From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Aug 23 12:06:26 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 MAA00446 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 1997 12:06:26 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA10846 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:00:52 -0500 Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:00:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199708231500.KAA10846@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 #308 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 Saturday, August 23 1997 Volume 01 : Number 308 In this digest: Re: IN> Ofanim Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> What happened to the Light (was Lucy's Word) Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con Re: IN> How do roles work? Re: IN> Why more superiors? Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Ofanim IN> Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets Re: IN> Demon becomes an angel? Re: IN> Demon becomes an angel? Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) Re: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets. Re: IN> Ofanim Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> Lilim Geases IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #306 -Reply Re: IN> What happened to the Light (was Lucy's Word) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:50:16 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Ofanim On Aug 22, 7:04am, Adam Canning wrote: > 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. Duh, Ofanim of Jean are Ofanim are they not? > 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. Short term! Much like the Ofanim of Jean attunement. The suggested radio one would let you go any distance at, presumably, the speed of light. The radio attunement, as originally presented, is unbalanced in both comparison to other attunements and the Ofanim resonance. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:38:43 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? > > 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 problem is that if an UNSKILLED person with a low precision hits you with a shotgun, it's not going to wing you. It's going to blow a hole in you. That is much better simulated by high damage rather than high accuracy. Shotgun shells have more powder and more metal, hence more actual destructive capacity (i.e. more damage). What I suggested does involve a new mechanic, but it much more accurately simulates the way a shotgun works. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:49:45 -0400 (EDT) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> What happened to the Light (was Lucy's Word) "Then there's St. Lucile (or St. Lucy), patron saint of light and vision. Can a human soul be given a Word?" I thought I saw Moriah post to the list an entry on the 'patron' distinction that can be given to Saints. yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:36:36 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con > P.S. Archbeth just hoe many list folk DO owe you Geasa?? I think I am in that crowd - I could have sworn the resonance needs eye-contact, but she looks like she found and is fulfilling my "Needs a mature group to RP with as a player". Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:27:54 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> How do roles work? On Aug 21, 7:23pm, Alex Helm wrote: > 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? IMO (non-canon), a Role is introduced the way you would any Role (i.e. you get down there and live the life). We've all heard of people with a hazy past, yet they seem pretty solidly cemented into their lives. Clever celestials will fake their history from before the time they took on the Role. Some, I imagine, went the _loooong_ way of assuming a very young vessel and letting it 'grow up' normally. It strikes me as ugly to say that just because you have a high-level Role, all of a sudden people out there believe they are your parents and records mysteriously change. Yuck! Now if you go and somehow mind-edit a townful of people into believeing your fake history and working up a bunch of fake records, you could probably justify a strong Role even though you've lived little of the fictional 'life' presented. Here's some options I see for high-level Roles: * Start with a young vessel. Grow up. Example: A young child is found abandoned at an orphanage * Plop down somewhere. Stay for a long time. ;) Example: "Bob? Why sure I know him! He's lived in this town for going on twenty years... works at the electric company. Hell, he's in my bowling league and is dating widow Johnson. Why I could tell you..." etc, etc. ;) * Fake a bunch of records and then plop down somewhere (but for a shorter time than the above). Example: "Mr. Smith? Well he joined the company in '94 with excellent grades from Standford. Copies of his birth certificate are on file. He's been very active in company events and is very active in local charities." * Take over someone else's life (hey, a new vessel can look like anybody, right?) Example: Bob dies in a car crash. 'Bob' shows up later with amnesia from the wreck that comes up spottily throughout the rest of his life. His friends are understanding and pity him a bit, but help out when his memory fails him. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 23:42:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> Why more superiors? > > Night Music had 2 expansions, and 2 *new* Superiors, along with > a bunch of material on drugs (to help out Fleurity, probably), > etc. > > The next two probably don't have new Superiors, or other stuff > was trimmed. > Other stuff must have been trimmed because both The Marches and Heaven and Hell have two new superiors as well. Which brings me to wonder what got trimmed? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:59:06 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases > At 8:38 AM -0400 8/21/97, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: [suggestion for traded Geases to not have Will-reduction snipped!] > No. With Wills in the 1-3 range, humans aren't likely to > make their Will rolls even *without* a reduction! > If you give an option that non-Lilim can make requests, > you get a case where a Geas is more valuable to others than > to the Lilim herself! In pure self-interest, she teams > up with someone to invoke the Geases for her (and for him > as well). Forget angels -- they can mop up with humans > plenty easy. Instant temporary Hellsworn, just add Geasa. > :-) Well, isn't that what the Geases are for? ;) Humans are always going to be easy prey, on the average, for someone with a Geas. So why is that reduction so important? Because the more important the being (human or Celestial), the more likely they are to have a higher Will. The plain fact is that humans are easy prey to nearly EVERY celestial and power of celestials. That's just the breaks when you have five forces and no special access to the Symphony. Any servitor that attempts to use a Geas/5 against the president of KrommCo (maker of fine high-tech weapons for 2000 years!) might find that he has a Will of six and that it's not really certain that the Geas will work. Powerful and successful people, IMO, are much more likely to have better stats... and possibly even be self-made soldiers in some cases. > Example 2: John, would you want Serah and Bez to be doing > that kind of thing all the time? Especially combined with > the canon additive-Geases... If so, please, tell me, so > Serah can start looking for Need/1's in everyone she sees, > bundle up a few, and let Bez invoke them. ) Go for it. ;) I think I'm going to use the 'One essence per Level' option and see how that flies. Howaboutit, Bez, you willing to risk 6 dice of Corporeal damage to invoke a Geas for a lazy Lilim? O=) Maybe we should make the damage applicable at all times and just remove the option for non-Lilim to get the Will-reduction. Check this out... A reasonable range for a human's Will is 1-7 (the range of 1-2 celestial forces). Assuming a Geas/3 (not too hard to get), the Lilim has a fairly good chance of getting her way, while a non-reduced person has a decent chance of failure (intervention not included, rounded to nearest %): Will Lil-First Try Lil-Second Try Non-Lil(no Will reduction) 1 100% 100% 100% 2 100% 100% 97% 3 100% 100% 92% 4 100% 100% 83% 5 97% 100% 72% 6 92% 99% 58% 7 83% 97% 42% So even at 7 Will (fantastic for a human and above-average for a starting celestial PC), the Lilim has a 97% chance of avoiding dissonance (and getting their service), while the non-Lilim has a 58% chance of failure. It gets much, much worse for the non-Lilim for higher Wills. Try this counter proposal: Make trading Geas to a non-Lilim, non-Superior cost essence (perhaps it _has_ to be embodied into an object like someone suggested). It can't be combined or broken up after that point (this sounds more like a trick that a Lilim/superior would be able to do). The non-Lilim gets no Will-reduction, but suffers no dissonance on failure. There's no second try for non-Lilim (i.e. the 'cost' for the second try is the risk of dissonance from one point of view). If we want to get _really_ technical, we could allow the last Lilim-owner to 'guarantee' the favor. This would mean that she _would_ take dissonance on a successful Will roll, but it would allow two tries. After that, it goes poof like normal. The other reasonable proposal (the one where you test the Geas immediately after fulfilling the Need) has the problem that the Lilim is almost certainly guaranteed to succeed due to the Will-reducing aspects of her resonance. _Then_ she has a much more valuable trading commodity! Of course, that method (which I rather like, btw), has the advantage that piling up a lot of Geas/1 is an almost sure route toward dissonance simply due to the number of times it takes to get a big Geas. (BTW Elizabeth, when going for an 'obvious' Need, let's say at level 3, does a Lilim still roll and use the check digit for Will reduction, or is it still tied to the Need?) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 12:14 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Ofanim >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. And "Kyrio teleport" is instantaneous (or at least light-speed), and can take you anyplace in the world that the phone system can reach. Kyrios of Jean are worse -- they could theoretically "teleport" to space probes in the outer solar system, though I suppose one could argue that the lightspeed lag precludes considering the radio links "real-time". One could certainly believe Kyrios "jumping" to astronauts in orbit or on the moon, though. >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 countSarcasm>.] This one doesn't bother me -- Cherubim are reliable in the sense that they don't get distracted from their task. Malakim are perfectly likely to go chasing off after the first demon they see, if they aren't bound to their current task by their codes of honor. I would call Malakim "predictable" rather than "reliable", in this context. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 02:29:31 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? >>>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.<<< Possibly a special Song that enhances the Song of Possession, or a Kyriottate/Shedim resonance. Some Archangel(s) might have special attunements to increase the number of Forces a Kyriotate can possess as well. - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 02:29:33 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets >>>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.<<< Jordi would say they wouldn't be in that condition if humans hadn't mucked with them in the first place. Remember, Jordi does not believe humans have any right to determine the fate of animals. If humans disappeared, the dog and cat population would stabilize after a few years and be fine. - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:02:25 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Demon becomes an angel? Basically, her PC used to be a Demon, but then something >happened and she now only does good, following the advice of an angel. >What exactly does that make her character? A demon still? A >renegade? An angel? How would one create such as character, then? >What does the process of converting demons to angels normally involve, >if it is even possible to do so? What about a renegade: can they do >good if they used to be a demon? Would an angel actually "use" and >trust one such? > If you have the InNomine rulebook, read the sidebar on Redemption. (For angels heading the other direction, read the one on Falling. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | Frank Lazar http://www.interactive.net/~fmlazar | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 04:10:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Demon becomes an angel? In a message dated 97-08-23 01:13:56 EDT, you write: << I'm in the process of starting an In Nomine game on Compuserve, and one of the player submitted a rather unusual and interesting character. Basically, her PC used to be a Demon, but then something happened and she now only does good, following the advice of an angel. What exactly does that make her character? A demon still? A renegade? An angel? How would one create such as character, then? What does the process of converting demons to angels normally involve, if it is even possible to do so? What about a renegade: can they do good if they used to be a demon? Would an angel actually "use" and trust one such? Any other thoughts on the issues involved? >> Mind you, none of what follows is canon, just my own humble game... I'd ask my player if she wanted to play an angel who *used* to be a demon, or if she were literally looking to role play the process of redemption. If she wants to role play redemption, then I'd have her play a renegade. If she just wants to have been a demon as part of her background then I'd ask her if she's done enough that she has a patron archangel. If enough time has past and her character is trusted (at least somewhat) then I'd have her play a regular angelic character. I'd ask what kind of demon she was and make her the angelic counterpart. If her redemption is complete but recent and untested then I'd have her play an outcast angel. Would Angels trust a demon? Depends. Ask the angelic players and follow their lead. Novalis would probably have a soft heart. Hide from the Malakim. Mike's a Seraph, he knows if your honest about repenting. He's probably your best friend if you really are serious- and worse than your worst nightmare if your lying. Can a demon do good? Yes, but it's dissonant. Demon's are universally selfish. Feelings of love, altruistic motives, these things go against their nature. In my game such a demonic character would accumulated dissonance quite quickly. I would think that the player would get one point simply for deciding to repent! In my game, you'd be redeemed in three games, tops. So you might be a demon, but not for very long. Or dead- and therein lies the rub. My demons do not trust each other, they watch each other closely. They are not fools. In my game I differ sharply with the rules, in that Dominic and Asmodeus do *NOT* cooperate. On the contrary, Dominic will be quite eager to help any demon who wants to switch. He will act the way US agents behaved when Soviet spies or diplomats expressed a desire to defect. Given the opportunity, he will slap down a cordon of bodyguards around you, usher you off somewhere, and get you to spill you demonic guts. (Literally; if you were faking- he's a seraph too...) The problem is that demons don't repent that often. And that means Asmodeus has A LOT of demons that he's sending after you, just you. I have 12 agents of Asmodeus written up for my game just bored to tears and dying to add you to their caseload. Add to that about 8 demons serving various other princes that they can call on for help. Add to that about as many more demons if Asmodeus *really* wants you and thinks that your defection is so serious as to warrant dropping other cases. *DON'T* plan to survive... ...and most of the demons in my game know this. They're selfish, they want to go on living. So most of them think about (but not too much...) and then chicken out. And that lightens Asmodeus' caseload, compounding the syndrome. It's hard to get that earthside assignment. Only the most dedicatedly evil demons get it. What would cause the worst of them to repent? He's watched by his comrades constantly. Nailing a repentant demon fetches a nice reward. And demons are mean to each other. You partner probably did something nasty to you once, you're just itching for revenge. If not, hey, get him before he gets you. In any event, whatever triggered your repentance, was it kept secret? Did you hide your angst and doubt, did they learn of your dissonance? If you fail to check in at the right times, they will suspect the worst. Lastly- In my game Angels and Demons are all pretty much done as 9 force beginning players. In that sense, the demons are not weaker. And they outnumber the angels in the field. (Behind the scenes is a different issue) But they are not trustworthy, fratricide is very high, and on balance I work to keep it an even match. The popular joke is that if the angels were not so badly outnumbered they'd be in serious trouble... Helping a demon repent can be one of the most dangerous assignments an angel can be given. In theory in can go totally smoothly- but one slip, and you are in one of the most combat intensive scenarios that can happen in my game. - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 17:39 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? >But again, the 4 force human is just as strong and tough as the 5 >force human. Or, for that matter, the two force cat. The only >reason I can see for even possessing humans is because of their >social position. Hands can come in handy, too.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 05:52:51 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) > >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. > > Do *not* get me started on the "No means yes and you'll *enjoy* your > submission" rape scene in that lousy piece of... ("Loving"? > *LOVING*? Gods, don't get me started...) It's Andre's, definitely. Whoop - missed that. Man, I really should have read more of the book, I guess (or not...) > If you want non-Lust smut... I most like XXXenophile stuff. > Consensual, with *real* tenderness... Yes - XXXenophile definately outranks hard porn, anyday. Though now you have me thinking - surely there must be some good love scenes from something... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:58:00 -0700 From: zingaro@peak.org Subject: Re: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets. Quick question: Do folks think that Jordi's word is 'Animals' or 'Animals that aren't humans'? - ------- zingaro@peak.org Goodnight, Rock. Goodnight, Stick. Goodnight, other Rock. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:21:12 From: Jeff Miller Subject: Re: IN> Ofanim > >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 countSarcasm>.] > Actually, I don't think that those are contradictory. A Malakim is slightly *less* stable because of their Honor. They can be forced into irrational actions by conflicting or inconvenient codes. While it *is* possible to put a Cherub into conflict by endangering two Attuned people, it is much more difficult to set up. Jeff Miller Program Director/Webmaster for Agamemcon II Burbank Airport Hilton -- May 22-24, 1998 Contact Info: 24161-H Hollyoak (714)643-8352 Laguna Hills, CA 92656 www.primenet.com/~shadocat/agamemcon.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 22:50:37 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 13:51:41 +0000, "Nathaniel Eliot" wrote: >Well, my main problem with that system was this - all the Kyriotate's >vessels were the same power, no matter how many forces the Kyriotate >had to invest in the first place. Good point! Argh! You've pointed out a major problem with the NM mortal hit points rework. The original IN system where host's vessel number was their Corporeal Forces didn't have that problem. Maybe you might return to that and use one of the other ideas for making humans more vulnerable. One idea was to double or triple damage from killing attacks to non-celestials. Or maybe the body for a host should be Kyrio's Strength x Host's Forces. That's simple, and somewhat close on average to the original Strength*(CorF+Vessel). It'll make Kyrios in Humans tougher, though. >But again, the 4 force human is just as strong and tough as the 5 >force human. Or, for that matter, the two force cat. The only >reason I can see for even possessing humans is because of their >social position. Yep. I didn't get that part of your point, but I do now. One factor that is different is protection, p. 191. Humans have 0 protection, but small animals have negative protections, adding to the power of attacks against them. That's probably not enough, really, to answer your point--unless you want to argue (rationalizing madly) that their small size makes them harder to hit, so it's not that they really have that much Body, but just that they need that many hits so enough connect to actually do the damage. By the book, that effect should be accomplished by giving them Dodge/7+, but... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:27:41 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases Option 7: "Hooks" can be traded to anyone. They can only be *invoked* by a Lilim, a Superior, a powerful Word-Bound (GM's discretion) or someone with a Relic (or hypothetical attunement/distinction/gift from Lilith) that allows the turning of hooks into Geasa. At 1:48 AM +0000 8/22/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 08:38:56 -0400, "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" > wrote: [...] >My reason is the whole Geas business really needs a ground up revision. > >Consider: Not fulfilling a Geas/6 costs a dissonance a year[...] > >By contrast, a Geas/1 imposes one dissonance an hour. Yeah, I've been mentally mucking with it so that the Geas bites according to whether the person is *trying* or not... (So a Geas/6-Year thing will "bite" if the person doesn't at least *try* to accomplish it in the interval, and same with an hour-one. But I *have* been doing it by feel, rather than the text of the rules. *sigh*) >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. What if Geases were defined such that they worked similar to the Bound Discord: the subject (once failing the first resistance roll) has to make a Will roll to disobey the orders, at intervals in some proportion to the Geas' level? At 3:19 AM +0000 8/22/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >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? ;) Now how *did* I get that it was the equiv of 3 years...? It was the demon of typos' fault. 3*9=27 levels of Geas... 27/6=4.3 So it's *4* years, 1 week, right? (4 Geas/6's and a Geas/3 left over...) At 3:54 AM -0400 8/22/97, David Edelstein wrote: >>>>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*, Or the ones they pledge themselves, which get traded all over creation. I don't see it as necessarily a problem that if the target fails to resist, he might carry an undefined Geas that looks just like a Lilith-placed Geas. OTOH, would Option 7, above, do you better? >>>>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. But it's *NOT A GEAS* then! If the subject resists, a Lilim gets another chance, and then the "hook" goes *poof*! *Anyone* can say, "resist this Geas and I kill you"... If an invoked Geas (that wasn't resisted successfully) doesn't cause Bad Things when the person does not comply with the Geased instructions -- then it is not a Geas! There is nothing enforcing the behavior, which is the *definition* of Geas. >>>>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. It's not the Malakim -- that's just the most extreme dirty trick. It's *anyone*. The corporate president, the bus boy, the servants of other celestials, anyone. It doesn't matter how much essence the person blows to resist, the resistance does not lash back against the Lilim. It would be like a Balseraph getting someone else to tell his lies for him (he makes the resonance roll, and sits back without risk of dissonance), or a Habbalite not having to eat a bounced-back emotion, or a Calabite failing a roll and going, "Oh, shucks." >Especially if Geases aren't self-enforcing. If they're not self-enforcing, then how can they be called Geases anymore????! >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. We're including "hooks" in this definition of Geases, right? >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. OH! Why didn't you say that previously? So there's no resistance roll if someone else "invokes" a Geas-hook -- it depends on what's asked, and what the person wants to do, with the addition of an "auto-poof" of the hook if it's done. But if it's not done, the hook isn't actually *invoked*. (It's not that it's not *enforced*, it's that it's not *INVOKED*. The Geas-hook remains inert.) It's like saying, "I've got a potential Geas on you (a hook), and I'll give it to you if you do what I want, and here's what I want," except you don't have to trust the person to give it to you afterwards -- it goes poof automatically. Curse it, why didn't you say this in the first place? I don't have much problem with *that*. >f) If it's a Lilim holding the Geas, go through the usual resistance >mechanics. I wouldn't make the subject make a Will roll to resist a "hook" pseudo- invoked by a non-Lilim -- double-jeapordy. So, would Option 7, above, work with this? It doesn't include the "auto-poof" mechanism, though; the situation becomes, "I hold a Geas-hook on you, and if you do what you say, I'll give it to you." (Whereupon it can go "poof," or the subject can trade it himself (!!), whichever he wants -- that sound good? Or should this get something like, the person says, "I will do [x]" and the "hook" allows him to have self-Geased himself with that statement?) [NOTE: I have always read the "self-Geas" paragraph as "It causes her dissonance *unless* she fulfills it" rather than "until". I don't think a Self-Geas on a Lilim should cause dissonance right then, persisiting until it's fulfilled. It will, however, slap her with dissonance if she breaks her promise.] >>>> 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. There's a difference between saying, "That trick never works because I say not" and "Sometimes the universe will getcha." And the notion that a Free Lilim might have to *pay* to work off dissonance in a Tether is pretty balancing to me. (Yes, I see a difference between invoking Murphy's Law of Coincidence in the week+ duration between getting dissonance and working it off, and saying, "Every time you send someone else to invoke one of your Geases on a nasty target, they get killed.") >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? Oh, there's still risk -- my Lil got surrounded by a ghetto gang and handed one the $20 he needed for a CD, then invoked it as "Show me the way to [x]." (She wound up having to convince the gang's leader that she'd sleep with him later, but it did set them off balance.) It would have been tricky to get someone else to invoke it then, too, but not impossible (she was with someone at the time). She could have gotten annoying dissonance then, and the gang wouldn't have been weirded by how their member just agreed. >>>>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? Because it's not relevant! A valid character concept includes non-resistable Geasa; why should other character concepts *not* include the chance that a "blank check" might get stuck on them? (At least they get a chance to resist...) The main point against making "hooks" into full-blown Geases is how much Essence someone would blow fighting it, and how that would change. On the other hand, Option 7 gets rid of both of those problems, and is close to what you *meant*.... At 7:04 AM -0400 8/22/97, Adam Canning wrote: >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. Actually, the rules *don't* say that they can't be traded... The "no fun" aspect is that you can't give hooks to anyone -- some want the option of: Lilim of [x] fulfilled the Need, but the person who comes asking for it might be an Ethereal/angel/mortal... (And I *do* like the notion of being able to trade a hook to Lilith -- it's probably deeply discounted for various reasons, but the idea of going to someone and saying, "You know that Geas I got on you? I'm not going to try to invoke it. *Mom* is." ) [...] >Besides from your whole arguement on trading geases I thought you liked the >concept of this happening to characters. I do. I like it fine. Other people don't, though, and I *really* don't like the mess that's caused by the difference between a "hook" and a real Geas... (I'm liking Option 7, above, fairly well, though.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS characters, Roleplayers; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 23:54:10 -0400 From: Tony DeGeorge Subject: IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #306 -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: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:06:36 -0400 From: speaks@mindspring.com Subject: Re: IN> What happened to the Light (was Lucy's Word) At 12:49 PM 8/22/97 -0400, IQJason@aol.com wrote: >"Then there's St. Lucile (or St. Lucy), patron saint of light and vision. > Can a human soul be given a Word?" Have you ever seen a St. Lucy icon? Nasty thing. She is standing with an outstretched hand. Her eyeballs are in her hand. Supposedly she said she would rather have her eyes torn out than lose her virtue staring at her naked husband. The husband obliged. (this is back in the "good old days" where virginity was more sacred than life!) >I thought I saw Moriah post to the list an entry on the 'patron' distinction >that can be given to Saints. Pretty much every saint is a patron of something and everything has its patron saint. I forget who it is, but the Church announced a patron saint of COMPUTERS!! It might be cool in IN for the saints to have special abilities related to their patronage. Twould make St. Jude, patron saint of lost causes, nice to have around. Speaks There are few situations in life that cannot be resolved promptly, and to the satisfaction of all concerned, by either suicide, a bag of gold, or thrusting a despised antagonist over a precipice on a dark night. -- Ernest Bramah (Kai Lung stories) ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #308 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.