From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Sep 6 14:04:03 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 OAA10238 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 14:04:03 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA04081 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 13:42:48 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 13:42:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199709061842.NAA04081@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 #327 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, September 6 1997 Volume 01 : Number 327 In this digest: Re: IN> KTE addenda -- Christopher Re: IN> IN: Davidian Malakim (was Malakim Vows - David??) IN> KTE addenda -- Christopher Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance IN> Eli is more than he appears Re: IN> Lilim Trackers Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance Re: IN> ghosts Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance Re: IN> Celestial Plane Questions Re: IN> Lilim Geases Re: IN> Malikim Vows- Will a Malakim help a demon repent? Re: IN> ghosts Re: IN> Lilim Trackers Re: FW: Janus/Valefor same person (Was: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph) Re: FW: Janus/Valefor same person (Was: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph) IN> Night Music: "...a skill known at Level 6 or better..." Re: IN> Eli is more than he appears Re: Gaming War Stories (Re: IN> Lilim Geases) Re: IN> Eli is more than he appears Re: IN> Communicating with Superiors Re: IN> Communicating with Superiors ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 14:04:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Hobbes Subject: Re: IN> KTE addenda -- Christopher According to Highway Star: > > Dan Ozdowski - thinks Moe is a Djinn....... > > Moe who? > Moe the big bully who always beats Calvin up, steals his swing, takes his toy truck, etc etc.... That just screams, "Big, surly Djinn" to me..... Dan Ozdowski - -- /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\/\/\/\//\ Beware the single most feared person in life..... The Articulate Incompetent ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Sep 97 14:34 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> IN: Davidian Malakim (was Malakim Vows - David??) > In the majority of cases, however, I still strongly believe a >Celestial should gain Dissonance for the DECISION of violating one of >their restrictions. I mostly agree, but I think it's a little deeper than this. The way I view it, a celestial is attuned to their Superior's Word when they get their Choir/Band Attunement (possibly and/or Rites). So their nature partakes of that Word. Doing something inconsistent with that Word requires them to distance themselves from it, bending their nature to the point where it begins to fracture a little. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 15:32:56 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> KTE addenda -- Christopher >>> Now... Which *band* does Calvin belong to? > Calvin is definitely a Calabite.<<< Nah. Balseraph. He actually *believes* all his own crazy stories. But his Will isn't high enough to make others believe them very often. Maybe a Gremlin of Kobal in training. - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 15:36:43 -0400 (EDT) From: JosephMoon@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance >> Rather than use 'angelic' and 'demonic' resonances as terms, >>I like 'will based' and 'perception based'. Will-based resonances >>can be resisted (most of the time) and this includes the Kyriotates. >>Perception-based ones usually can't be (like the Lilim's). >Has this become Canon, Karakash? In particular, to Habbalah have >two resonances-sort-of? One Perception, to sense an existing >emotion (with the option of accenting it) and one Will, to force >an emotion upon someone? > >It's two rolls, but then so is the Impudite resonance. It's on >two different stats, too, though -- but the enforcing of an emotion >probably wouldn't *require* sensing the existing ones? And Lilim, too. One Perception-based roll (sensing need) and one Will-based (the Geas). Can't believe you didn't use that one for an example, Beth! ; ) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 15:47:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: IN> Eli is more than he appears This is from the same demented soul who came up with the "Dominic is a Balseraph" idea. You Have Been Warned. I've been thinking about Eli lately. Then, when I was in the shower, this idea occurred to me. (Strangely enough, all of my odd ideas originate in the shower. Must be all that tile. Hmm...) Eli can't be an Archangel. He's something far more powerful. Let us consider the following: 1) Eli's servitors can't be dissonant to Creation. This is something that even Yves is incapable of granting, and he is widely acknowledged to be the most powerful Archangel. 2) Eli's two servitor attunements, Abracadabra and Transubstantiation, duplicate miracles performed by Jesus -- the feeding of the five thousand and the water into wine at Cana, respectively. 3) One of Eli's rites is calming children. "Permit the children to come to me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." -- Mark 10:14 4) Eli has forsaken Heavely politics to concern himself with Earth. He is also hostile to no one. 5) The word Eli means 'My God'. "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" -- Matthew 27:46 6) Taken as a verb, Creation is a powerful Word. But if it's taken as a - -noun-, doesn't it encompass everything? 7) The French version of IN had Jesus as an Archangel. Conclusion: Eli is Jesus. Thoughts, comments, rotten fruit? - -- 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, 5 Sep 1997 17:28:25 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Trackers [This bounced; hope it's not now duplicated.] At 10:35 AM -0400 9/4/97, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: >On Aug 30, 10:18am, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Trackers >> > At 12:22 AM -0600 8/27/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> > > I don't think Geas hooks can reasonably be used to track someone >> > >down...that's too much overlap with the Cherub/Djinn Resonance. >> and Our Favorite Archangel replied; >> > Tough. Karakash canoned it a while back -- Lilim can use Geases >> > (and hooks) to track someone down. Once there, the Geas *MUST* >> Well, Karakash has been wrong before... > > Lies, foul lies! It wasn't me! I wasn't even there! You >can't prove nothin'! I hope you're not going to deny it's in the FAQ. And do you *really* want me to go through the archives to find the original email with your name on it? I will, you know.... >> I dunno..I'm REALLY not liking this. (Enough to feel compelled to >> respond, anyway, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't geased into it...) Granting >> that they don't get the `extra' information, you do realize this makes >> Lilim better trackers than Djinn and Cherubs? And the extras you miss out >> on really only amount to "general condition" (on a 4) or if it's in danger >> (on a 6)...the first of which might be handy, granted, but IS kind of a >> side-point, and the second the Lilim probably doesn't care about anyway... > > Two things, though. They can only do it once per Geas because >they are _required_ to use up the Geas once they activate it in this >way. Those darn Cherubs and Djinn can follow you around for a long, >long time. And, IIRC, it's only one Perception+GeasLevel check per day, rather than any number... So, if you keep running... ("Darn it, I never should have tried to find that Ofanite of Wind!") - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:03:40 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance At 3:36 PM -0400 9/5/97, JosephMoon@aol.com wrote: >>> Rather than use 'angelic' and 'demonic' resonances as terms, >>>I like 'will based' and 'perception based'. Will-based resonances >>>can be resisted (most of the time) and this includes the Kyriotates. >>>Perception-based ones usually can't be (like the Lilim's). > >>Has this become Canon, Karakash? In particular, to Habbalah have >>two resonances-sort-of? One Perception, to sense an existing >>emotion (with the option of accenting it) and one Will, to force >>an emotion upon someone? >> >>It's two rolls, but then so is the Impudite resonance. It's on >>two different stats, too, though -- but the enforcing of an emotion >>probably wouldn't *require* sensing the existing ones? > >And Lilim, too. One Perception-based roll (sensing need) and one Will-based >(the Geas). Can't believe you didn't use that one for an example, Beth! ;) Except that they don't have to do *anything* to invoke the Geas, currently. But yes, I suppose it could turn into a perception-will pairing as well -- one to see, and then one to impose it. I could see that. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:28:28 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> ghosts [This bounced; hopw it's not now a "duplicate."] At 11:59 AM -0400 9/4/97, Greg wrote: >> >> There is an essential difference between corporeal, >> ethereal and celestial beings and one type cannot be converted >> to another. >> >This is probably in the book, but what do once-mortal souls in Heaven and >Hell counts as? Essence batteries. At least, in Hell... And Force-sources. *hem* Human souls, or just "souls," probably. At 3:29 PM -0400 9/4/97, Gregory Littmann wrote: >> >> There's always the reincarnation option -- a "bad ghost" who is >> busy repenting might get reincarnated for another go 'round. [...] >Your ruling makes perfect sense, but I wouldn't use it for two "feel" >reasons. >1. Reincarnation is not usually associated with monotheistic world views, >and I want my In Nomine game to feel monotheistic. It's canon that it can happen. p. 67, last paragraph of the Fate & Destiny box. Of course, it's *your* game. >2. Reincarnation is a big feature of the World of Darkness games. My In >Nomine already feels enough like its set in the WoD without reincarnation >too. Heh. I dunno -- a bunch of Garou run into Jordi... I could see that... "Now, repeat after me, Jean is the Wyrm..." (Or was that Weaver?) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Sep 97 18:03 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Resisting Angelic Resonance >>It's two rolls, but then so is the Impudite resonance. It's on >>two different stats, too, though -- but the enforcing of an emotion >>probably wouldn't *require* sensing the existing ones? > >And Lilim, too. One Perception-based roll (sensing need) and one Will-based >(the Geas). Can't believe you didn't use that one for an example, Beth! ; >) Lilim don't make Will rolls to use their resonance, though -- only the victim makes a Will roll. The victim of *any* demonic resonance (and the Kyrio angelic one) gets to resist with will. This is over and above the rolls Elizabeth was mentioning. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:24:57 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Plane Questions At 12:08 AM -0600 9/5/97, Kingsley Lintz wrote: >> On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >> > p. 82, box, 3rd paragraph: "When the user is in celestial form, >> > these powers do celestial damage!" >and Casca replied; >> Oh, okay. Spank me for not reading it closely enough. ;) > What? Beth's giving out spankings for misreadings? Oooh... I am? Hm.... Funny, I didn't put anything about wearing black leather outfits in my "Archangel of Archives" first draft. Do you think I should? > Er, hey, uh, what about here, on...on..page 5628, where it says >"Dominic also wears a floppy purple hat and carries bright orange >pom-poms"? Isn't that interesting? > >(Or am I just up too late?) Yes. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com // emccoy@jade.mv.net GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 08:21:58 +1000 (EST) From: Peter Frederick Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Geases Dear Leath and John At 11:56 AM 4/9/97 -0400, in_nomine-l@lists.io.com wrote: >On Sep 3, 11:49am, Leathal Weapon wrote: >> Subject: IN> Lilim Geases >> Yet another Geas question. >> >> If a Lilim (or anyone, for that matter) kills a holder of their Geas, >> does that geas cease to exist? Therefore Lilim A finds out Human X >> has a geas on them. They track that human down and kill them before >> they can call in the geas. Does the geas vanish. Logically I'd have >> to say yes, but I'd like a few other opinions. >John Replied > Sounds like yes to me! I (as usual :) ) have another position on this, which I hope isn't too biased as I know the in-game situtation that Leath is referring too. Firstly I would say killing the human doesn't remove the Geas. It stays with their Soul and that means you still have to find them and get it off them. Of course if their Soul goes to Hell you better be quick, because the first Demon that realises the new 'inmate' was holding a Geas is going to trick /force/bribe it off them. OTOH I generally feel that only Lilim and Word Bound (maybe only AAs and DPs) can envoke Geasa, UNLESS you put the holder under a lot of stress, like trying to kill them. Then they can envoke it and possibly with a bonus to succeed in the Will roll. Can't you just tell that I use to play Amber DRPG, love those Blood Curses :) . If the person knows what they have and what they are doing they could make it really uncomfortable for the Lil. Just a little of MHO, thanking you for your indulgence. Yours Peter. 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: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:28:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Calabim@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Malikim Vows- Will a Malakim help a demon repent? In a message dated 97-09-05 08:51:13 EDT, milliken wrote: << The point is not whether one specific Malakite might consider it necessary to kill demons -- I'm perfectly happy to agree that that is more than likely. What I'm saying is that not *all* Malakim automatically need to kill demons. The Old Guy is merely an example of one who does. And that's not surprising -- he's a Malakite of the Sword, and Laurence isn't known for being soft on demons. After all, Laurence is in charge of the War... it seems likely that of all Malakim, his are going to be among the least likely to consider demons as anything but "Evil! Kill! Kill!".... >> Actually this is starting to move beyond the subject of Malakim, and more toward what is "evil". If all demons are inherently and unavoidably evil, then the Malikim must kill him, period. The topic has shifted beyond Malakim, to asking whether demons inherently evil, or merely highly likely to be evil. Can a demon be good? In my own game the answer would be a resounding no. At least, he wouldn't stay a demon long. But then, as I'm so fond of saying, my game isn't canon, it's heresy... :-) I tend to rule that anything that gets it's essence back at sunset is evil. It may be cheerfully evil, it may be begrudgingly evil, or it may even be deluded into thinking that it's good. But it is evil. And no Malakim will let it live out it's life as a demon. It does raise a new point though. The Malakim is *not* actually sworn to kill evil, merely not to suffer it to live...So what if the demon redeems? Then he is not an evil, he's a good...and the oath is satisfied. So what is required to redeem? Suppose an Malakim of Lawrence or Novalis has a highly christian worldview. He says to a demon, "OK, you don't want to die, fine. Go to church and pray. Tell God you're sorry. Then confess to the priest about all the nasty things you've done. Then we go talk to my Archangel and roll up our sleaves and go to work..." So say the demon does it. In my game he might. If... A) He was already unhappy with what side he was on, and filled with dissonance. B) He had no prospect of winning a battle, and no chance to flee. C) He was in major bad trouble with his prince and dare not go home. There's about a 90% chance he'll be lying. But...some demon's repent. So are those actions of repentance mentioned above dissonant when they're sincere? [Horrible digression- I'm getting this vision of a impudite player wanting to repent. The GM rules that simple religious activity is insufficient to generate the dissonance needed to redeem. So the demon goes out and starts killing mortals, cause it's dissonant to him, so he can be more angelic...] Will a Malakite accept this or is his attitude really "take no prisoners"? I suspect that the canon response would be that the Malakite will take no prisoners. It is mentioned in the book a few times that Angels kill angels who are dissonant or outcast. These mentions make it sound remarkable yet routine- sort of like police shooting an armed robber. It's noteworthy, but happens with some regularity in a city of any size. And if they'll kill someone who is still an angel, you can imagine what they'll do to a demon. In any event, many GM's would tend to feel that this interpretation of the Malakim's vows lacks sincerity, and betrays a desire for a cheap vow you can wriggle out of. - -Calabim@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:14:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> ghosts On Fri, 5 Sep 1997, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Heh. I dunno -- a bunch of Garou run into Jordi... I could see that... > "Now, repeat after me, Jean is the Wyrm..." (Or was that Weaver?) Weaver. And speaking of Garou, I've decided that in my games they're the descendants of Jordi's Grigori. - -- 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: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:00:56 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Lilim Trackers > > Well, Karakash has been wrong before... > Lies, foul lies! It wasn't me! I wasn't even there! You > can't prove nothin'! Actually, I can prove several things...but, admittedly, not this one. I'll leave it to Beth, who seems to have it well in hand.. > > respond, anyway, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't geased into it...) Granting > > that they don't get the `extra' information, you do realize this makes > > Lilim better trackers than Djinn and Cherubs? And the extras you miss out > Two things, though. Um, this is one of those "Spanish Inquisition" things, but in reverse, right? ("Our two weapons are our devotion to the Pope. Um, wait..") > They can only do it once per Geas because they are _required_ to use up >the Geas once they activate it in this way. Those darn Cherubs and Djinn >can follow you around for a long, long time. Not Djinn; they don't stay Attuned to a given subject for a whole week. Cherubs can, provided they don't mind having to keep track of you constantly the whole time.. A Lilim in this case can pick up your Geas and forget about you until she needs you, and THEN go find you...which has significant advantages. Granted, she can only do it once on that Geas, but...so she Resonates another Need/1 while she's there, if she thinks she'll want to track you down again. (Bearing in mind that even with just a Need/1, they'll STILL do it better than a Cherub, who only gets to roll his Perception, compared to her Perception+1. Having to pick up someone's laundry or somesuch is an awfully small price to pay for this.) Oh, and ESPECIALLY now that it's being determined that death doesn't necessarily erase Geases. I know this was being looked at from the other angle, but wouldn't a Geas potentially hold -against- a reincarnated human? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 11:39:36 GMT From: dsarrazin@cyberus.ca (Denis Sarrazin) Subject: Re: FW: Janus/Valefor same person (Was: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph) On Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:59:16 -0700, you wrote: >Has anyone actually got any of the French stuff? Is it as cool as it >sounds? Would I sound like a total fanatic if I considered getting some >of it-the basic set at least-and having it translated? :) Yes, I have it. I love it myself, for various reasons (I also love SJG's version). The mood of the rules and the world view has a lot of sardonic humour sprinkled throughout. I favor that approach personally to the very serious "WhiteWolf" (ie melodramatic) approach that SJG took -- to me, it is hard to be that serious when describing a world of Angels and Demons fighting it out on Earth. Not to say that their many adventures aren't serious: many of them are quite serious, well thought out. Most of them will have a bit of sardonic humour, some of them will be light and some dark and some in-between. Croc basically wrote the game to have fun, and not to take themselves too seriously. It also has a very French feel to it which may not work well in the US (just like not everyone necessarily appreciate British humour in your country -- I'm in Canada, btw). I found the french rules tremendously simpler and the books immensily better orgarnized. It has a lot of originality and it is easy to create and run PCs (easier than the SJG version). Otoh, the original system is not supposed to be as well balanced as the SJG (although I think the SJG version still needs some adjustments ). Now, whether you find it to be better or worse than SJG -- I have no idea. I love both, for different reasons. I probably favor slightly the french one. SJG obviously liked the original quite a bit because there is a huge amount that it took from it. Apart from the greater quality of the books, and the more detailed info from In Nomine, it boils down to personal feelings, in my opinion. The original game is mean to have fun. Their adventures tend to be very interesting and original, mixing various kinds of elements into them (with touches of sardonic humours strewn throughout).. - -D ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 13:27:37 GMT From: dsarrazin@cyberus.ca (Denis Sarrazin) Subject: Re: FW: Janus/Valefor same person (Was: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph) On Mon, 04 Aug 1997 23:33:29 +0100, you wrote: >Well, I was back in France a month or so ago and picked up most of the >French stuff. And IMHO, the SJGames version is *way* better. The French >version has more of a sense of humour - e.g. Jesus is an Archangel, and >is the most powerful because he's Daddy's boy, even though he screwed up >his first mission That is not what they say in the book. Some angels disagreed with Jesus's method, and some agreed with it. Hence the split in politics and the creation of the muslim religion. > so badly that he decisively split the Jews and the >Christians when he was supposed to bring the Jews round to Christianity. >There's a fun quote: "That didn't even hurt" >*But* it's almost impossible to run seriously. Also untrue. Read the many adventures that come in the supplements, or in the rulesbook. The stories tend to be quite serious (although not quite as melodramatic as the stories of SJG's version in that there are touches of humour, usually sardonic or dark humour, though). It's true they don;t take themselves as seriously as the SJG version, but that does not automatically mean that it is impossible to be serious. I mean, SJG is *very* serious and Croc's version is mostly serious with touches of dark and sardonic humours thrown in. > There's no Falling, no >resonances, it's more or less AD&D with Angels and Demons. That's not how I would see it. No class system, for example (less so even than SJG's game since there are no specific Choirs that one has to take to guide them in their personality). > It's a *lot* >more combat-orientated (nearly everyone has magic weapons that behave >like Laurence's Scabbard attunement) Not true. No one has magical weapons unless they buy it as part of their character creation (like you can with SJG's version via artifacts). And like th SJG, even if they do buy them, the initial versions of these won't be very powerful. >, a lot less subtle (no cold war, no >real reason why the whole thing is kept secret although it obviously >is). The reasons are actually given in the history of the universe that is at the beginning of the second edition, or in more details in the Heaven & Hell supplement (No 13). > Oh, and there are no Choirs and Bands either - you're either an >Angel or a Demon, and that's it. True. The Choirs and Bands are very much like classes, though, and in many ways, force you to have your characters adopt a certain set of core belief and personality. There are many variations of these which certainly keeps them from being too restrictive. Basically, both ways have their advantages and disads. >As an example: David's write-up (he's called Daniel in the french >version) has the following quotes: > >What Daniel thinks about... >Humans: The military and skinheads are OK. The others are boring. Actually, he says that the others are of no interest to him. No quite the same thing. >Animals: I don't like animals >Violence: Violence is cool. Cool may not translate quite the same way. I would have translated his view of Violence to this instead: Violence: Yes, it's okay. >Politics: Eh? You missed a few others: Order and Discipline: Order and discipline must always rule. That's very important. The Archangels: Some are cool (Laurence, Jean) and others are not (Novalis, Christopher). Servents: They are my army and my strength. One thing worth nothing is that skinheads have a special place in these adventures. They are used by both the good and bad side, thus skinheads can be good. > >As another example: Andre Ribeiro mentioned Genesis 8:1 as a possible >explanation of how Janus came to be (promoted to an Archangel after >successfully dispelling the Flood). This is a far more impressive >reason, IMHO, than just stealing something big. Also, I get the >impression that the SJGames people might well have thought of this, >whereas I'm pretty sure the French version never would have. That's purely subjective. Don't forget that the SJG version borrows immensily from the french one, and then build on top of it various of their own stuff (some of which I like and some of which I don't like). So that the core of what they do still can be found in the original game (and many of the things that are coming in the future can also be found in the original games). Otoh, SJG is a far bigger machine than Croc is, and they have a solid team of people working on supplements. I'm sure they are going to have lots more stuff out faster than the original game could. The original still is loads of fun to play and different enough in mood to be a game unto its own still. >So: the SJGames version is far more intricate, offers much more scope >for intelligent roleplaying, and is far easier to run if you're not >aiming for a Toon-type angels-with-big-guns adventure. Let's just say I disagree. The "mood" of SJG is too strict. Although you could play games in various style you wanted to, it currently has a very melodramatic tone to almost everything they have that makes it, imo, less flexible. The original game, otoh, mixes various kinds of things and their adventures, as they currently exists, range tremendously. >(NB: I haven't really looked through Stella Inquisitoris - In Nomine in >space -, so there might be some fun stuff in there.) It is also on my "to buy" list: it certainly looks really interesting (basically taking the stuff of the Bible's Revelations and putting it into a world of the future -- number of the beast and all that). My two cents, Denis ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 14:39:26 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: IN> Night Music: "...a skill known at Level 6 or better..." On page 31 of NM, in the second paragraph of Forces and Characteristics: "When a mortal succeeds at a skill roll known at Level 6 or better, that creates a point of Essence." This implies that skills are open-ended. Was this formerly "5 or better" or is the intent that the net Chararacteristic + Skill be 6 or better? Or are skills really open-ended? (Perhaps only for mortals?) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 03:59:37 +0100 From: Sam Kington Subject: Re: IN> Eli is more than he appears Casca wrote: [snip] > 7) The French version of IN had Jesus as an Archangel. > > Conclusion: Eli is Jesus. I wish to point out that the French version of IN *did* have Jesus as an Archangel. It had *loads* of Archangels. And Jesus was a spoilt Daddy's boy brat, who completely failed his mission on Earth and split the Jewish and Christian churches irredemiably, but is the most powerful because he's got his Dad's ear. There are quotes like (following the Crucifiction): "That didn't even hurt." Steps 1 to 6 I don't necessarily disagree with. But don't rely on the French version of IN for the final step. (Anyway, the French version has Jesus *and* Eli as Archangels, so if anything this would disprove the Eli-is-Jesus argument.) Sam - -- There are *my* opinions, dammit, and let no-one say otherwise. Home page: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/ INWO Homebrew: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/cgi/illuminati Cloning is the sincerest form of flattery. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 10:52:24 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: Gaming War Stories (Re: IN> Lilim Geases) Jeff Miller noted; > >Have we mentioned that Kyrios of Lightning are seriously obnoxious? > Kyrios are supposed to be obnoxious. That's their job. Heh..forget all that "omnipresence" and "perspective" stuff. Kyriotates are The Obnoxiousness of the Lord, embodying those aspects of Him that do things like throw snitfits and flood the entire planet, or wreck the life of a devoted follower just to prove He can, even though He already KNOWS He can and Lucifer does too... (Though, on a more serious note regarding Kyriotates of Jean...having read a few reports on them from people's games, I'm thinking they should be limited to a certain minimum tech level...`curtains' just shouldn't have the complexity to support a Servitor of Lightning. Plastic blinds, perhaps, because they're 1) plastic and 2) possess a minimal `mechanical' quality, but..no curtains, clothing, blocks of wood, etc. Living out in a wood or stone cabin with no modern touches should be as good against Kyrio's of Lightning as clearing out all the flowers is for Servitors of Novalis...) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 13:22:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Eli is more than he appears On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Sam Kington wrote: > Steps 1 to 6 I don't necessarily disagree with. But don't rely on the > French version of IN for the final step. Well, it wasn't supposed to be any sort of logical progression, really. I had intended to mention how the picture of Eli is rather semitic-looking, but realized that was simply a matter of personal interpretation. Also, isn't the Revelations cycle supposed to focus heavily on Eli? This would make one heck of a Revelation.... > (Anyway, the French version has Jesus *and* Eli as Archangels, so if > anything this would disprove the Eli-is-Jesus argument.) I wasn't really trying to -argue- anything....more like put forth a thought-provoking idea I had. Like the 'Dominic as Balseraph' idea, I don't take it all that seriously, simply considering it an interesting thought exercise. But if someone likes it enough to use in their games, great. - -- 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: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 11:10:32 -0600 (MDT) From: Kingsley Lintz Subject: Re: IN> Communicating with Superiors Em brought up; > My player felt frustration at, everytime they wanted to send off something > small like a status report to his Superior, he either had to drop > everything and go to heaven, or summon his Superior there on the ground. I've wondered about that, too...(and their comment somewhere about Novalis being likely to come up behind you at a concert and put her hands over your eyes is one reason I liked your idea for the Word-Bound having incidental effects on mortals...otherwise, the whole Disturbance thing just didn't seem to jibe...) > Superior (or whoever you report to) is a lot of hassle when all you want > to say is "not much going on here", and Summoning is a hell of a way to go > if you just want to confirm someone's identity or say, "Hey, I'm on the > right track" - and when you do, you're in disfavor for being a whiner, Though for the most part, I tend to hold that Earth-bound Celestials are supposed to be able to take care of themselves WITHOUT reporting in a lot. That's why they've been entrusted with this important and coveted job, and why they've been taught all those neet Songs and Attunements and stuff. So if there's not much going on, you shouldn't be wasting their time with it anyway. If you just want to confirm someone's identity, you're expected to get sneaky, like sending the Seraph up to ask. () And, of course, if you're on the right track..dandy; check in when you've reached the finish line, because THAT'S what your Superior wants to hear.. > Furthermore, the "Dominic drops in on his servants to check up on them > once a week" seems really extreme. Here's this busy guy, working on his Dominic and Jean, of course (and, for that matter, Asmodeus's `once a month' and Baal's noted tendancy to be `off leading his troops') sort of go against this, which I'm not quite happy with either... (I DO see it as another cue that Dominic's evil, mind...that kind of mistrust is a Balseraph trait for sure.) > What I THINK I'm going to do is try to instigate sort of celestial email. > For a point of essense, the Celestial in question can write something on a > note, and do a little Rite. For example, a servant of Yves can leave the > note in a book in the library, a servant of Gabriel can toss the note into > the fire, a servant of Andrealphus can stick a note in a copy of Penthouse Heheh...I can tell we'll be adopting this for our games, too...(Hm, do Servitors of Michael get frustrated with all this blasted report writing, crumple it up and throw it across the room to bonk someone on the head?) All told, I think I'd go with a combination of this and a bit of a hierarchy; Dominic doesn't check on people PERSONALLY once a week, because he has other things to do...but he does have one of his Tribunals try to catch up with you about that often, and there are a number of Tribunals who DON'T have other things to do... Jean has more of a tendancy to actually go over things personally, but even he probably has some automatic sorter on his e-mail...("Darnit, didn't I killfile him? Oh, he got Einstein's soul to finish that last equation and still spent 5 Essence for the invocation...guess I'd better read it, then..") So, probably, the Servitor of Marc writes his report and tucks it into his wallet, where he knows it'll disappear in a bit...the report shows up in one of Marc's Cathedrals, where a flunky picks it up and takes it to the report room. It gets read over by a couple higher up intermediaries, who then either file it, send back a form letter, or pass it on for review... {Which, of course, brings up Melvin, the Archangel of Bureaucracy, and Hubert, Demon Prince of Red Tape...} ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 13:23:48 -0500 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> Communicating with Superiors Kingsley Lintz wrote: {snip!} > So, probably, the Servitor of Marc writes his report and tucks it > into his wallet, where he knows it'll disappear in a bit...the report > shows up in one of Marc's Cathedrals, where a flunky picks it up and takes > it to the report room. It gets read over by a couple higher up > intermediaries, who then either file it, send back a form letter, probably in the form of the world's longest ATM receipt slip *G*. tom t., mandarin's butterfly to James the Stone Malakim ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #327 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.