarchy." [GM nods sagely. "I see...and then comes the dog, and then > the humans..") Well, as Walter Milliken noted, it was just a Stupid Servant Trick, not really meant seriously. OTOH, it *does* bring up the chain of command thing, which is interesting. It seems reasonable that an angel of War might want a General as a Servant, or a Demon of Faction might want a Senator. Should there be an extra cost for someone with these kind of resources? Surely a servant with Staus/6 (Socialite), is worth less than one with Status/6 (President of USA), or Status/6 (Director of CIA), even if they're the same force level. Another thought: A cheap trick is to make your servant really low on Will so you can push it around, even at low level. A servant/6 at level 1 is still pretty useful, even with a Will of 1, and only costs 3 cp. Making a tough, dumb soldier bodyguard an affordable option for many Celestials. Yet another thought: You can write up your servants with very similar attitudes and goals to yourself. Then they're much less likely to balk. (Works better for Angels than Demons.) Regards, Martin Leuschen martinl@rice.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 13:28:19 -0700 From: zingaro@PEAK.ORG Subject: IN> Geasa in re: the question of 'why _geases_ over _geasa_' I suspect it is much the same reason we use 'Malakite' over the actual singular form of 'Malakim' and several of the other 'foreign' words. To make it easier for folks who didn't grow up immersed in words and imbued with a sense of their beauty might and power, and therefore find that it's not that important. - ------- zingaro@peak.org I don't know where you magic pixies came from, but I sure like your pixie drink ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 16:47 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Humans and Skills [johnk:] > For most normal actions, the GM shouldn't have to >roll dice at all. So, if someone is staying at an adequate >hospital with a reasonably competent doctor under no >unusual time constraint, the skill works automatically. > Under stress situations (all combat qualifies as >a stress situation!) rolls have to be made as given in >the book. Is this canon? - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 15:22:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Martin Leslie Leuschen Subject: IN> Humans and Skills > From: Walter Milliken > Subject: Re: IN> Humans and Skills > > >You know. Something has been bothering me about skills. Has there > been > >any discussion of them on the mailing list? It seems like skills are > >unnaturally difficult. How much study is a point of skill supposed to > >equate to? Here's what I'm talking about: > > There's been a lot of discussion on the subject. > > One answer (which doesn't help all *that* much) is that mundanes blow > Essence on skill rolls a lot, though that's really only good for one > skill roll per day (at a +1), or a higher bonus less frequently. > > Various "fixes" have been proposed, most of which amount to some type of > bonus to human skill use. > > The basic problem here is that the game is designed to center on > celestials. To make a significant distinction between them and humans, > and still have celestials fail often enough to make things interesting, > humans wind up being mostly total incompetants. Note that the issue > isn't really the granularity of the d666 system (or the limitation to > skill levels <=6) -- it's on a more fundamental level. > > This problem is probably the largest architectural flaw in the game > mechanics. The solution space seems to boil down to one of: > > - make humans mostly incompetant at skills > - make humans and celestials roughly equal for skill use > - make celestials always succeed automatically at skills > > The In Nomine designers chose the first option. None of the options > particularly appeal to me at the moment, though I probably lean toward > the second -- there are enough other differences between celestials and > humans that giving them comparable target numbers for skills isn't > *that* much of a flavor-killer. Well, there are two things that i think are important here. The first is auto-success, which I think has been discussed enough already. The other is that Humans aren't quite as bad off as they sound. A Professional probably has a stat of 5 or 6 relating to her professional skill, and considerable study devoted to it, so its at level 4+. Thus a `Professional' level of skill is 9+, which is pretty good. A very experienced professional will have skill/6, and a very talented one will have a stat in the 7-10 range, so human skills of 12+ are not incredibly rare, and 16 is achievable for Geniuses. Now, for skills that they don't depend on, most humans are pretty pathetic. As has been pointed out, this isn't horribly unrealistic, if you assume skill rolls are for stressful situations only. It is hard to do a credible human polymath in IN. Regards, Martin Leuschen martinl@rice.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 16:32:21 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Ladislas Budnarzik in Night Music > In any case, I can see no logic to requiring Soldiers to have 2 > Corporeal Forces, except if their superior is planning to use them > mostly for combat, and it's stated that not all Soldiers are > combat-oriented. I can think of two reasons off the top of my head (I'm not sure if these are _the_ reasons or not...). One, Soldiers with two Corporeal forces are sturdier than those with just one on the average. Significantly sturdier! Even if they don't get into combat on a regular basis, you don't want one dying from a fall down a flight of stairs. Two, Soldiers can only use Corporeal Songs. Having a two in CorpForces isn't much of a boost, but it's useful. On the other hand, Soldiers that are recruited with six forces, rather than made, might have only one in CorpForces. This is totally a GM's call, however. The individuals that have six forces without celestial help are very rare. Here's an example. Bob has CorpForces/1 with Strength/2 Agility/2. After two Body hits, this guy is unconscious and after four total, he's a goner. After he becomes a soldier, the extra force goes into Corporeal. Now he has Strength/4 Agility/4. He has 8 Body Hits and it'll take 12 to kill him. A big, big difference! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 16:07:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Austin George Loomis Subject: IN> Motel 666 (4/9) [And the hits just keep on comin'...] Margali here for Motel 666, and you know, we can't promise you all those fancy trimming like you find at posh heavenly hotels. Things like com- plimentary soaps and shampoos, big fluffy bathrobs, and those little mints on your pillow? But then again, what does all that amount to in the eternal scheme of things? Not a hell of a lot. We're Motel 666 - -- just look for that flaming goat. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:22:19 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases > Ah, but if you have a favor from Willard, the local mayor, President > Clinton (don't ask), or something on that cute little Servitor of > Creation who's operating the rival brothel.... Heh! Part of one my character's (Tina, Lilim of Gluttony) history is that she kept getting and using Geases with her Resonance/Attunement until she was able to cook several dozen _fabulous_ meals with the governor of a relatively unimportant state. She had to trade away all of these Geas/2 later, but they were fun while they lasted! Though not specifically mentioned, this particular governor was not adverse to other 'needs'. }=) > > Otherwise, unfortunately, with your logic, it really comes down to > >that the dissonance has to hit HER, or Lilim will never invoke their own. > > No, the dissonance has to hit *someone* -- no free lunches. (And I've > decided that letting non-Lilim invoke untested Geasa is A Bad Idea. > Too many weird effects.) Hmmmm... this closes off a _lot_ of good plot lines. Anything from Aladdin's lamp, to an enemy getting hold of some Geases. Or are we talking about 'testing' the Geas in order to generate a roll and then letting the person it is traded to ask for the specific favor? - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:12:11 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: FW: IN> Immortal soldiers. > > One of my soldier players noticed that if a Soldier spends one > point on > > Corporeal Song of Entropy, he's immortal. Oh, sure, he can't > control > > his age exactly, and he has to spend a few points of essence a > year, but > > basically, if he wants to and doesn't get killed, he lives > forever. > > > > Is this intentional? Is this a bug? > > As far as I know, no one thinks this is a bug. Mind you, the odds of > intervention go up dramatically if you attempt this trick. As a house > rule, I'd say that anyone who rolls the wrong intervention when using > this Song to stay young forever regains all of their age, instantly. On Aug 14, 11:13am, Steven Feldon wrote: > Subject: FW: IN> Immortal soldiers. > Still, with one bad intervention every 216 on average and an average of > 3.5 years gained every time you use Corp Entropy, this will increase the > average Soldier's lifespan from 70 to 826. So it's not immortality. > It's still a really decent chance of living a Biblical lifespan.... You'll have to calculate over again. You have an unstated assumption that the Song _works_ every single time. Of course, a smart Soldier will get the Song at a good level and blow all their Essence on every single roll (which could mean getting a bonus on their check digit). And the mean amount of time gained would be closer to 3.5*108... assuming that the failure will have enough age behind it to kill the person, of course. The math gets a little sticky and my 'average' is just a rough guess. Getting the mean of an infinite series is beyond me without my reference books! ;) Most active Soldiers (nearly all of them) will have been 'retired' long before then. ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 18:10:31 -0400 From: "Michael Stanley" Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels > On Wednesday, August 13 at 7:32 PM > Walt Mazur wrote in regards to: IN> Corporeal Vessels > > Good question. I don't have an answer, but another question: When the > Vessel dies, what happens? Does it poof as it normally does when the owner > goes celestial? Given the fact that upon the Vessel's death, the angel/demon get's snatched back into the Celestial realm; I would presume that there's enough evidence to support the idea that the Vessel vanishes just like in a normal ascension. Except for Kyriotates and the Shedim though. L8R, - -Michael Stanley- stanman@netset.com- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 18:05:54 -0400 From: "Michael Stanley" Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels > On Thursday, August 14, 1997 at 11:27 AM > John Karakash wrote in regards to: IN> Corporeal Vessels > > On the other hand it only takes one point to get a vessel > (Human/1, low charisma/1). Even on a totally > screwed-up adventure, people will have at least _one_ point! ;) Thanks, in addition to answering my question, you have also shown me that there can be a really good advantage to taking negative charisma:). > The use of 'essence' in that sentence was figurative, not the > literal game term use of essence. 'Character points' is a not a term > that characters understand. Essence is the--well--essential energy > of the universe. That's pretty much what I figured, just wanted to be sure though. L8R, - -Michael Stanley- stanman@netset.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 19:43:24 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases At 5:22 PM -0400 8/14/97, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: >> Ah, but if you have a favor from Willard, the local mayor, President >> Clinton (don't ask), or something on that cute little Servitor of >> Creation who's operating the rival brothel.... [...] >Though not specifically mentioned, this particular governor was not >adverse to other 'needs'. }=) >> > Otherwise, unfortunately, with your logic, it really comes down to >> >that the dissonance has to hit HER, or Lilim will never invoke their own. >> >> No, the dissonance has to hit *someone* -- no free lunches. (And I've >> decided that letting non-Lilim invoke untested Geasa is A Bad Idea. >> Too many weird effects.) > > Hmmmm... this closes off a _lot_ of good plot lines. >Anything from Aladdin's lamp, to an enemy getting hold of some >Geases. Or are we talking about 'testing' the Geas in order >to generate a roll and then letting the person it is traded >to ask for the specific favor? Bingo. A *tested* Geas can go anywhere. If you can get someone to agree to "an unspecified favor, anytime in the future, by me or one of my agents..." Well, more fool the mortal. If the Will roll has been attempted and failed on such an open-ended promise, then the Geas is tradeable to anyone. It's only prior to that test that non-Lilim don't get to play with Geasa. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:55:20 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Grwoth Spurts. David (Wood?) wrote: >This is precedented, too. Remember Haagenti, Prince of Gluttony? He >started out as a frequently abused familiar. He got elevated through >demon right to prince on one swell foop. His is something of a >cinderella story (one which Kobal still gets chuckles out of once in a >while, I bet), but the fact that it did happen says it could happen >again. Just thought I'd point out that Haagenti didn't go from Demon to Prince straight away. Kobal helped him through several 'growth spurts'. Nybbas was the one promoted from Demon to Prince in one fell swoop by Lucifer when he invented television. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:20:17 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Immortal Humans John K. wrote: >As far as I know, no one thinks this is a bug. Mind you, the odds of >intervention go up dramatically if you attempt this trick. As a house >rule, I'd say that anyone who rolls the wrong intervention when using >this Song to stay young forever regains all of their age, instantly. As a further comment, any human attempting this is going to make Noise with each performance, increasing the chances of a passing demon (or militant angel) to appear and kill them through violence. Also, since Laurence keeps track of the Soldiers on Earth, after the first 200 years or so, he would probably appear to them and say "Well done, you have served God in the best way possible, it's time to ascend for your reward" and kill the still-youthful-looking human quickly and painlessly for their eternal award *he he he*. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:14:44 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Lucifer's Word Casca wrote: >Lucifer's Word is Free Will. The ability to choose between Good and >Evil is at once the greatest gift and the greatest curse of humanity. >We can aspire to great heights of goodness, or plumb the depths of >evil, all because we -choose- to. It is a subtle and powerful Word. > >Lucifer rebelled because he embodied Free Will. He realized that the >other angels, by serving God, had subsumed their own will for God's. >So he told them they had a choice, that they did not HAVE to follow >God, that they could become their own masters. I'd take that a step further, and say that Lucifer, the Lightbringer's Word is Light. He was the Archangel of Light. Since Heavenly Words often have a metaphorical sense to them, Light didn't just mean illumination in the physical sense of the Word, it meant that Lucifer was able to see how Free Will worked and could see how the angels were being deprived of it. This led him to rebel as described in your post. When he became ruler of his own world (Hell), he kept the word Light as a reminder to all that he holds the key to illuminating the mysteries of God, leading the demons to be able to one day unravel the mystery and defeat God. Therefore, although it would VERY rarely be used in Hell (or general conversation), Lucifer is still "the Lightbringer." Just my opinion. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 05:46:00 GMT From: marcus.evenstar@greymatter.com (Marcus Evenstar) Subject: IN> Immortal soldiers. SF> Steven Feldon wrote the following on 13AUG97: SF> One of my soldier players noticed that if a Soldier [has] on Corporeal SF> Song of Entropy, he's immortal... basically, if he wants to [spend the SF> essence] and doesn't get killed, he lives forever. II> Is this intentional? Is this a bug? Oh, I think this is quite deliberate... They're not quite them same, I know, but the Saints And Superiors box (NM, p 46.) could shed some light on this. According to this, only three AAs are likely to give out the Song of Entropy. Saints of Michael are conspirators. He has over a _thousand_ saints on call and some have been waiting for centuries. He's noted as teaching all songs to his saints. Dominic employs saints as watchers. With his gifts of the Songs of Charm and Entropy, I can just see them as those "nice old folks who've always been here." They'd be the memory (and guards) of places that enforce justice, in all its forms. The helpful, but few, Saints of Eli are also likely to know any Song since their boss is quite helpful of his charges. They'd be as likely to use this particular song to age someone (if that was cool). I can well imagine that soldiers serving those particular AAs would be able to all the (Corporeal) Songs that the Saints know. This would be quite the recruiting inducement, neh? BTW, the situation for Soldiers of Hell isn't quite as good (of course!). NM indicates that the training is at best erratic and certainly doesn't meet with a universal standard. (These are selfish demons, after all.) From the descriptions in the book, most don't have Songs to use. It would seem that you really have to be useful to your Superior before he'll even deign to give you a Song of Charm, let alone Entropy. ("You wanna be immortal? Hokay, we'll make you into a mummy.") - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GAT d- s+:++ a+ C++ U? LU? E? W- N++ o? K++ w+ O? M V? PS+++ PE- Y+ PGP- t+ 5+++ X+ R+++ tv b+++ DI++ D G++ e+ h--- r+++ y++(**) - -----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ==================================================================== | marcus.evenstar | "I thought usenet was free of this sort of | | @greymatter.com | tyranny, of despots, of raging ego maniacs." | | | - mariposa@tezcat.com | ==================================================================== * RM 1.3 02440 * And God said: E = *mv* - Ze*/r ...and there *WAS* light! ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #294 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.