From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Sep 17 18:20:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA28057 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 18:20:11 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id RAA17398 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 17:26:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 17:26:28 -0500 Message-Id: <199709172226.RAA17398@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 #345 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 Wednesday, September 17 1997 Volume 01 : Number 345 In this digest: Re: IN> Bright Malakim [Longish] Re: IN> A Few Questions IN> Counter-spamming: Existence proof of it working Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) Re: IN> Counter-spamming: Existence proof of it working Re: IN> Bright Malakim [Longish] IN> Anime Lilim IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) IN> Malakim Re: IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! IN> Seraphim in Heaven IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC Re: IN> Anime Lilim IN> Game Hooks, an amusing anecdote... Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) Re: IN> Anime Lilim Re: IN> About the four horsemen of the Apocalypse... Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC Re: IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! IN> Cruelty to characters (Re: Geas Entrapment) Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 17:52:46 -0400 (EDT) From: "Emily K. Dresner" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Malakim [Longish] > > in his own happy fairyland. It is possible, in fact, that Lucifer is > > running the whole show. No one knows, because they aren't exactly hosting > > their own call in talk shows. > There's an amusing thought for the upper reaches of > Heaven. "Hey, I've been promoted! Wahoo! I'm going upstairs! > Yeah..hey, I don't mean to criticize, but isn't it awfully, well, HOT, up > here?" (What, in all these years, NO ANGEL has EVER wondered why *no one > comes back*? 'Course, now I'm getting "Sweeney Godd", so I should > probably cut this short.) I had seriously, honest to god, considered this scenario for a while for my game. I junked it, I don't remember why, but there was a good rational why Heaven and Hell had to be seperate. Probably has something to do with canon, but I think it was just making my head hurt. I'd bring it back, if God and Lucifer ARE: a) mirror images b) the same person or c) Lucifer is THE only guy who knows what is going on. I'll take one of a and three of c. > > > >It makes perfect sense to me in sort of a twisted way. There was no need > > > >for honor or vengance against evil until the Fall, because it simply > > > >didn't exist. Thus, the Malakim did not exist until the Fall - a retained > 'Course, I'm not sure what MOST of the Choirs do up in Heaven. > (Seraphim, for example, are particularly pointless up there - you CAN'T > lie in the Angelic Tongue, after all...) But you can not say everything. I think angels have other purposes then just hanging around and being filler, but you never know. Maybe they really are just window dressing. > > > system right now that the GM can take some creative license. (If I didn't > > want creative license, I'd go play Vampire.) > (Once in a while, you say something that makes me think, > "THAT'S why we like Em so much...") And I thought it was my hair. :) > > > It makes a Malakim a paradoxial creature, who needs to destroy Evil to > > sustain itself, but if it succeeds in destroying Evil, it will, in turn, > > ultimatly end it's own continued existance. So it must exact bloody > Hey, kind of like the American Cancer Society. But without a web page. As a TOTAL non-seq: Oh, speaking of Vampire, I showed up to a session of a game, where I was being a particularly silly Malkavian. At this game was one of my In Nomine players, also a PC. I had brought reading material, which was my IN sourcebook, and the KULT supplement, Metropolis. So I thought I would give her a run for her money. I opened up the supplement, read a bit, and then stared at her. Susan said, "Oh, man, not that game. I hope you don't play that." I said, "No, but you do." I think she keeps wondering what I meant by that. :) - -Em, Demiurge ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 18:38:37 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> A Few Questions > > I'm getting this image of Satan killing and carving up Celestial > > corpses to build hell in, like the Norse creation myths. I *know* > > that's not what you meant, but... > > Anyone remember that old, old Pyramid article that presented Him > Upstairs and Lucifer as Superiors? Can't say so, no. I didn't start reading Pyramid for a while, and I stopped recently because there wasn't much I liked. I may start it again if I am convinced it will actually have around 1/2 material that is actually for a game I play. > In that, there was mentions of how Lucifer had carved the Caverns > of Hell from the undying corpse of the Metatron, which was a > pretty evocative passage. Ah, that's what sparked it. I knew I'd heard something like that before on this list. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:11:11 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: IN> Counter-spamming: Existence proof of it working On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 19:23:00 -0800, NotesServer4@hotmail.com wrote: We have closed the account referenced in your mail. Hotmail offers a unique service, providing individuals who might not have access to a computer messaging service the ability to send and receive e-mail messages without charge from anywhere in the world. Unfortunately, as is the case with most public services, there will be individuals who abuse their privileges by using the service in an improper manner. Hotmail does not in any way condone or support the sending of junk mail (aka spam) messages through our system. The Hotmail TOS strictly forbids this and we terminate all accounts that we are made aware that are in violation of the TOS. We appreciate your mail alerting us to the spammer using our system. Our ANTI-SPAM policy can be viewed at http://www.hotmail.com/nospam.html Visit the following ANTI-SPAM related Web sites for more information on how to combat SPAM and what you can do about it. "Help stop Scam Spammers!" http://www.junkemail.org/scamspam/ Maintainer of the SPAM-L FAQ http://www.ot.com/~dmuth/spam-l Complaint Addresses (GoodGuys|Unresponsive|Foe) http://www-fofa.concordia.ca/spam/complaints.shtml "If you want to improve your spam-fighting skills, check out" http://www.ot.com/~dmuth/spam-1 Anchor Desk "Special Spam Fighting Edition" http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_index_19970819.html How to Get Rid of Junk Mail, and Telemarketers http://www.csn.net/~felbel/jnkmail.html Best Regards, HotMail Staff - --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - --------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:11:00 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) On Tue, 16 Sep 1997 11:49:06 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>I don't see any reason to change that, but, hey, you're the one who >>pronounces canon. :) > > I'm not pronouncing canon here, yet. I'm just kicking around some >ideas to see if they bruise. And trying to see if we're reaching any >sort of "we both think this". I wouldn't mind giving them two chances, though one would be more suspenseful. With only one chance, they'd be more likely to spend essence (under the assumption they can) to make the best of it, and take the effects of being noisy. >>>>Some points: >>>>1. Will+Geaslevel will let high Will=12 Lilim unconditionally Geas most >>>>humans. The humans will have at most a CD of 6 while the Lilim will have a >>>>minimum CD of Geas+1, and she can spend Essence, which she couldn't before. >>> >>>Vicious. >> >>Not much more so than originally. In fact, maybe less so because the Lilim >>has to put points into Will, now. > >True... Still, it might be a reason to let them have only one chance. >>I don't know. The idea of having five plots based on serving Lilith seems >>like four too many for most campaigns. > > No more than 5 plots based on serving any of the other >characters' Superiors is "too many." Besides, if the GM felt like it, >all *nine* of those Geasa could wind up in the hands of somebody else, >from Odin to Vapula to Jack Smith who did Lilith a good turn when she >was in a giving mood. Bzzt! No trading Geases, right? >>If a Lilim could get a really good >>Geas to give to Lilith to release her from one of her Geases, I think that >>would be a plus. > >Oh, I'm sure that could work! No problem. It would be a "I want to >trade you this Geas for one of the Geases on me" deal. I'm sure that >Lilith might be interested. Bzzt! I would hope so, but under the recent no trading ruling, it's non-canonical. >>Just thinking as a GM, if you have a Free Lilim, you have to give her a >>chance to advance and choose her own destiny. As long as the Lilith Geases >>are hanging over her, she's not going to be a comfortable player. > >One is not supposed to be a comfortable player when one is doing a >Free Lilim. The Geasa are supposed to hang over one's head like a >sword. It's why I love the Free Daughters so! (That's why >mine has 9 Geas/6's...) Well, it takes all kinds... ;/ >Well, it's roughly 9 weeks of work, generally... And you *don't* >(*shouldn't*!) have to use them all up in a row! (Heck, sometimes >she might get Geased to help out one of the other PCs, when that >PC's Superior bought the Geas...) Bzzt! You're trading Geases again. >The main reason that the Free *have* those Geases is so that they have >the same plot-hooks as everyone else. Other PCs get ordered around >by their Superiors; Lilim get ordered around by Geas-holders. It's >the "This Way To The Plot" mechanism. Trouble is, a Superior can trade a player to another Superior. Status quo is: the Geas must by invoked by Lilith only. >If the GM *chooses* to run too many "Get Beth's Geasa knocked down >a little" adventures in a row, then that's a GMing problem. ... Agree. But I think most campaign will be angelic. So, most Lilim will want to become truly Bright Lilim. That means working off all the Geases to Lilith somehow. Until then, she isn't really part of the angelic team. With at least limited trading, a GM could use smoke and mirrors to get her freed pretty fast. Without it, the only way is to have Lilith assign the Lilim to work for an Angel. Since Lilith isn't stupid, she'll use a more efficient and more binding Geas/6. >>The difference is between humans being helpless pawns and having >>free will. I feel this is a very important issue for game feel. >>IN has stated it's a game where humans have free will; that should >>be lived up to. >> >>I'm not sure humans shouldn't have a fat Will bonus just because God >>created them with free will. It should be damn hard for a Celestial to >>force a human to do something, not the slam dunk it is now. > >There's a reason why a lot of stuff is "barring celestial intervention"... >And celestials get free will as well -- just mostly less of it... > > No opinion on that one... Well, it would be a different game almost... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:59:42 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> Counter-spamming: Existence proof of it working On Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:11:11 GMT, w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) wrote: >On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 19:23:00 -0800, NotesServer4@hotmail.com wrote: Apologies to all: I muffed the address and sent it to the wrong list. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 01:07:08 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: IN> Bright Malakim [Longish] > > > >tools to keep the balance. As an NPC explained, without Good or Evil, the > > > >humans might well just go pfft, and THEN where would everyone be? > > (I should follow this with the answer, which is "probably much happier", > Huh. My guess was, "At the corner ice-cream shop," but only after > I ruled out "Detroit." Reminds me of a quote, attribution forgotten: "Of course Heaven is perfect. I made it." "One does not necessarily follow the other. You also made New Jersey, and you seem to have had your hand in the Chicago Cubs, as well." > > in his own happy fairyland. It is possible, in fact, that Lucifer is > > running the whole show. No one knows, because they aren't exactly hosting > > their own call in talk shows. > > There's an amusing thought for the upper reaches of > Heaven. "Hey, I've been promoted! Wahoo! I'm going upstairs! > Yeah..hey, I don't mean to criticize, but isn't it awfully, well, > HOT, up here?" (What, in all these years, NO ANGEL has EVER > wondered why *no one comes back*? 'Course, now I'm getting > "Sweeney Godd", so I should probably cut this short.) It's an interesting idea - I've toyed with it on a level or two, and am still thinking of using it. But instead of God = Lucifer, God just uses souls like Hell does, as a giant Essence battery. It ties into the "God is evil" and "God is a Ethereal" ideas well. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 01:16:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Casca Subject: IN> Anime Lilim > On Tue, 16 Sep 1997 11:49:06 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy > wrote: > > > > No more than 5 plots based on serving any of the other > >characters' Superiors is "too many." Besides, if the GM felt like it, > >all *nine* of those Geasa could wind up in the hands of somebody else, > >from Odin to Vapula to Jack Smith who did Lilith a good turn when she > >was in a giving mood. This passage inspired another Strange Idea (tm). Imagine a Bright Lilim who, just out of the goodness of her heart, grants the occasional wish (using her resonance) to virtuous people without asking anything in return. Imagine this Lilim suddenly appearing one day to a lonely, frustrated college student, whose wish is "I want you to be my girlfriend forever!" Imagine what would happen if she fulfilled his wish.... Presenting "Belldandy as Bright Lilim". - -- 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: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 05:23:39 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! From the SJ Games Press Release: >September 15, 1997 > >New SJ Games Line Editors > >Two new Line Editors have been added to the growing list of Steve Jackson Games >contributors. >... >And taking over as In Nomine Line Editor is Elizabeth McCoy, who's nickname -- >"Archangel Beth" -- while appropriate, dates back to well before In Nomine was >published. "Beth will tackle the huge job of coordinating plot and game world >continuity for a roleplaying game that routinely uses six or eight different writers >per book," Managing Editor Scott Haring said. "She'll also help us come up with >future plot lines, pick the right authors for the right tasks, and probably do some >writing herself. She'll be busy." "Hallelujah, for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. "...The kingdom of this world is become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. "...King of Kings, and Lord of Lords." --Handel's Messiah, Hallelujah Chorus (Rev. XIX:6, XI:15, XIX:16) And, BTW, who cops the dissonance for, "...who's nickname..."? ;) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 01:07:08 +0000 From: "Nathaniel Eliot" Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) > >>>Some points: > >>>1. Will+Geaslevel will let high Will=12 Lilim unconditionally Geas most > >>>humans. The humans will have at most a CD of 6 while the Lilim will have a > >>>minimum CD of Geas+1, and she can spend Essence, which she couldn't before. > >> > >>Vicious. > > > >Not much more so than originally. In fact, maybe less so because the Lilim > >has to put points into Will, now. > > True... Not really valid, though - most characters want to balance between Will and Perception anyway, to resist Songs and Attunements, and to sense the Symphony. I'd say straight Will vs Will-(Geas Level). The one with the highest CD wins... > >Just thinking as a GM, if you have a Free Lilim, you have to give her a > >chance to advance and choose her own destiny. As long as the Lilith Geases > >are hanging over her, she's not going to be a comfortable player. > > One is not supposed to be a comfortable player when one is doing a > Free Lilim. The Geasa are supposed to hang over one's head like a > sword. It's why I love the Free Daughters so! (That's why > mine has 9 Geas/6's...) Ooof. I'd point out that one is not supposed to be a comfortable player playing *any* character - you're a player in a war with beings far more powerful than you on both sides, and often the side you're on is no safer for you than the other side. > Maybe, though it does muck with the body-chemistry. I'd say at a penalty to resist, then. I'd say that if the character succeeds against a DD, he/she doesn't have the Need. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com Better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. - Milton ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 09:41:57 GMT+10 From: "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Malakim In reply to: "It's very possible that is what God had in mind. Here's a model of some angels gone hideously screwy, and they're retained in Heaven as an instrument of Vengence, and a good solid object lesson. They kill, they maim, they destroy, all in the name of their own personal codes and the good of... someone. They are supremely useful, but they need the chains to restrain them." I have to say I disagree with this whole "Malakim are kind of demons" thread. Before I go further I'll say this is all IMO. By assuming that Malakim are already Fallen, therefore are selfish and evil, I feel you are missing the whole point of these angels. The Malakim represent God's vengeance. It's not nice but it's a part of what God is (in the IN book, and Old testament). The Malakim's resonance is for Honour. They do not go around killing people and stopping evil because it's fun or cool (although most Malakim grow to enjoy it, because that's what they were made to do). The Malakim have Oaths to live by. The two that most restrain their lives are given to them. They do not choose them. Malakim represent that aspect of God that says "I'm warning you, do this/ do not do this or I will be angry and you'll feel my wrath!" Malakim have their codes of honour so that if someone violates these codes they are able to exact vengeance. God did not want any of his angels to rebel (well maybe he did, but that's another debate), therefore those who did violated his wishes and are subject to his wrath, the wrath embodied in the Malakim. Malakim can be cruel, destructive and violent, but so can God. If you make Malakim demons instead of angels, you miss a big part of what IN is. God is not necessarily the nicest thing around. He embodies love, he is a parent, but even parents get angry and punish their children. The Malakim are the representation of this aspect, nothing more, nothing less. Malakim in general do not fall because they police themselves so well. They embody God's vengeance, therefore they practice it on any of their brethren who need it. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 00:55:48 -0500 (CDT) From: Donald G Bixler Subject: Re: IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! > And, BTW, who cops the dissonance for, "...who's nickname..."? ;) Whoah! Dissonance is being handed out for typos? I hope that I didn't mess up "The Word" Oops da Ogre, reading through "The Marches" and goetting over the flu mudgb4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 02:25:41 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Seraphim in Heaven >>> 'Course, I'm not sure what MOST of the Choirs do up in Heaven. (Seraphim, for example, are particularly pointless up there - you CAN'T lie in the Angelic Tongue, after all...)<<< The Angelic Players Guide will give more details on what angels do in Heaven. But remember, Seraphim are a lot more than celestial lie detectors (says the guy who wrote up the Seraphim for the APG). - -David http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DavidEdelstein/innomine.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 19:04:58 -1000 From: jumpshot@iniaccess.net.au (Karen J Davies) Subject: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC As a new owner/GM and new subscriber to the list, I've just got to comment on the quality of the stuff I've been reading... its GREAT. My query/point/whatever regards the nature of Jesus Christ within the In Nomine universe. My theory would be that JC was recruited as a Soldier of God by Eli and Yves, with Gabriel's assistance (Gives a whole new persepctive to the crying out to Eli Eli on the cross...). They found a very promising 30ish carpenters son, empowered him with more Forces and a couple of SOngs, and tried to right the Symphony with the help of a highly inteligent, Celestialy gifted and rather idealistic human. Yves would have known that JC was to die, it may have been hoped that because of the timing that the death would become a new starting point for human thought and help change the nature of the mundanes to a more selfless example. It didn't work out that way of course... I am sure Kronos, Lucifer and most of the infernal would have worked hard to corrupt the central message. They must have been very concerned for Lucifer to actually make a personal appearance to try and sabotage the plan in the wilderness... What do you guys think, or is this a too hot topic? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 11:58:29 +0200 (MET DST) From: Haavard Roenne Faanes Subject: Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Karen J Davies wrote: > My query/point/whatever regards the nature of Jesus Christ within the In > Nomine universe. > My theory would be that JC was recruited as a Soldier of God by Eli and > Yves, with Gabriel's assistance (Gives a whole new persepctive to the crying > out to Eli Eli on the cross...). They found a very promising 30ish > carpenters son, empowered him with more Forces and a couple of SOngs, and > tried to right the Symphony with the help of a highly inteligent, Celestialy > gifted and rather idealistic human. > What do you guys think, or is this a too hot topic? I think your theory works. However, I think I prefer the idea that JC is something more. Something not even all the AA's know the whole truth about. Gabriel was present at the conception of Christianity, but the was only following orders. From whom? God or Dominic? I think the theory of JC being something unique, rather than just another soldier has more potential. Especially if the AA's dont know for sure. What if Gabriel claims that he was acting acording to Gods will. Nobody would care since she's kinda unstable. Eli chose to sponsor this son of a carpenter as a Soldier, who would later be crucified. However, the resurrection came as a shock to heaven. Whats this a human rising from the dead? Only Yves was silent... Haavard R. Faanes Email: hoc@nvg.unit.no hoc@nuts.edu http://www.nvg.ntnu.no/~hoc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 07:38:38 -0400 (EDT) From: "Benjamin D. Hutchins" Subject: Re: IN> Anime Lilim > > Presenting "Belldandy as Bright Lilim". > An entertaining concept, but it's pretty obvious to me that she's a Cherub. :) (Now, just what sort, that's another question. 'Terrible Master Urd' showed us that she hides a great deal of her true nature and power when on Earth, for no readily explicable reason. For my take on that in IN terms, well, you'll just have to wait for me to finish my workup on her and her sisters. :) - --G. who needed Yet Another Project - really - -- Benjamin D. Hutchins, cofounder and Keeper-Straight of the Continuity Eyrie Productions, Unlimited - An AnimeTech Limited Company -><- Visit us on the World Wide Web at http://www.eyrie.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 10:48:03 -0400 (EDT) From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: IN> Game Hooks, an amusing anecdote... As I've mentioned before, I GM a party of Angels (and one reforming Lilim...). On occasion, I have to use trickery to get them to go where I want. This past week, the characters were moving fairly slowly, and I wanted things to go faster. So, the Kyriotate of Jean ("Sparky") had invaded a very handsome host (he had asked the Lilim out on a date...), when the host's cell phone rang. It turned out (the characters later discovered) that the caller was a Soldier of Andre', and the Kyrio's host was part of a "sex cult." To make matters worse, the Lilim, before she started reforming, was part of the "cult." So the Kyriotate shows up to the date "wearing" someone she's worried about finding her.... Kyriotates are so much *fun* Mark (I hope this is on topic...) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 07:44:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) > Bzzt! No trading Geases, right? > > Bzzt! I would hope so, but under the recent no trading ruling, it's > non-canonical. > > Bzzt! You're trading Geases again. I must have missed something... where did the putative no trading Geases ruling come from? Some of the ones you were responding to were about Lilith herself trading the Geases to somebody else. The In Nomine book doesn't just imply, but out and out _states_ that "Lilith can and will trade those favors to others," including demons, angels, and humans. - -Rob === Rob Knop === rknop@crl.com ==== http://www.wco.com/~rknop === Amiga PGP information at http://www.wco.com/~rknop/amiga_pgp Visit the Dramatic Exchange at http://www.dramex.org/ ================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 09:16:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Dennis C Hwang Subject: Re: IN> Anime Lilim On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Benjamin D. Hutchins wrote: > > > > Presenting "Belldandy as Bright Lilim". > > > > An entertaining concept, but it's pretty obvious to me that she's a > Cherub. :) Interesting! You thought so, too! > (Now, just what sort, that's another question. 'Terrible Master Urd' > showed us that she hides a great deal of her true nature and power > when on Earth, for no readily explicable reason. For my take on that > in IN terms, well, you'll just have to wait for me to finish my > workup on her and her sisters. :) I'd be very interested to see what you come up with. I'm also working on the idea (in a rather desultory fashion at the moment), and I'd be curious to see how others' takes on the concept relate to mine. - --Dennis, aka Imago, Kyriotate of Jordi dchwang@itsa.ucsf.edu xenopathologist at large! Deathwalker for President: for some *real* health care reform. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 09:19:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Dennis C Hwang Subject: Re: IN> About the four horsemen of the Apocalypse... On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Thomas Davidson wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Dennis C Hwang wrote: > > > Yeah...although, now that I think about it, it seems to me that Saminga as > > the sole representative of Death in the IN universe is a little lopsided. > > After all, Death shouldn't always fall into the demonic realm. > > > > Anyone interested in a writeup for Archangel Azrael? > > (Appears as a perky young black-clad Goth girl? :) > > > > Well, actually, I think the Endless would be neither Angels nor Demons. > Something in between, not caring about the War or its consequences. > > This is supported by the comics. Dream often found himself caught between > Angels and Demons, such as in "The Season of the Mist". In that story > Angels, Demons, and several pantheons were fighting over the Key to the > Gate of Hell. > > Although, the roles of Michael (Destruction), Yves (Destiny), > Beleth/Blandine (Dream) blur somewhat. Well, yeah, I was just being silly (me? never!). I'd probably go with the classical description of Azrael if I were to write him up. - --Dennis, aka Imago, Kyriotate of Jordi dchwang@itsa.ucsf.edu xenopathologist at large! Deathwalker for President: for some *real* health care reform. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:43:44 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC At 7:04 PM -1000 9/17/97, Karen J Davies wrote: >As a new owner/GM and new subscriber to the list, I've just got to comment >on the quality of the stuff I've been reading... its GREAT. > >My query/point/whatever regards the nature of Jesus Christ within the In >Nomine universe. ( Feel free to come up with any and all theories... Not even most angels know for sure -- and the ones who do, aren't talking.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:37:27 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Hallelujah, Archangel Beth! At 5:23 AM +0000 9/17/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >>From the SJ Games Press Release: > >>September 15, 1997 >> >>New SJ Games Line Editors >> ... > >And taking over as In Nomine Line Editor is Elizabeth McCoy, who's nickname -- >"Archangel Beth" -- while appropriate, dates back to well before In Nomine was [...] >And, BTW, who cops the dissonance for, "...who's nickname..."? ;) Not me! - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:41:13 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Cruelty to characters (Re: Geas Entrapment) At 1:07 AM +0000 9/17/97, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: >> >Just thinking as a GM, if you have a Free Lilim, you have to give her a >> >chance to advance and choose her own destiny. As long as the Lilith Geases >> >are hanging over her, she's not going to be a comfortable player. >> >> One is not supposed to be a comfortable player when one is doing a >> Free Lilim. The Geasa are supposed to hang over one's head like a >> sword. It's why I love the Free Daughters so! (That's why >> mine has 9 Geas/6's...) > >Ooof. (She bartered for a promise that certain Superiors & their Servitors couldn't ever acquire one of her Geases from Lilith. Of course, Asmodeus can always say, "My dear friend Vapula, I need one of your Servitors to acquire a Geas on a certain Free Daughter. I will, of course, reimburse you for the trouble." If he finds out.) >I'd point out that one is not supposed to be a comfortable player >playing *any* character - you're a player in a war with beings far >more powerful than you on both sides, and often the side you're on is >no safer for you than the other side. True, though the Free Daughters have it almost as bad as Outcasts and Renegades -- calling up Mom for help, even in the middle of a firefight, is usually going to result in yet another Geas. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 13:25:14 -0400 From: johnk@ascc01.ascc.lucent.com (John Karakash - Lucent ASCC) Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) > > No more than 5 plots based on serving any of the other > >characters' Superiors is "too many." Besides, if the GM felt like it, > >all *nine* of those Geasa could wind up in the hands of somebody else, > >from Odin to Vapula to Jack Smith who did Lilith a good turn when she > >was in a giving mood. > > Bzzt! No trading Geases, right? Except for Lilith... she _invented_ the darn things and can do stuff that no one else can do with them... like trading. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:35:36 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) At 4:11 AM +0000 9/17/97, Walt Mazur wrote: >On Tue, 16 Sep 1997 11:49:06 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy > wrote: >>>>>Some points: >>>>>1. Will+Geaslevel will let high Will=12 Lilim unconditionally Geas most >>>>>humans. The humans will have at most a CD of 6 while the Lilim will have a >>>>>minimum CD of Geas+1, and she can spend Essence, which she couldn't before. >>>> >>>>Vicious. >>> >>>Not much more so than originally. In fact, maybe less so because the Lilim >>>has to put points into Will, now. >> >>True... > >Still, it might be a reason to let them have only one chance. And one not based on their Will, but on how much they worked for that Geas? (Usually.) Dunno. I'd probably have to see both options in play. >>>I don't know. The idea of having five plots based on serving Lilith seems >>>like four too many for most campaigns. >> >> No more than 5 plots based on serving any of the other >>characters' Superiors is "too many." Besides, if the GM felt like it, >>all *nine* of those Geasa could wind up in the hands of somebody else, >>from Odin to Vapula to Jack Smith who did Lilith a good turn when she >>was in a giving mood. > >Bzzt! No trading Geases, right? Lilith trades Geases. She's the only one. Or, rather, you do her a favor and she gives you a Geas on a Lilim. And she could trade them to ethereals, celestials, and humans -- she knows a lot of people... >>>If a Lilim could get a really good >>>Geas to give to Lilith to release her from one of her Geases, I think that >>>would be a plus. >> >>Oh, I'm sure that could work! No problem. It would be a "I want to >>trade you this Geas for one of the Geases on me" deal. I'm sure that >>Lilith might be interested. > >Bzzt! I would hope so, but under the recent no trading ruling, it's >non-canonical. Lilim do not trade Geases. Lilith trades Geases. Also, a "trade" could be "I promise that I won't invoke this Geas save as you instruct me" (thus putting another Geas/1 on the Lilim). In fact, that is what most Lilim refer to when they speak of trading Geasa. >>>Just thinking as a GM, if you have a Free Lilim, you have to give her a >>>chance to advance and choose her own destiny. As long as the Lilith Geases >>>are hanging over her, she's not going to be a comfortable player. >> >>One is not supposed to be a comfortable player when one is doing a >>Free Lilim. The Geasa are supposed to hang over one's head like a >>sword. It's why I love the Free Daughters so! (That's why >>mine has 9 Geas/6's...) > >Well, it takes all kinds... ;/ And I don't get any points for it, either. >>Well, it's roughly 9 weeks of work, generally... And you *don't* >>(*shouldn't*!) have to use them all up in a row! (Heck, sometimes >>she might get Geased to help out one of the other PCs, when that >>PC's Superior bought the Geas...) > >Bzzt! You're trading Geases again. See above. I've thought this stuff out, believe it or not. >>The main reason that the Free *have* those Geases is so that they have >>the same plot-hooks as everyone else. Other PCs get ordered around >>by their Superiors; Lilim get ordered around by Geas-holders. It's >>the "This Way To The Plot" mechanism. > >Trouble is, a Superior can trade a player to another Superior. Status quo >is: the Geas must by invoked by Lilith only. No, **Lilith** can trade them. I'm SURE I said that. >>If the GM *chooses* to run too many "Get Beth's Geasa knocked down >>a little" adventures in a row, then that's a GMing problem. ... > >Agree. But I think most campaign will be angelic. Then what's a Lilim doing in it? If the GM thinks it's going to be a problem, he shouldn't have a Renegade in his group. >So, most Lilim will want to become truly Bright Lilim. (Not mine! She wants to be truly Free! She's just ticked off at Fate and fell in with "bad company.") >That means working off all the Geases to >Lilith somehow. Until then, she isn't really part of the angelic team. You want to play a Renegade Free Lilim, go ahead. That uncertainity is the price, and the appeal. (Note that non-Free Lilim Renegades don't have any Geases upon them -- just a ticked-off Prince or two after their hides.) >With at least limited trading, a GM could use smoke and mirrors to get her >freed pretty fast. Oh, I hope not... >Without it, the only way is to have Lilith assign the Lilim to >work for an Angel. Since Lilith isn't stupid, she'll use a more efficient >and more binding Geas/6. Hm? Unclear. If you mean that Lilith will charge more on the angel/AA, then that's quite possible. (Computer upgrades, maybe; Vapula's seem to blow up all too frequently.) >>>The difference is between humans being helpless pawns and having >>>free will. I feel this is a very important issue for game feel. >>>IN has stated it's a game where humans have free will; that should >>>be lived up to. >>> >>>I'm not sure humans shouldn't have a fat Will bonus just because God >>>created them with free will. It should be damn hard for a Celestial to >>>force a human to do something, not the slam dunk it is now. >> >>There's a reason why a lot of stuff is "barring celestial intervention"... >>And celestials get free will as well -- just mostly less of it... >> >> No opinion on that one... > >Well, it would be a different game almost... Might be interesting. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 22:07:41 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> New INom GM and the nature of JC On Wed, 17 Sep 1997 19:04:58 -1000, jumpshot@iniaccess.net.au (Karen J Davies) wrote: >As a new owner/GM and new subscriber to the list, I've just got to comment >on the quality of the stuff I've been reading... its GREAT. Welcome! >My query/point/whatever regards the nature of Jesus Christ within the In >Nomine universe. In Nomine--very appropriately, I think--leaves almost all such questions to the discretion of the GM. His nature should be what ever you want or need him to be for your campaign. Whether you take your inspiration from Handel's Messiah or Jesus Christ: Superstar is your decision. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 22:07:33 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: Geas Entrapment (Re: IN> Lilith's Potence) On Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:35:36 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>Still, it might be a reason to let them have only one chance. > >And one not based on their Will, but on how much they worked for that >Geas? (Usually.) Dunno. I'd probably have to see both options in >play. Hm. Dunno. How much the Lilim needs to work for the Geas hasn't entered the picture before that I recall. >Lilith trades Geases. She's the only one. Or, rather, you do her a favor >and she gives you a Geas on a Lilim. And she could trade them to >ethereals, celestials, and humans -- she knows a lot of people... Ok, I understood that the no trading rule was absolute. If Lilith is an exception, that makes a big difference. Hm... Maybe Geas trading is an Attunement Lilith might give out to her very favored Lilim? Almost a distinction-level reward. That would be a good one for when Lilith gets an expanded treatment. Of course, it would have to be traded to a Lilim or a Superior with the power to enforce it, unless either the trading attunement itself or an additional attunement allowed enforcing the Geas. Note that I am not suggesting an attunement to Geas, but just to be able to enforce a Geas traded to you. > Lilim do not trade Geases. Lilith trades Geases. >Also, a "trade" could be "I promise that I won't invoke this Geas save >as you instruct me" (thus putting another Geas/1 on the Lilim). In fact, >that is what most Lilim refer to when they speak of trading Geasa. Sorry, I clearly misunderstood the ruling. I gues we'll see the official canon when the FAQ gets updated next. >>>If the GM *chooses* to run too many "Get Beth's Geasa knocked down >>>a little" adventures in a row, then that's a GMing problem. ... >> >>Agree. But I think most campaign will be angelic. > >Then what's a Lilim doing in it? If the GM thinks it's going to >be a problem, he shouldn't have a Renegade in his group. I see Lilim as right on the edge, as indicated by Lilith's odd placement in IN. She isn't quite a Prince(ss). She has that level of power, but not that level of submission to Lucifer. Somehow she's struck a special deal. >>With at least limited trading, a GM could use smoke and mirrors to get her >>freed pretty fast. > >Oh, I hope not... Wall, not completely freed, but with her Geases and oaths all to AAs or other angels. Bright, I should have said. >>Without it, the only way is to have Lilith assign the Lilim to >>work for an Angel. Since Lilith isn't stupid, she'll use a more efficient >>and more binding Geas/6. > >Hm? Unclear. If you mean that Lilith will charge more on the angel/AA, >then that's quite possible. (Computer upgrades, maybe; Vapula's >seem to blow up all too frequently.) What I was trying to say is that you get the most value from Geases as /6. Six Geas/1's can be done in six hours; three Geas/2's, in three days; two Geas/3's, in two weeks; but one Geas/6 takes a year to work off. Also, Geas/6's represent the most odious tasks. >>>>I'm not sure humans shouldn't have a fat Will bonus just because God >>>>created them with free will. It should be damn hard for a Celestial to >>>>force a human to do something, not the slam dunk it is now. ... >>Well, it would be a different game almost... > >Might be interesting. Somehow I think TPTB aren't going to go for that level of change. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #345 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.