From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Aug 25 18:55:20 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 SAA17804 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 18:55:20 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA08450 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 16:14:29 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 16:14:29 -0500 Message-Id: <199708252114.QAA08450@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 #311 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 Monday, August 25 1997 Volume 01 : Number 311 In this digest: Re: IN> Character idea: Rolemaker Re: IN> A question of essence Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim Re: IN> Lilim and geases Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? IN> In Nomine IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #310 -Reply Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim IN> A Question of Essence pt 2 Re: IN> Who is most reliable Cherubs, Malakim, Seraphs or Lilim? Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? Re: IN> Starting out with discord Re: IN> Lilim Rules Question Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Starting out with discord Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? IN> Word Bound Celestials IN> Lilim of Fate IN> Lilim Geases [none] Re: IN> New Drugs Re: IN> Why more superiors? Re: Re: IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat Re: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con Re: IN> A Question of Essence pt 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:03:06 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Character idea: Rolemaker On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 23:55:15 -0400 (EDT), Casca wrote: >Or have them work for the Federal Witness Relocation Program, where not >only can a person be created on paper from scratch, but also could be >used to protect Soldiers and their families. *Very* cool idea. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:02:50 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> A question of essence On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 11:55:07 +1000, ehp wrote: > Here is a fairly silly question, but I am actually interrested in >hearing the answers, so here goes. It is inspired by the movie gremlins 2. > So, and angel gets essence back at dawn. What is to stop an angel >catching a plane for half an hour and seeing the dawn again several hundred >miles to the west, and thus regain more essence? His archangel ripping his forces into nine *useful* relievers. :) Seriously, the answer is that he gets essence roughly every 24 hours. An hour or two either way is ok, but the most that's going to happen is he might get an extra essence if he circumnavigated the world. I believe this is a canonical ruling. BTW if you really want more essence, just spend one point for a reliquary/1 (3 pts.) with a five minute invocation (-2 pts.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:02:46 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:55:06 -0400, Adam Canning wrote: >From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" >>> However there is a good arguement that these are Normal Discord Geases >and >> therefore not Cumulative or divisible. > > Now this is an interesting theory... one I hadn't heard before.< ... >I.e. these favours are part of an agreement to recompense Lilith for making >you rather than for a need. I suspect those Lilim who don't take the deal >get traded to the Demon Prince [And possibly Jean] of their choice in >exchange for favours for Lilith [Quite possibly Need related ones.] > >Does that make sense or have I totally flipped? This all makes sense, but one huge loophole remains: Lilith is a Demon Prince: She can impose fifty Geas/6's for no reason at all if she wants. Since her Word is Freedom, it would be out of character; but acting in character, she can basically do anything she wants with her Lilim, barring a truly Bright Lilim with an Archangel's protection--even then it better be an old powerful Archangel, not a newbie like Laurence--Lilith is nearly as old as Yves. However, since Lilith's Word is Freedom, my take is that she'd be relatively kind to her Lilim. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:02:52 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim and geases On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 20:12:24 -0700 (PDT), Tony Zbaraschuk wrote: >So, my take on it: > >1) Lilim are the only ones who can _create_ a Geas (well, excepting >Superiors and other oddball stuff like that). Yep. >2) They can't create a Geas unless the person has consented to their >aid. (The old "deal with the devil") bit. No, consent of the Geased is not required--check the Lilim section. The bit with the conversation with the businessman on page 149 is that he could refuse to accept that money; some favors you just can't refuse accepting, like saving your life. >4) No such thing as "testing": you can create the Geas, but there's >no way of knowing how successful it will be unless somebody actually >tries to invoke it. You have a lien on their soul, but maybe they >know a good lawyer, or God is looking out for them, or they're just >incredibly strong-willed that day. Agree. >5) If they agree to do whatever-it-is, then the Geas binds them to do >so, and they don't (barring exceptional circumstances like direct >divine intervention) get any roll to resist it: they agreed, after all. >(One might create exceptions at the point when they realize what >they've actually gotten into it, but those should be very rare.) The >Geas goes away once the job is done; meanwhile, it keeps them doing it. I think an argument can be made that a voluntary agreement might not activate the punishment part of the Geas, though the Lilim would have the option of invoking it later. >6) If somebody resists, they get a Will roll; if they fail it, then >the Geas locks and they're forced to do it. If they successfully >resist, then the Geas goes "poof" and the invoker gets the backlash. The Lilim gets two will rolls, at invokation and one CD days later. >7) I would suggest that dissonance for a refused or broken Geas affects >the person who invoked the Geas, _whoever_ they are. The potential >for backlash is part of the Geas as created, and can't be separated >from it. Invoke the Geas, and you risk getting hammered if things >go wrong. That's the price of getting a Will-reducer--it might blow >up in your face. The other position (as you probably know) is that non-Lilim can only ask, but have to bring in a Lilim or Superior to actually fully invoke the Geas. >8) Trading Geases -- that's probably something that a GM would have >to rule on for his campaign. I'd probably allow it (just because >K.K. is such a fun character), with a couple of points noted: > a) Only the Lilim who created the Geases can combine them. > (If you're feeling more broad-minded, maybe "only Lilim but > nobody else can combine Geases"). This keeps part of the > mystique of Geases in Lilim hands. I like the latter. (And Superiors.) > b) Maybe a +1 or +2 Will bonus should be given to someone resisting > a Geas that isn't invoked by its creator, if you think that > trading them freely is too powerful. See 7, above. >How's that sound? That's a pretty middle of the road position. At some point, I hope the Archangel of In Nomine or the Demon Prince of SJ Games :) will authorize a ground up rework of Geases because of the problems inherent in abusing Geas/1's. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:42:32 -0500 (CDT) From: Donald G Bixler Subject: Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? > I may have missed it, but is there such a thing as the possibility for > an angel to be stuck in their corporeal form such that if their > physical body die, the angel dies with it, permanently? Is this > described in the book anywhere, and if so, could someone point me to > it? Sort of. See the Etherial Discord, Bound. (p 87) > Denis Oops da Ogre mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:40:52 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 22:02:12 GMT, dsarrazin@cyberus.ca (Denis Sarrazin) wrote: >I may have missed it, but is there such a thing as the possibility for >an angel to be stuck in their corporeal form such that if their >physical body die, the angel dies with it, permanently? Is this >described in the book anywhere, and if so, could someone point me to >it? Yes, if a celestial looses all Celestial Forces, becoming a Remnant. Check out the end of page 67-68. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:25:05 -0700 From: The Herder Family <"HERDER "@ix.netcom.com> Subject: IN> In Nomine In Nomine, I have a new discord idea: Sleep: The victim must sleep for the level of discord times 2 hours in the last 24. If he doesn't, he must suffer the level subtracted for a number of hours equal to the level. Example: Leon, an angel has Sleep/3. He must sleep 6 hours from one sunrise (Sunset for demons) to another. He didn't, so he suffers -3 to all his stats for 3 hours. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:44:56 -0400 From: Tony DeGeorge Subject: IN> in_nomine-digest V1 #310 -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: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:46:15 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim > This all makes sense, but one huge loophole remains: Lilith is a Demon > Prince: She can impose fifty Geas/6's for no reason at all if she wants. How do you figure? I assume she'd have to sense need like any other Lilim. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 14:57:57 +1000 From: ehp Subject: IN> A Question of Essence pt 2 Thanks for the talkback. :) Well, if it is to be assumed that it occurs once every 24 hours, and angels et al have an "anchor" time zone, is it not possibly to assume that angels can in effect /choose/ the time of day they get their essence by realligning their temporal anchor? Or, how long after one moves time zone should an angel take to adapt to the new dawn time? A drift perhaps of one hour per day, lengthening the time between essence regeneration to 25 hours each day that passes till the time zone and the angel are in allignment... Thoughts? Evan ps...munchkinism can be fun for a break, but too much fun causes breakages. :) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:46:15 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Who is most reliable Cherubs, Malakim, Seraphs or Lilim? > >A Malakim is slightly *less* stable because of their Honor. They > can be forced into irrational actions by conflicting or inconvenient > codes.< > > Please explain how having a code of behaviour makes you less > reliable than some one who doesn't have any self imposed > restrictions on what he will do. Predictable, yes. Reliable, no. A Malakim can be "relied" on to trash any evil in sight. He cannot be relied on to keep you safe (except in the rare cases where he has an Oath to). > >From the Malakim oaths I've seen setting up contradictions in there > reqiured and forbiden codes of behaviour is rather difficult. > > Unless you are one of the Cherubs attunements they can be > considered flaky. Sure you can rely on them to protect their > attunments, but unlike Malakim you can't rely on them not to Fall. I would point out that it hasn't been decided if Malakim *can't* fall, or if they simply get axed before they do. At least, not in my mind... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:46:15 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? > >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. I should really be a playtester - picking nits comes naturally to me. Hint, hint... > 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. Why make them more vulnerable? Do we really want to be widening that gap? I can see the problem, in that humans will have more hits than many Celestials with low power vessels. Why not change it the other way - since there have been complaints of celestials being harder to remove than cars, why not give humans vessels equal to Corp forces, and change the formula to Vessel times Strength. Humans would be about 5 hit points on average, while a celestial with vessel one would be 6 hit points on average, up to 72 for the toughest starting Celestial. > 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. Kyrio's are already pretty powerful - IMO, more powerful than many Malakim. Multiple vessels, unpredictable presence, no Trauma (unless their preplanning sucks eggs), etc. > >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. Again, only covers part of it. The rationale smacks of AD&D hit points... >By the book, that effect should be accomplished by giving >them Dodge/7+, but... That's the other reason I like my idea - under the current system, a Kyrio inhabiting a turtle is just as nible as one inhabiting a cat. In fact, IIRC, they would have the same speed. [They would - I just checked. Took me long enough to find it. Note to self - rewrite rules for In Nomine, send to SJ. Will beat-down occur?] It takes too much individuality out of vessels to do it the other way. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:29:12 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Stuck in corporeal form? > > an angel to be stuck in their corporeal form such that if their > > physical body die, the angel dies with it, permanently? Is this > Sort of. See the Etherial Discord, Bound. (p 87) Though I don't think a Bound Celestial would die if the body did...that'd be a MAJOR disadvantage to being Bound that I think they'd've mentioned. (MY read on it is similar to Outcasts, since they can't go Celestial either...if the body dies, they're stuck in a dead vessel for a while, but it does continue to heal at 1 Hit/day, and once they're back up to 1, they regain consciousness...someone Bound presumably gets a Will - Discord roll to not be trapped as well, though.) [Now, purely for amusement's sake - what if when a Celestial, acting in his Role, gets killed, you have them make a roll based on the Role's Level..and if they make it, they're dead. Heh heh. I didn't think so either.] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 01:19:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Starting out with discord In a message dated 97-08-24 21:17:36 EDT, you write: << One of my players has submitted a character which has a fair bit of discord initially. This has given him more point, of course. I'm wondering what you guys think about characters that start with discord (angels, to be more precise). This discord can be eventually removed through proper methods, if I understand the rules correctly, which would eventually leave him with a particularly powerful character. The discord (for an angel) might also make it difficult for him to interact with other PCs, due to the stigma attached to it? >> Generally I dissaprove of angels starting with discord. Point one- Notice how you come by discord in the game. Three points of dissonance equals one point of discord. Ergo, if your character has three points of discord, you have NINE DISSONANT ACTS to put in your characters history. (Or, if it's etherial discord maybe he lost three etherial battles) Is this character be roleplayed? IE is how he came about this dissonance/discord being spelled out in his background, or is the player just munchkinizing? Point two- page 64 of the rules- "The first time an angel notices another angel's discord, he must make a reaction roll (see pg 44) subtracting the level of the discord." - and a bit earlier- "For an angel Discord is a very bad thing. If he does not deal with it before someone reports it to his superior he could be censored, shunned, punished, or- especially for a Malakim- destroyed outright." How much discord do you have? How much can you have before everyone is out to get you? Why in heaven would an Archangel *ever* trust you with a mission? He's not going to send you on a mission, he's going to send you to a therapist! Demon's are said to not mind stigma. I have no idea why. MY demons will see that you are unreliable, not truly dedicated to evil, weak, exploitable, and they will turn on you and divvy you up between them. Point Three- Have you ever heard of Synergy? It's when a person takes two drugs thinking the effect will add, but instead the effects multiply. Like various people who've taken sleeping pills and alcohol and went to sleep forever... This point is hardest for me to prove, but take my word for it...The discord rules are very prone to synergy. Problems cling and reinforce each other. Like my player who wanted to be a sports agent, and a Mercurian of Micheal. He took Aura-2, Merciful-4, and Cowardly-2. He's cowardly but being a servant of mike he gets dissonance for retreat- making him a dissonance generating machine. He's merciful so he only gets one point of essence every three days. (It's a celestial discord, see page 60 for the effects of celestial discord.) And his aura can make his role very hard to maintain. And when he submitted his character he knew none of this. He said he took "only very minor problems... }:-])> Tell me, is this how you want In Nomine characters to look in your game? (and if you answered "yes" why not play Champions? ;-) ) In your letter you sounded like you were having deep misgivings. This shows you to be the wise GM. I've had a few players try taking discord, and so far it's been my impression that they thought they were playing GURPS. Trust me, discord AIN'T the gurps disad system. - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:34:34 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Rules Question On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:30:13 GMT+10, "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> wrote: >Yes, yet another Lilim-related rules question. I'm unsure how to >interpret the Lilim of Kronos Attunement. It reads "Kronos' Lilim can >see Discord in the eyes of others. Also, they can add their Celestial >Forces to any attempt to inflict a charmed person with their infernal >geas." Now the first part about the Discord is straightforward, but >the second part confuses me. Does it mean that the Lilim adds their >Celestial forces to the Perception roll to get the geas, or does it >mean that their Celestial Forces are added to the difficulty of the >victim to resist the geas (like the initial level of Geas being >subtracted byt he will roll)? The former, I'd say. The will roll is the victim's roll, not the Lilim's. However, since the initial roll is boosted, the final check digit will be boosted. But to take the extreme case, suppose the Lilim has 6 celestial forces and perception of 12. That makes her base roll 18, so her check digit will be 7-12. Plus any essence spent! Does she really get that level of Geas and will reduction, or always 6? For most other things, I'd let the 7-12 stand, but Geases are so powerful, I think I'd limit it at 6. A GM call, I suppose. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:34:27 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:27:07 GMT+10, "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> wrote: >>I think the fundamental problem is that little Geases have huge >>penalties and big Geases have tiny penalties. The ability to make a >>will roll out will help celestials, who are pretty likely to bounce >>the Geas anyway, but mortals won't have a chance. > >I think the only point you are missing with this system (which does >seem wierd to me in certain ways as well) is that although humans may >not be able to resist geas/1's, the limit on what you can ask for a >level 1 geas means that the average human will be able to get it done >easily within the hour. IF he doesn't run into trouble: just a traffic accident could kill him by delaying him for a few hours. IF someone doesn't sabotage him: Simply making a false police report against him could get him held long enough to die. > I tend to view the time limit on geases not >just for how long before the victim suffers again, but how long the >geas can be expected to take. So a geas/1 should take about an hour. That's the view the Discord Geas section takes. The Lilim Geas section takes the view that it's the moral seriousness of the task. I think the latter is a more reasonable view. Consider: Geas/1: You're at your sister's wedding. Here's an Uzi and 10 clips; kill as many people as you can in an hour. Try to get all your relatives. Geas/6: Call your mother every week for the next year. I have a problem with the Discord Geas interpretation. The first should be multiple Geas/6's, probably one for every relative. The second, a Geas/6 only because of the time. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:34:31 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Starting out with discord On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 22:02:10 GMT, dsarrazin@cyberus.ca (Denis Sarrazin) wrote: >One of my players has submitted a character which has a fair bit of >discord initially. This has given him more point, of course. I'm >wondering what you guys think about characters that start with discord >(angels, to be more precise). This discord can be eventually removed >through proper methods, if I understand the rules correctly, which >would eventually leave him with a particularly powerful character. >The discord (for an angel) might also make it difficult for him to >interact with other PCs, due to the stigma attached to it? > >I'm basically looking for opinions about this, as I'm curious on how >this will work out in game play, and whether it is fair or not. You might want to reread the section on Angelic Discord on page 61 and the sidebar on Superiors and Discord. He's going to get negative reations from all angels. The only way to get rid of it is essentially to buy it off with character points or get it removed instead of getting a reward like an attunement. If he's a Malakim, he'll be killed on sight. I'd say no, flat out, if he's a Malakim or works for Dominic. I might let him have a little if he works for one of the more relaxed Archangels, like Eli or Novalis. But he should understand that when his Superior rewards him, it'll be by removing the discord instead of getting the points and attunements the other players will get. So say he has a discord/1, worth 3 points. When the other angels are getting 5 point attunements or 5 raw experience points, he'll only get his discord fixed. He shouldn't get to borrow the points for free. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:05:41 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:46:15 +0000, "Nathaniel Eliot" wrote: >> This all makes sense, but one huge loophole remains: Lilith is a Demon >> Prince: She can impose fifty Geas/6's for no reason at all if she wants. > >How do you figure? I assume she'd have to sense need like any other >Lilim. AAs and DPs can basically do anything, at the discretion of the GM. They *make* celestials. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:05:37 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:46:15 +0000, "Nathaniel Eliot" wrote: >> 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. > >Why make them more vulnerable? Do we really want to be widening that >gap? I can see the problem, in that humans will have more hits than >many Celestials with low power vessels. The basic idea is so that it's possible to kill most humans with one good shot, about 10 Body. >Why not change it the other way - since there have been complaints of >celestials being harder to remove than cars, why not give humans >vessels equal to Corp forces, and change the formula to Vessel times >Strength. Humans would be about 5 hit points on average, while a >celestial with vessel one would be 6 hit points on average, up to 72 >for the toughest starting Celestial. That might require a change to (un)holy pistol and bullet mechanics. Probably there are other ripples out there... It sounds ok, but having just gotten surprised by the NM mechanic... >> 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. > >Kyrio's are already pretty powerful - IMO, more powerful than many >Malakim. Multiple vessels, unpredictable presence, no Trauma (unless >their preplanning sucks eggs), etc. I think you want to toughen the host up somewhat. The old super strength of possession bit. >Again, only covers part of it. The rationale smacks of AD&D hit >points... I agree, there's a problem. >That's the other reason I like my idea - under the current system, a >Kyrio inhabiting a turtle is just as nible as one inhabiting a cat. >In fact, IIRC, they would have the same speed. [They would - I just >checked. Took me long enough to find it. Note to self - rewrite >rules for In Nomine, send to SJ. Will beat-down occur?] It >takes too much individuality out of vessels to do it the other way. Check out Wolf vs. Dog on page 191: Dogs run at 10 x Ag but Wolves at 12 x Ag. IOW, the GM can set the Agility multiple as appropriate. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:19:33 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Word Bound Celestials Message text written by INTERNET:in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > Aw, not the Angel of Piling Rocks On A Person's Chest Until They Confess? < More likely is the Angel of Comfy Cushions. Adam Canning The X weapons of the Spanish inquisition include Fear, Suprise, Devotion to the pope,... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:19:42 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Lilim of Fate From: "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> >Also, they can add their Celestial Forces to any attempt to inflict a charmed person with their infernal geas.< Targets under the effect of one of the Songs of Charm perhaps? Adam Canning "It is a truth uneversally acknowledged that a young man of good fortune must be in need of a wife." one of teh Bronte sisters giving advice to young lilim. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:19:39 -0400 From: Adam Canning Subject: IN> Lilim Geases > Elizabeth wrote: >I think the fundamental problem is that little Geases have huge >penalties and big Geases have tiny penalties. The ability to make a >will roll out will help celestials, who are pretty likely to bounce >the Geas anyway, but mortals won't have a chance. < Actually it's the other way round [IN p88] If you use a level 5 geas on a task that should take a week, then the target starts suffering every hour until its done. If you use a level 4 gease they suffer every day until its completed. If you use a level 3 geas they only suffer every week until its done. Since tehre is no lower level than 1 you can't shrinkl it below that so they take damage per hour for a task that only takes them an hour. Adam Canning Why am I recieving even numbered Digests before the preceeding odd numbered digest? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:40:46 -0400 (EDT) From: gibsonc@nku.edu Subject: [none] please remove gibsonc from your list, thanks. chas gibson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:45:02 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> New Drugs > Alcohol: [Parts snipped] At that level of drunkenness, I > generally agree with the -1 to everything, except strength--agility goes > down, but strength remains until you don't have any agility left to apply > the strength. Strength is also a combat 'to-hit' stat. Perhaps rule that the lifting/carrying ability of Strength is the same, but all skills based on it still go down? > Tobacco is more like +1 Int, -1 Precision: there's a reason smokers get > into far more car accidents than non-smokers. Lighting cigarettes and accidentally dropping lit ones in your lap. ;) > By the way, the caffeine analog in chocolate is named theobromine because > the Latin name for chocolate is Theobroma. Broma means food; most people on > this list should know what Theo means. Chocolate is God's Food, or so its > namer thought. Damn straight. O=) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:40:40 -0400 From: "John Karakash - Lucent ASCC" Subject: Re: IN> Why more superiors? > It seems that upcoming releases for In Nomine will have more superior > expansions than before. Night Music had 2 - Laurence and Saminga. The > Marches has Blandine, Gabriel, Beleth and Belial while Heaven and Hell has > Dominic, Yves, Asmodeus and Kronos. What gives? It takes _forever_ to get an expanded writeup on a Superior... trying to juggle _all_ of them to put them out at once is a nightmare, yet you want to give them out at soon as you have them detailed (especially when it might impact on the rest of the supplements). Fer example, what if you wanted to write about a Servant of Saminga with one of his expanded Attunements, but you hadn't yet published the expanded Saminga? You'd either have to include the Attunement in multiple places (ugh) or leave off that NPC concept. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:06:24 -0400 (EDT) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: Re: Re: IN> Re: Smut (and nothing but) Elizabeth McCoy: " If you want non-Lust smut... I most like XXXenophile stuff. Consensual, with *real* tenderness..." *nod* I'm still doing the Dance of Joy over the fact that Phil is doing some art for us in an upcoming issue. Woo hoo! Nathaniel Eliot "Yes - XXXenophile definately outranks hard porn, anyday." I could comment about the fact that 'toons are exponentially more adaptable than humans in this area. "Though now you have me thinking - surely there must be some good love scenes from something..." Maybe...but they'd be accidental. Movies are Media, too. yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:12:06 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat IQJason@aol.com wrote: "See...I'm having trouble understanding how it's ever considered 'good' to hijack a human body." If I recall the book's writeup correctly, most Kyriotates on Earth duty have a team of willing human associates to inhabit. In the example given at the front of the Kyriotate section, the human inhabited doesn't seem to be a volunteer, but the habitation is also quite brief, so that, for the "victim," the Kyriotate's presence amounts to no more than a fit of absent-mindedness (literal in this case). Recall that it is dissonant for a Kyriotate to damage its vessel. This list has also had discussions about whether it is dissonant to abandon a vessel in a hazzardous situation. I don't recall that there was a concensus, but the dissonance as stated at least shows that, in general, Kyriotates are expected to possess without doing harm. Earl Wajenberg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:14:16 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Hire Purchase of Lilim > >> This all makes sense, but one huge loophole remains: Lilith is > >> a Demon Prince: She can impose fifty Geas/6's for no reason at > >> all if she wants. > > > >How do you figure? I assume she'd have to sense need like any other > >Lilim. > > AAs and DPs can basically do anything, at the discretion of the > GM. They *make* celestials. Yes, but that's assuming that Lilith has the nigh infinite power that you (as GM) would give her. That is *far* from the default assumption. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten. - George Carlin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:07:06 -0400 From: "Kirt A. Dankmyer -- aka Loki" Subject: Re: IN>Kyriotates in Humans, Vessel=? >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. Why not use both systems? I don't see why they're mutually exclusive. Humans have less hit points, and Vessel=0. But when a Kyriotate inhabits a human, the body becomes a celestial Vessel at a level equal to the human's Corporeal Forces. -Loki - -- Kirt A. Dankmyer --- Academic Computing Specialist http://www.wfu.edu/~dankmyka/ -- (910) 759-4202 -- PGP public key available. For the Snark _was_ a Boojum, you see. --Lewis Carroll ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 13:10 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Kyriosity Killed the Kat >See...I'm having trouble understanding how it's ever considered 'good' to >hijack a human body. With the Shedim, it's corruption -- exposing the mortal >to the horrible things that people are capable of so that they'll learn to >enjoy them. But a Kyrio's vessel is essentially out-of-the-picture when he's >being ridden. He's being used out of expedience. I can think of cases, though they're generally hard to come by: - the human is a servant of the Kyrio, and is aware of and agrees to periodic possession - the human is trouble of some sort that they can't deal with, and the Kyrio can. Cases of mothers using "hysterical strength" to lift cars of their kids could actually be cases of Kyrio possession, for example. - the Kyrio only uses sleeping humans. They're in the Marches already, and they're not using their body.... - the Kyrio only possesses the human for a few minutes, at most, when the human might be daydreaming or otherwise doing nothing of significance. And of course, animal hosts are much less of an ethical problem. I'm doing a Kyrio of Lightning in John Karakesh's online game, and I've been dealing with this issue some there. You might want to look at the archives up on John's web pages at http://www.io.com/~wileyc/nomine/. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:52:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Dennis C Hwang Subject: Re: IN> Jordi and Domestic Pets On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, David Edelstein wrote: > >>>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. I dunno. I still think that maintaining biodiversity might be more important to Jordi, especially since endangerment of endemic species by exotics is often a side effect of human expansion. Plus, I don't think the absence of humans would do anything to affect any currently-established populations of feral domestics, and by the time their numbers stabilized, huge numbers of native species would be extinct. Look at New Zealand, Hawaii, and Mauritius. Think of the Chatham Island wren (?), which was driven to extinction by the actions of a single cat owned by a lighthouse keeper. - --Dennis, aka Imago, Kyriotate of Jordi dchwang@itsa.ucsf.edu xenopathologist at large! Deathwalker for President: for some *real* health care reform. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 12:29 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> [FLUFF] Diabolical Dealings at Gen Con >Geez....you're going to make me turn this into an ad, aren't you? Okay. The >Tour of GenCon will be in InQuest #32 -- hits store shelves in November. And, >for those of you who aren't InQuest readers already, it's a decent place to >start. ;) Actually I suspect people were hoping it would be an *indecent* place to start.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:41:25 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> A Question of Essence pt 2 As I recall, angels get their essence point at dawn, humans at noon, demons at dusk. Clearly, this is essentially symbolic. So, rather than munchkin around with time zones, I think one should have characters get their essence point once every 24 hours MORE OR LESS, with a stretch factor based on symbolism. So, if an angel has been jetting from time zone to time zone, and it's say, 20 hours or 27 hours since it last got its essence point, but the time is 2 AM in the local zone, the angel gets its point and the next major act of illumination it encounters. This could be as dramatic as a lightning flash or as mundane as walking out of the dark into a brightly lit room. By the way, having essence come in such coarse granularity rather implies that the CHARACTERS, as well as the players, are conscious of these points. *Thump* "I just got my daily essence." I don't know if this is a feature or a bug, but it's there. Earl Wajenberg ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #311 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.