From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Aug 22 22:45:12 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 WAA01278 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 22:45:12 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA28317 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:55:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:55:43 -0500 Message-Id: <199708221255.HAA28317@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 #306 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, August 22 1997 Volume 01 : Number 306 In this digest: IN> noise in the symphony Re: IN> Asmodeus's Humanity IN> How do roles work? IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets. IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #304 -Reply IN> Recorporation Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #305 -Reply Re: IN> Religious Patrons Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> noise in the symphony Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> Recorporation IN> Tony DeGeorge's Vacantions Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat Re: IN> noise in the symphony Re: IN> Recorporation Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat IN> New Drugs Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con IN> The Nature of Kyriotates IN> Lilim Geases IN> Ofanim IN> Lilim Geases ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:23:27 -0400 From: Alex Helm Subject: IN> noise in the symphony If a human is saved from harm or a natural death eg rescueing a mortal from the path of an on rushing truck does this cause a disturbance in the symphony? if so how much? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:22:55 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Asmodeus's Humanity At 11:47 AM -0400 8/21/97, Louis Wainwright wrote: >Asmodeus's Humanity Attunement - What really happens to a demon with this >ability? Here are my questions. > >1) Vessel/Body? My interpretation is that the demon's Vessel becomes a human >body. This means that it would have the Body hits of a Mortal (NM, p. 31.) >I really don't worry about this from a game mechanics viewpoint, but I think >it's important that while 'Humanity' is on the demon is much more vulnerable. Hm.... I could go with that. >2) Death? So, speaking of vulnerable, what happens to a demon when their >corporeal form is killed while using 'Humanity'? Anything special? Probably not -- maybe an extra day of Trauma. Unless it was a good and righteous demon, in which case the soul/demon might have a chance of going to Heaven or being reincarnated or something screwy like that... >3) Songs? I don't understand why a demon can't use songs. I'd think that >they could use corporeal songs. They can use essence, so effectively they >are as a six force human. Hence I'd think corporeal songs should be fine. Hmmmmm.... I could see that. >4) Disturbance? Obviously they don't cause disturbance, but what happens if >an angel smacks a demon using 'Humanity'? Does that act cause disturbance? >I'd say yes. Ditto. >5) Tethers? Can a demon using 'Humanity' go into a Divine Tether? Any demon in a vessel can go into a Divine Tether -- they merely cannot be near/in one in *celestial* form. (It is debatable about whether they could swap vessels (if they cared to make the noise) or what would happen if their vessel were killed. I think they would probably survive, but it would Hurt. Now, #6: Seraphim of Destiny. One assumes that the Humanity attunement cancels them out? One also tends to assume that all emotions/needs/ whathave you are suppressed (at least a little) so that you can't be spotted as non-human by resonances. Or at least not easily. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:23:24 -0400 From: Alex Helm Subject: IN> How do roles work? Exactly how do roles work? If the role is taken at a high level, ntihs means that ther character is more firmly knit into the symphony. So does this mean that he has a traceable background eg school/university history, parents ect.? if so then was he a divine conception or is it an illusion were his parents only think that he@s their own? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:16:22 GMT+10 From: "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets. In reply to Elizabeth: >>>The real reason Jordi hates humans? >>> >>"Snip, snip." >> >>Hmmm.... >> >>I wonder how Jordi feels about spaying and neutering pets. > >Probably hates it, along with breeding things like the smushed- >in nose of the Persian that causes the breed so much trouble... > >Me, well, I'll spay and neuter my cats no matter what Jordi likes. I >do draw the line at declawing, though. Speaking from an Australian point of view, I'd say that Jordi may agree with spaying pets. Here, especially in the country areas, feral cats are a major problem, breeding in the wild and killing native wildlife at an alarming rate. IMO, Jordi would probably encourage spaying in these instances, since cats aren't exactly an endangered species, and besides, they've been so domesticated they're probably seen as "Too human" for the likes of the AA of Animals. Of course, he wouldn't like seeing any animal 'interfered with' without good reason. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:55:09 -0400 From: Tony DeGeorge Subject: IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #304 -Reply I'll be out of the office from August 15th through the 24th, back again on August 25th. If you have publishing business that can't wait until I return, please contact Cindy Achar. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:58:14 -0500 From: Colin Fredericks Subject: IN> Recorporation Hail. I have a question for everyone, which may have already been answered, but isn't in the official FAQ's or errata. When a Celestial gets killed, they get shocked back to their home plane - heaven or hell. How long does it take to recorporate? I'm thinking seven days, once you overcome Trauma and have enough character points for a level-1 Vessel. What do y'all think? My reasoning is pretty obvious, but it does have a sort of side-effect. Consider: if angels recorporate in seven days, and God created the world in seven days, and "God is everywhere".... Stay Cool; -Sir Colin P.S.: Yes, I know there are a few exceptions to the "go home and sit in a corner" reaction - Malakites and the two body-snatchers. Even Malakites have to recorporate, though. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:48:11 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 05:52:15 -0400, Adam Canning wrote: >At 9:19 AM -0400 8/20/97, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: >>>5) Untested Geases don't count as Discord > >Check Miriam Kahn in Night Music. Her Gease 5 is listed as Discord even >though it hasn't been called in. Right you are! ARGH!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:48:17 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:59:11, Jeff Miller wrote: >At 01:15 PM 8/19/97 -0400, you wrote: >> >>Kyrio Strength * (Kyrio Corp Forces + host's Toughness) >OK, so how many people have Toughness and does a Kyrio/Shedite know if >someone has it; before posession, after possession? I would be tempted to rule that one Toughness is characteristic of an active duty infantryman or someone who trains daily, maybe 1% of the population. Two Toughness would be maybe 1% of that, Olympic athletes, etc. I'd say you would get some sort of feeling by looking at the person. You might estimate that he has about 20 body, but whether that's 3 CorF * 7 Str (giving the Kyrio Str * CorF) or (2 CorF + 1 Tough) * 7 Str (giving the Kyrio Str * [CorF+1]), you won't know until you possess. Does that sound fair? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:48:33 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:07:03 +0000, "Nathaniel Eliot" wrote: >Kyrio's don't have Strength or Agility ratings, only Corporeal >Forces. For the purpose of possessing a host, all that is counted >are the corporeal forces. So a Kyrio with 3 corporeal forces can >possess 3 cats (Corporeal 1), an average human (Corp 2) and a cat, or >an average human and a weak human (Corp 1). ... >Comments/abuse? Sorry: abuse. Complicated with a fair amount of bookkeeping for the attribute raising, I don't think it really has any advantage over the canon system, with the exception that you seem to have nailed down *everything*. You get +2 essence for performing that Rite of the AA of Gaming. :) My thought is that since exceptional humans exist with 6 or more forces, also, deficient humans exist with under 5 forces: children, sick old men, etc. So my thought is also to give a beginning Kyrio an opportunity to possess two humans, but through a different mechanism with less change to the base system. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:21:50 -0400 From: Tony DeGeorge Subject: IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #305 -Reply I'll be out of the office from August 15th through the 24th, back again on August 25th. If you have publishing business that can't wait until I return, please contact Cindy Achar. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:11:09 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Religious Patrons > > I think she gets the role of "Celestial mouth" a lot. > > Burning bushes, anyone? ;) Good thing she's not a Seraph: "I am the Lord thy God. " Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:11:09 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Vessels > > I have returned from Pennsic - sorry for the delay in replies. > > I heard it was a bit... ahem... _wet_ at Pennsic this year. The last weekend was sopping. But fun... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:48:05 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 08:38:56 -0400, "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" wrote: > Does this sound balanced? (And reasonable... two >separate matters!) Pretty much, but I think I'm still going to go with a strict interpretation of the IN rules as I described in <34013510.4431294@smtp.primenet.com>, and essentially making trading illegal. If not that, I'll probably either bar Lilims from the campaign entirely (reluctantly since they're fun) or write new Geas rules from scratch. My reason is the whole Geas business really needs a ground up revision. Consider: Not fulfilling a Geas/6 costs a dissonance a year--a Celestial can blow that off, and probably do enough good deeds in that time to get his Superior to poof the Geas. An old man getting a Geas/6 might not be able to distinguish the strength loss from aging. A human PC can probably earn enough character points in a year to raise his strength so the Geas penalty is offset, and not really miss the 2-1/2 or 3 points a year it costs him. By contrast, a Geas/1 imposes one dissonance an hour. "Go pick up my dry cleaning." With a little effort, a geased Celestial could be balked until he goes outcast; all it would take is to protect the dry cleaner from the geasee. A human could get into a traffic accident, and die because he's trapped in his car or in the hospital for a few hours. Geas/1's have the capability to kill quickly, which is far beyond the power they should have. Reasonably, the Geas/6 should be the dangerous one, not Geas/1. To me, the basics of Geases just seem too whacked out to use. The changes you suggest are reasonable and balanced, but the fundamental problems with the mechanics remain. Maybe the best thing would be for The Powers That Be to be shown just how many problems Geases have, and ask for free rein to do a complete redesign. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 03:19:04 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 17:50:49 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Not the Free ones! They've got 9 Geas/3's on them (which can add up >to 3 Geas/6's...), and have utterly no say about what happens with >them! Um...care to try that math again, Beth? ;) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:25:12 -0500 From: Colin Fredericks Subject: Re: IN> noise in the symphony > If a human is saved from harm or a natural death eg rescueing a mortal > from the path of an on rushing truck does this cause a disturbance in > the symphony? if so how much? Wow, that's a good question. In my campaign, it'd depend on whether the mortal was "fated" or "destined" to die then, something only the GM can tell. I'd probably call for a d666 roll as in the Role rules (Role + CorpForces). That way, if you're "connected" enough to the symphony, you can save people as well as whack them. If the roll succeeds, then you get no disturbance. If it fails, tough muffins - they were supposed to die and you screwed it up. The bell tolls. Or GM's fiat, as always. On another topic, if someone's using the Humanity attunement, I'd make them 100% human. No songs at all, nothing but Essence use. Probably no Toughness, although I suppose a demon who used the attunement enough could eventually buy some. If they do anything, there's no disturbance. If a celestial does something to them, there's the usual disturbance. If they die, though, they should revert back to Celestial form and suffer Trauma, unless people want this to be a very dangerous attunement to the user. Stay Cool; -Sir Colin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 03:19:10 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:41:09 -0400 (EDT), IQJason@aol.com wrote: >I'm having trouble understanding the way that the Kyriotate resonance -- >multiplicity -- is an aspect of the Divine in the way that truth or honor >are. All the other bands and choirs I can wrap my head around, but I can't >quite grasp the Kyrios. The closest I could come was: "Kyrios represent the >divine quality of Omnipresence, being multiple places at once," but that's >not quite it. Works for me. "No sparrow shall fall..." Kyrios are representative of being everywhere and seeing everything, protecting all; the opposite of a guardian angel who protects just one person. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:11:09 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) > "Not necessarily. Not having seen many pornos, I couldn't name a movie, but > something along the lines of Lady Chatterly's Lover," > > Not a correction, just a comment -- jeez, what a lousy piece of > erotica that was. Well, yeah, but at least it wasn't treating sex like most porn pieces do. As far as I read (not far - you are right about lousy) the characters seemed fairly loving. > "Silent Came the Stranger," > > *giggle* It's 'Naked Came...". And a fairly funny backstory; the > 'author' was actually a group of magazine writers and authors who > wrote a chapter apiece. They pulled off the scam for several > months before letting the joke go. I know the backstory - my Creative Writing teacher told me about it. It sounds fairly interesting. > "or other well written smut might be very good for the soul. Andy > deals with stuff like Dolly Does Dallas." > > Debbie. Geez...can't do anything right. I never really saw all that much in porn films - by the time I was able to get to them consistantly (a year ago, just about) I had had better experiences. But magazines... they may be Andre's, but I'd like to think Eli is just a little happy about what I learned from them. > And I think that Andre's oevure might be more of the non-con porn > productions...if Linda Lovelace's stories about the making of > "Deep Throat" are to be believed, that'd be an example. I think any type of porn that promotes the image of sex being a commodity or something to simply be taken is his area. Non-con porn is just an icing on the cake compared to the effects a "women as objects" film has on some men... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 03:19:06 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:16:41 -0400, "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" wrote: >> Is that really enough of a change, though? I was serious about reversing >> the stats: Power -1; Acc +6. Since the Acc will probably translate into a >> check digit plus at short range, I think that make them reasonably lethal >> at short range. At long range, power -1 is appropriate for a sawed off >> shotgun, but you're still very likely to wing the birdie with some of the >> shot. > > Shotguns at short range do massive amounts of damage. Remember >that we are only talking a d6 here! d6-1 does an average of 2.5 points >of damage. They certainly do more damage than most pistols (to unarmored >targets, that is... shotgun pellets have very little penetrating >power). Right, but at short range, suppose you have an average human precision of 4 and a moderate skill of 4. Add the accuracy of 6: 4+4+6=14=12+2, automatic success with +2 on the check digit, -1 for the power, for an average damage of 4.5, same as +1 power and an automatic hit, reasonable, I think for a shotgun--no missing, just varying degrees of damage. A reasonably skilled human might be 5+5+6=12+4-1, 6.5 average damage, equal to a .44--he's skilled enough to get the target in the full blast. The nice thing is that the +6 accuracy makes the chance of hitting stay pretty high even at long range (realistic) but the damage drops to d6-1, maybe still too high, but close. I think the high accuracy does the shotgun mechanic fairly well: easy to hit with, lots of damage close up, little damage at distance. The whole combat system is simplified compared to GURPS, for instance; I think acc +6 power -1 does a reasonable job of representing shotgun effects without introducing new mechanics. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:03:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Recorporation On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Colin Fredericks wrote: > Hail. Ave. > Consider: if angels recorporate in seven days, and God created the world > in seven days, and "God is everywhere".... Just to be pedantic and nitpicky.... God created the world in -six- days, resting on the seventh. - -- Casca (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His 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: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:28:10 -0300 From: Andre Ribeiro Subject: IN> Tony DeGeorge's Vacantions Tony DeGeorge wrote: > I'll be out of the office from August 15th through the 24th, back > again on > August 25th. If you have publishing business that can't wait until I > return, > please contact Cindy Achar. Someone *else* can't stand it anymore or it's just me?? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:58:57 -0400 From: "C. J. Hunter" Subject: Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat IQJason@aol.com wrote: > Anyway...I've got a question about our fine feathered (occasionally) friends > the Kyriotates. > > I'm having trouble understanding the way that the Kyriotate resonance -- > multiplicity -- is an aspect of the Divine in the way that truth or honor > are. Think of the Trinity: Father, Son *and* Holy Ghost... > Is there anyone out there on the list who feels an affinity towards the > Dominions the way that Archangel Beth does toward the Lilim? I'd appreciate > someone to bounce ideas off. Judging from the amount of traffic (i.e. confusion) about the Kyriotates, I'd guess that we're all equally confused... :) bcnu .j. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:57:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> noise in the symphony On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Alex Helm wrote: > If a human is saved from harm or a natural death eg rescueing a mortal from > the path of an on rushing truck does this cause a disturbance in the > symphony? if so how much? I'd say it would, -especially- if it was that human's destiny to die that way. This, incidentally, is the basis for a story I'm working on, one that I hope to post to the list soon. It's called "The Keeler Agenda", and astute Trekkies will notice the reference to "City on the Edge of Forever". Details forthcoming. - -- Casca (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His 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: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 04:28:55 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Recorporation On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:58:14 -0500, Colin Fredericks wrote: >I have a question for everyone, which may have already been answered, >but isn't in the official FAQ's or errata. When a Celestial gets killed, >they get shocked back to their home plane - heaven or hell. How long >does it take to recorporate? It's all detailed on page 67 under Trauma. It's a bit complicated. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:44:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 IQJason@aol.com wrote: > I'm having trouble understanding the way that the Kyriotate resonance -- > multiplicity -- is an aspect of the Divine in the way that truth or honor > are. All the other bands and choirs I can wrap my head around, but I can't > quite grasp the Kyrios. The closest I could come was: "Kyrios represent the > divine quality of Omnipresence, being multiple places at once," but that's > not quite it. Actually, that's exactly how I saw it. I see then as God's eyes and ears, able to view thing from multiple viewpoints so as to avoid the personal bias inherent in a single perspective. Imagine, if you will, a group of people arguing. A Kyrio inhabits someone on -either- side of the issue, and proceeds to have a debate with itself. It would lead to a greater understanding of the issue in question. > Is there anyone out there on the list who feels an affinity towards the > Dominions the way that Archangel Beth does toward the Lilim? I'd appreciate > someone to bounce ideas off. I can't claim any great affinity with them, but I think I udnerstand them fairly well. I'm of the mind that roleplaying is simply a mild form of schizophrenia channeled to a useful purpose ;) so following that reasoning, I suppose you could think of Kyrios as RPer's in the greatest RPG of all -- Life. They inhabit multiple hosts for the same reason people like playing different PCs -- not only is it enjoyable to explore differing viewpoints, it's also a sight easier to get things done when there's more than one of you. Incidentally, I'm one of those weird folks who doesn't have a problem with Shedim possessing animals. Reference the demon 'Legion' of the New Testament that inhabits a herd of swine when cast out of a human. I'd figure that as long as the animals are acting in an 'unnatural' manner, then that's good enough for the Shedite. - -- Casca (bertishg@db.erau.edu) "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His 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: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:33:03 +1000 (EST) From: peterf@wr.com.au (Peter Frederick) Subject: IN> New Drugs Dear List got my hands on a copy of Night Music at the begining of the week. Still looking it over and working out what I like and what I don't. One thing I thought was quite well done was the section on drugs, especially as it included alcohol, caffeine and tabacco. However I feel that the authors missed two other drugs that are legal and freely available, some would say unavoidable, in Western First World countries. Thanking you for your Indulgence. Yours Peter. Chocolate (+1 Int, max of 6) Legally and freely available in the US, and most other countries. Third of the Big C drugs of South American origin (the others being Cocaine and Caffeine) it is derived from the beans of the cacao bush. Available in many forms, but usually as a confectionary combined with sugar (itself an addictive substance) and fat (primarily of a dairy origin). While a wide range of chocolate "products" are available each supplier uses different, often secret and closely guarded, recipes. This can make any change of "brand" a dangerous period of experimentation for the addict. A typical dose is 100 grams, but this can vary depending on the "product" available. Users of this stimulant often report a feeling of energy and increased brain function, which may be a side effect of the sugar often used to cut chocolate. Anecdotal evidence suggests that chocolate may also have uses as an aphrodisiac, although this may be no more than fulfilling the cravings of unacknowledged addicts. While suppliers provide doses in convenient forms for a quick hit users are also known to indulge in binge behaviour at times consuming 10 or 20 typical doses in a single session. Use of chocolate in itself has little detrimental effect on humans, however the feeling of energy can result in the addict substituting it for dietary items with real nutritional value, causing a gradual decline in the addict's health. Additionally addiction to chocolate can cause the addict to consume more fat and sugar, both used to cut chocolate, than is good for their health. While withdrawal has little physical effect some users report massive psychological trauma during the initial withdrawal phase, and a strong continuing association between chocolate and pleasure. Television (see description) "One nation under the influence of one drug." Disposable Heroes of Hiphopriscy. Legal and freely available in the US and many other First World countries. While not often classed as a drug Television (aka TV aka Cable) has a strong addictive power over populations exposed to it's effects for a majority of their lives. Following the classic pattern of drug experimentation young users (or viewers) are exposed to animations (obviously not real) and "Educational" TV (which purports to have some constructive purpose) and will migrate to the harder, more insidious and popular varieties such as daytime soaps, talk shows, sports and "Reality" TV later in their lives. While there is some debate about what proportion of viewers become full blown addicts there is little question of the addictive quality of TV. An addict under the influence of TV becomes incapable of self motivation, often sitting entranced until released by an "ad break". They also become highly susceptible to both emotional manipulation and programming with information. Addicts often plan much of their lives around the arbitrary schedule of supply of their favourite "programs" or "shows" going to great lengths to ensure that they are free at the appropriate time or spending large sums of money on equipment to record the "programs" to be viewed later. Some groups of addicts will congregate for a shared hit of a program, reporting heightened effects amongst so called "fans" of a show. A typical TV addict will show most signs of addiction only in the presence of a TV set. They will want to turn the set on and will watch whatever is being supplied, or may "surf" looking for something else more to their liking, but unable to turn off. Long time users, almost the entire population of many countries, must make Will rolls to resist turning a TV on. Once they are actually watching a program their emotional state will start to conform to that desired by the "programs" producers and they will start to accept any opinion given in the program as their own. Will rolls may be made to avoid this reaction, but most addicts say this spoils the shows by disturbing the "suspension of disbelief" factor. Some addicts will leave their TV's turned on even when performing activities in other parts of their homes! The direct physical impact of TV viewing on humans is minimal, however the social and mental effects can be devestating. Heavy TV addicts will avoid other forms of recreation and social interaction. The lifestyle of the TV addict is prone to be one of little exercise and poor diet. Additionally they may progress to using other drugs such as Alcohol (especially if they watch Sport) and Chocolate (particularly if they watch talk shows or day time soaps). The mental effects can be profound. Viewing over a long period can result in a narrowing of the addicts knowledge base and an inflexibility in their use of their brain (GM's may impose a negative to Int rolls, particularly where creativity or a broad knowledge of the world is required). Other signs of addiction are an inability to concentrate on anything for more than seven minutes (the average time between "ad breaks") and the ability to give an opinion on anything, but only for 30 seconds (the "sound bite" syndrome). The most heavily addicted come to be unable to differentiate between TV and reality, relying on it for all their information about the world and being unable to derive pleasure from any other source. These addicts find it almost impossible to break their habits. Reply to peterf@wr.com.au What does the Lord require of you, but to do justice and to love kindness and to walk humbly with your God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 04:34:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Davidson Subject: Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Shadowcat wrote: > Wich issue will this be in?? I want this. > Yeesh... Now I'm curious, too. :-) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 03:54:42 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> The Nature of Kyriotates >>>I'm having trouble understanding the way that the Kyriotate resonance -- multiplicity -- is an aspect of the Divine in the way that truth or honor are. All the other bands and choirs I can wrap my head around, but I can't quite grasp the Kyrios. The closest I could come was: "Kyrios represent the divine quality of Omnipresence, being multiple places at once," but that's not quite it.<<< In my opinion, Kyriotates are THE most powerful Choir, and that's what they represent-- the sheer power of God. Kyriotates are Dominations. God reigns absolute over all of creation, and Kyriotates share a small part of that terrible power, being able to embody and usurp small pieces of the Symphony. I think this is what makes them the most alien Choir-- because their resonance, unlike those of the other Choirs, is not even necessarily "good" as humans think of it. In In Nomine, God is not always the warm & cuddly, benevolent father-figure so beloved by modern Christians-- take a look at the Old Testament, sometimes He's capricious and downright cruel. Likewise, the things Kyriotates can do-- taking over a mortal's body, without his permission, and doing whatever they choose with it-- can be capricious and cruel, no matter how well they take care of it. Which is not meant to imply Kyriotates are anything close to evil, or that there aren't Kyriotates who are all sweetness and benevolence. But they're unique in that that part of God which they embody has nothing to do with human morality. - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 03:54:40 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Lilim Geases >>>Conflicts of interest, I meant there. Going along, minding your own business, doing [x], and then somebody comes up and says, "I've got a job for you."<<< Oh. Well, the difference is that you're talking about Geases put on Lilim at *creation*, and only those who are not serving a Prince. In other words, this only applies to Lilith's Geases. If anyone can pre-test a Geas, it's Lilith (though I'd say it's more like, resisting one of Lilith's Geas gives you a penalty to your Will equal to Lilith's Forces....in other words, unless you're a Superior, forget it.) But if a Lilim puts a Geas on another Lilim, the second Lilim can resist it just like anyone else. So no, Lilim aren't getting unequitable treatment here. You're talking about a special kind of Geas that only applies to a small subset of Lilim. And that special kind of Geas applies to anyone whom Lilith Geases, not just Lilim. >>>If a Geas isn't self-enforcing, it's no longer a Geas. If only Lilim can *enforce* a Geas, that means that only Lilim can *invoke* a Geas.<<< Anyone can invoke a Geas, but only a Lilim can make it stick if the subject resists. >>>I really don't see where you're coming from in that sense. The basic problem is: "Can Lilim trade the 'hooks' they get when they fulfill someone's Need? If yes, then who gets the dissonance should the subject make his Will roll?"<<< If it's not a Lilim invoking it, no one. I still don't see this as unbalancing. Your "loyal Malakite-bait" scenario does not give Lilim the universal free lunch you seem to think it does. Especially if Geases aren't self-enforcing. Here's how I think Geases should work: a) Only Lilim (or a Superior) can put Geases on someone b) Geases can be freely traded. c) When someone holds a Geas on someone, they can go to that person and announce what they want. d) He may choose to obey without resisting, in which case he performs his service, and the Geas evaporates. e) If he decides he wants to resist, and it's not a Lilim invoking it...nothing happens. The bearer still holds the Geas, it hasn't evaporated, but he has no way to force the subject to obey it. f) If it's a Lilim holding the Geas, go through the usual resistance mechanics. What this means in effect is that Geases *are* freely tradeable, but if a non-Lilim is buying/bartering for a Geas, he'll have to take into account the fact that he can't enforce it if the subject chooses to resist. So Geases would only be valuable to non-Lilim in the case of a subject who's not expected to resist, otherwise he'll also have to contract for the services of the Lilim (or another Lilim) to invoke it. This reduces the trading aspects somewhat, but doesn't close them off completely, keeps Lilim as the valuable purveyors of Geases, and preserves the element of chance that makes Geases risky. (A non-Lilim can always tell the subject of the Geas, "Obey it or I'll rearrange your corporeal form", of course, but if they're able and willing to use that method of persuasion, why do they need a Geas? Now, someone who knows what Geases are, but not all the details, might not even know he CAN resist! And someone who understands Geases completely might understand that he can blow off the non-Lilim, but then the Geas will probably come back wielded by a Lilim next time, and more than likely with an even more odious task.) >>> I don't think that knowing *when* is *MORE* abusable than dodging it entirely. That it *is* abuseable, I would grant, though I think a combination of factors ameliorate it a *lot* more than a way to avoid dissonance entirely. (You still have to work it off -- and may well wind up owing the Seneschal of the local Tether favors in return! You might get hit by dissonance from skirting the edge of your Superior's Word. The GM might smile evilly and start the next adventure with "Okay, Lily just got bit with dissonance from a resisted Geas. The next day, she gets a message: her Superior wants her to show this Servitor of the Game around town...") Dissonance isn't easy to get rid of!<<< Now we're back to relying on the GM to prevent abuse. I thought you didn't like that. Dissonance isn't easy to get rid of, but should Lilim be the only ones who can make very effective use of their resonance and never risk unexpected dissonance at a *really* inconvenient time? >>>Not the Free ones! They've got 9 Geas/3's on them (which can add up to 3 Geas/6's...), and have utterly no say about what happens with them!<<< *Lilith's* Geases, for a small subset of Lilim. Why do you keep ignoring that point? - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:04:57 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Ofanim Message text written by INTERNET:in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Ofanim are supposed to be the fastest things in creation, right?< Actually IN pages96,97 and 123 Ofanim of Jean are one of the fastest things in creation. Ofanim may be the swiftest of the instruments but their resonance for motion still only pushes you a number of milesequal to theior check digit per minute in celestial form. Level 6 with the celestial song of motion [IN p85] enables you to do Check digit x10 miles in a combat turn [equal to 5 seconds IN page 64] which for a short while is 60 times faster. Also from the first paragraphs of choir descriptions Cherubim are the most reliable of the heavenly choirs. But Malakim have hard wired codes of Honour [so obviously that doesn't count.] Adam Canning ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:04:53 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Lilim Geases From: Elizabeth McCoy >#1: "No. It's not a Geas yet, so it can't be traded." > problem: no fun. No Fun? The Lilim has to find the person and ask them and get the right result when she needs it and thats not fun? [Stressful on the player maybe but certainly fun.]. It also happens to be what the rules say. Even as written without being able to trade geases on a spot market, it is one of the most useful resonances in the game. On the Trading Geases as plot devices most of the none munchkin concepts can be dealt with buy either invoking the geas for someone else .[i.e. You owe me one could you give one of my friends a job, bodyguard my friend for a week, etc.] or by Lilith trading favours and there is a good chance she would swap one of the favours a Free Lilim owes her for the use of a reasonable level geas on a Celestial [or an important human.] >Not the Free ones! They've got 9 Geas/3's on them (which can add up >to 3 Geas/6's...), and have utterly no say about what happens with >them! Actually that is 9 favours you owe Lilith [which when called in become Geas 3's] and one of the only two mentions of trading favours or Geases in the rules is the next sentance And you can get 4 geas/6's out of 27 points of geas [or 1 Geas/27] However there is a good arguement that these are Normal Discord Geases and therefore not Cumulative or divisible. Besides from your whole arguement on trading geases I thought you liked the concept of this happening to characters. Adam Canning Dahak@Compserve.Com ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #306 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.