From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Jan 21 14:03:38 1998 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 OAA03531 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:03:38 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA06666 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:57:42 -0600 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:57:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199801211957.NAA06666@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 #581 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, January 21 1998 Volume 01 : Number 581 In this digest: IN> The singular of "Lilim" (was Raphael) Re: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Re: IN> Seven Re: IN> Evil Idea Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed Re: IN> The singular of "Lilim" (was Raphael) Re: IN> Raphael Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Re: IN> Seven Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed Re: IN> Raphael Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Re: IN> Raphael Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Fair Exchange Re: IN> By Any Other Name IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking IN>Lying Re: IN>Lying [Fluff] Re: IN> Seven Re: IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:08:31 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> The singular of "Lilim" (was Raphael) A quick web-search gets me references to Ardad Lili, Ardat-Lile, and Irdu Lili as Babylonian or Sumerian precursors to Lilith, plus a reference to a kind of Babylonian/Sumerian storm demoness called a lillu. Did any of these make it into Hebrew. "Lilim" certainly did, and it seems funny that there should have been no singular for the plural. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:19:21 -0500 (EST) From: IQJason@aol.com Subject: Re: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Kevin Walsh writes: "Another linguistic nitpick. That show is allegedly set in Ancient Greece, isn't it? Gabrielle is just a tad anachronistic." True. But, then again, so is "A Midsummer Night's Dream." The show goes down much better if you see it as a pastiche of mythological elements. yours, IQJ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:26:45 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Seven >Temperance Gabriel Gabriel hardly seems to embody Temperance. - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:31:01 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Evil Idea >> << He controls the Armies of God with a ruthless fist, and attempts to extend >> the Catholic Church upon Earth to sway the hearts and minds of the humans. >> >> >> >> God is Power >> >> Power for the sake of Power > >No no no - God is an iron. Iron, Lion, Zion. - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:35:19 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed >-David (Just imagine a Lilim carrying a folder of rare Magic cards around >at a gaming convention....) No thank you no. I would rather not think about 2000 zit faced 16 year olds at the command of a Lilim. Ewww. - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:42:48 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> The singular of "Lilim" (was Raphael) >A quick web-search gets me references to Ardad Lili, Ardat-Lile, > and Irdu Lili as Babylonian or Sumerian precursors to Lilith, >plus a reference to a kind of Babylonian/Sumerian storm demoness >called a lillu. Did any of these make it into Hebrew. "Lilim" >certainly did, and it seems funny that there should have been no >singular for the plural. > >Earl Maybe the singular of Lilim is Lilim. Like sheep and fish and deer. - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:46:01 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> Raphael > Ah, but with my Line Editor hat on, I become the > Demon Princess of Nitpicking. Djinn, of course. (And very good > friends -- in as much as Djinn have friends -- with Asmodeus. > He does the Game, and Demon Princess Beth makes sure the rules > are only inconsistant when he wants them that way...) Hmmm, what kinda Attunements do you hand out to Habbaalah, and where do I sign up?? Brandon, who wouldnt mind serving the Demon Princess of Nitpicking - -- (lore@tmgbbs.com) \\/// Brandon Lance Quina (x x) ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:49:41 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > Is everyone on this list forgetting Beleth? I'm terribly terribly > disappointed in all of you. Well, its easy to forget her. She stakes out those marches so much that she's easy to overlook. The only superior who I overlook more than Beleth is Blandine. - -- (lore@tmgbbs.com) \\/// Brandon Lance Quina (x x) ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:51:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) > Kevin Walsh writes: > > "Another linguistic nitpick. That show is allegedly set in Ancient Greece, > isn't it? Gabrielle is just a tad anachronistic." > Someone else wrote this: > True. But, then again, so is "A Midsummer Night's Dream." The show goes down > much better if you see it as a pastiche of mythological elements. > Not that I've read "A Midsummer Night's Dream", but isn't that supposed to be set in Faerieland anyway? Or some of it? I'd be worried if there weren't anachronistic elements (in the sense that Faerieland shouldn't have the same relationship to time as we do). But if I'm not mistaken, Xena does not purport to be located in another world, or in Faerieland. Of course, the only real reason it bothers me is that I was a great fan of "Robin of Sherwood", which _did_ have magic and mythic elements, but which were appropriate to time and period. (Before someone mentions Herne, I would point out that Herne existed before the English invasion of Britain, I think, and could therefore exist afterward. I have problems with people being called Gabrielle before the name existed in that form.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:57:29 +0100 (MET) From: David Skogsberg Subject: Re: IN> Seven On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Jesse wrote: > >Temperance Gabriel > > Gabriel hardly seems to embody Temperance. Now Temperament, on the other hand... cd (Someone suggested Tzadiqel or however it's spelled. Sounds good to me.) - -- d97skog@dtek.chalmers.se | cd skogsberg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:04:27 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed > >-David (Just imagine a Lilim carrying a folder of rare Magic cards around > >at a gaming convention....) > > No thank you no. I would rather not think about 2000 zit faced 16 year > olds at the command of a Lilim. Ewww. > I pretend to take offence at that! I play Vampire: the Eternal Struggle, though not Magic: the Gathering. (Not having any money this year is an impediment to starting a new habit.) And I'm not 16, or a kid. I shall pointedly ignore all comments referring to zit-facedness. Of course, the big problem with the strategy is that the Lili has to obtain those cards herself, which is difficult indeed. I've seen people buying stacks of cards, who found that most of them were duplicates. And it can be hard for a non-enthusiast to tell what's rare and what isn't. I got a card called "The Hungry Coyote" in something like my third Sabbat pack, swapped it away for another card which I reckoned was rarer, and never found "The Hungry Coyote" again. Similarly with "Information Highway". And sometimes Fate takes a hand. I have never succeeded in getting the card "Sudden Reversal". Most other people I play it with have three or four of them. I only ever got one "Wake with Evening's Freshness" either. (Ironically enough it was the first deck I got.) It's not a reliable strategy, and I doubt that most Lilim would even consider it. It's a pretty obscure subject, after all. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:14:56 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > I totally agree. > I'm glad to see I'm not just hallucinating. :) Not that your hallucinating but I disagree :) I kinda like the expanded Superior writeupes. Atleast, the ones that ive read so far. I thought Laurence was written up very well, although I wasnt too thrilled on the write-up for Saminga (abit too stupid for death, if you ask me). I liked the Write Up of Gabriel. Ive never had so many story ideas in one section of a book in any other game. Belial was good to. I never really liked Beleth or Blandine--- until I read their write-ups.. I havnt gotten Heaven & Hell yet-- but I have no doubt that ill like some of it, dislike other parts of it, and make do.. The new superiors.. Well, I agree with you there. We dont need any more superiors. Fluerity almost got thrown out from my game, as I /had/ a demon of drugs in my game-- but I did get an idea from the writeup that ended up helping my plot more than anything else.. If id gotten the book any later into my game, though, he woulda been thrown out. However, usually you can ignore the new princes and still stick to canon. Afterall, they are /minor/ superiors. They arnt supposed to be in the action as much, or as important as the bigger superiors. Their words will overlap with the other princes-- Just because Christopher comes along and is in the heavenly host dosnt mean that Novalis is gonna start telling her Servitors to not help children and things like that.. I /like/ broad words. In my In Nomine game-- Novalis' word of flowers equals Peace, Love, Some Rock (woodstock and things like that) certain drugs, hippys.. Even if we get an archangel of love--- his word will be weaker, simply because Novalis overlaps his, and she has more servitors.. > I personally, use none of the new Superiors, not even from the GM > screen. My reasons include: Im planning on having Fleurity and Christopher (the only new ones ive read up on) be a part in my game. > This is something mimicked in some Vampire games I see around - people > advertizing with 'Original Sourcebook Only'. That is how we play as > far as I know. We find there are plenty of fun things to throw into > a game without resorting to Deux Ex Expansion-Sourcebook. (Although > with Susan, one can never tell these things.) Well, as cool as it would be. If Vampire only printed the basic set and then no suppliments they wouldnt make any money. People would eventually all have the basic supplement. Same with In Nomine-- as long as people are willing to pay money for the supplements, they will be published.. Despite the fact that the game promises to be 'living and breathing' I havnt noticed all that much diffrent from the other games.. The supplements have a short adventure at the back. Thats perfectly fine.. Im all for it.. Expanded Write-Ups for the Superiors are no diffrent than-- for example --the clanbooks for vampire, or 'campaign expansions' for an AD&D campaign.. For instance-- I had played around with Tremere for along time before somebody showed me the Tremere clanbook.. They didnt match my view of the Tremere.. Thus the clanbook wasnt used.... When a game first comes up, to be playing it-- you /will/ make some things that will be true to your game and not to others. Thats because there /isnt/ a canon. Thus, when they publish this other stuff, it will conflict.. That dosnt mean they shouldnt make new superiors and expanded write-ups. Ill use them. Im sure others will too (look at some of the online writeups, there's more new superiors than you can shake a stick out-- obviously some people think there arnt enough) - -- (lore@tmgbbs.com) \\/// Brandon Lance Quina (x x) ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:24:28 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Gluttony vs. Greed >Of course, the big problem with the strategy is that the Lili has to >obtain those cards herself, which is difficult indeed. Not reallt. Just grab a Soilder of Hell, take a seller outside and *wham* *pow* *zap!* You now have all of his cards. Better stop this theard. I had a nightmare flash of players doing this. Pass me the Lithuim - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:29:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Raphael > Hmmm, what kinda Attunements do you hand out to Habbaalah, and > where do I sign up?? > > Brandon, > who wouldnt mind serving the Demon Princess of Nitpicking > > (For my own peculiar reasons, I'm modelling all of these on the Lust attunements, but first the dissonance.) These demons stay verbally to their victims but distant from any intellectual sympathy. It's dissonant for Beth's Servitors to feel sympathy for an argument, and they are strictly prohibited from feeling or showing concern for the main points of a discussion going on around them. Arguments exist only to be ruthlessly nitpicked. A Balseraph of Nitpicking can force the victim to enjoy lecturing others about any nit the Balseraph has picked with them, for a number of minutes equal to his Celestial Forces. A victim may resist with a Will roll, but if that roll fails, a check digit of 6 indicates that he is now permanently wired to feel that particular nit to be of immense importance, no matter how trivial it may be. Beth's Djinn, who are miserably compulsive about it anyway, are the best at giving nits their full attention. They have the uncanny ability to keep a person in extreme annoyance, that state of mind in which a person is most susceptible to lashing out in fury. As long as the demon continues harping on about a particular nit, the person will pay no attention to anything else that is going on - and the demon may add his Ethereal Forces to any Will roll to influence his victim and to any resonance thereafter if he is attuned to that target. The Calabim of Nitpicking may do celestial damage to any target whose statements they can nitpick - even one protected by a corporeal vessel. Sadly, this attack will not do the final hit of damage that would cost the victim one of his Forces. The Habbalah who serve Beth never suffer a reversal of their resonance if their target resists; the emotional storms they generate merely spin pseudo-randomly (the precise target is in fact generated by a "random" seed determined at character creation) into the world and afflict someone else. Also, these angels may add their Ethereal Forces to any use of their resonance against someone who has just made a trivial factual error that the Demon has corrected. The Lilim of Nitpicking may or may not be Beth's favourite minions. (She asked for a full page in which to enumerate their powers fully and precisely, but basically it boils down to the fact that I was too lazy to write it.) They automatically detect what a victim needs if they successfully nitpick one of his statements. Beth's Shedim, by agreeing fervently, can move at will into any vessel whose owner is nitpicking someone. Also, they may add their Ethereal Forces to any resonance roll against a person they are currently nitpicking. Impudites who serve the Word of Nitpicking may add their Celestial Forces toward using their resonance on anyone who has joined in when they were nitpicking someone. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:32:27 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > Is everyone on this list forgetting Beleth? I'm terribly terribly > > disappointed in all of you. > > Well, its easy to forget her. She stakes out those marches so much > that she's easy to overlook. The only superior who I overlook more > than Beleth is Blandine. > Remember that the Marches are closer to humans than much else of what goes on in the War. _Everyone_ goes to some corner of the Marches when they sleep. To suggest that either of those Superiors is irrelevant is missing the point entirely. And Beleth, at any event, doesn't ignore the Corporeal world. The seeds for nightmares are often planted there. Would you have nightmares if a random stranger cut your eyes out? (A schtick my Calabite of Beleth _will_ manage to do eventually.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:30:42 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > Is everyone on this list forgetting Beleth? I'm terribly terribly > > disappointed in all of you. > > Well, its easy to forget her. She stakes out those marches so much > that she's easy to overlook. The only superior who I overlook more > than Beleth is Blandine. > But they are so...... useful. Really. Honesty. *Do the GM Laugh Evilly thang* Actually, I find scads of uses for Blandine and Beleth. They are easy to forget, and that makes them all the more interesting. Although they aren't politically involved, if one forgets the Marches one can get onesself into a tenuous position quickly. All that is important to remember is that THEY don't forget. They might not care what goes on inside, but between the two of them they have an entire plane of existance. Not something to be taken lightly. - - Em, Balseraph of Balseraphin'. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:35:11 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) Kevin Walsh wrote: > Not that I've read "A Midsummer Night's Dream", but isn't that > supposed to be set in Faerieland anyway? No, it's set in Athens and environs, on the occasion of the marriage of King Theseus to Hippolyta, Queen of the Amazons. So the setting is earthly, but also in Classical mythology, to which we proceed to add Anglo-Saxon fairy lore. Moderns have no monopoly on mixing genres and settings. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:00:01 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Raphael > > > (For my own peculiar reasons, I'm modelling all of these on the Lust > attunements, but first the dissonance.) > Servitor Attunements, Rites and Distinctions. Servitor Attunements: Compulsive Nitpicker: This power costs 1 Essence, and allows a demon to imprint any trivial correction upon a person's psyche. The victim may make a Will roll to resist his urges, but if he fails, he'll have no goal except to satisfy his desire to harp on about that nit, for a number of hours equal to the demon's total Forces. Note that this attunement does not work upon females, as it specifies "he" in the description. This also applies to all other powers granted by Beth. Nor can Habbalah, Soldiers or Undead buy any power which specifies that a demon uses it. After all, Habbalah are angels. Nitpick of Death This power permits a demon (but not a Habbalah, as noted above), by succeeding in a Will roll, to attempt to kill someone who has joined the demon in nitpicking someone. This is considered a physical attack, doing hits equal to (the check digit times twice the Essence spent.) Distinctions: Knight of Infernal Pressure The demon or angel can detect an individual's degree of verbal accuracy, both at that moment and in his life as a whole. Beth always grants this rank to any of her Servitors who correctly nitpicks a Seraph. Captain of Stunned Relief Beth's Captains can bring a person who knows them well instant pleasure by refraining from nitpicking that person, increasing all rolls to manipulate that person for the scene by the demon or angel by +4. Baron of Eternal Agreement A Baron of Nitpicking can make someone who's joined him in nitpicking agree to any proposition by the demon or angel, even an argument the victim wouldn't normally consider. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:07:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (was Re: Gluttony vs. Greed) > Kevin Walsh wrote: > > > Not that I've read "A Midsummer Night's Dream", but isn't that > > supposed to be set in Faerieland anyway? > > No, it's set in Athens and environs, on the occasion of the > marriage of King Theseus to Hippolyta, Queen of the Amazons. > So the setting is earthly, but also in Classical mythology, > to which we proceed to add Anglo-Saxon fairy lore. Moderns > have no monopoly on mixing genres and settings. > My apologies. And don't send any Calabim of Nitpicking after me. They might visit me in the Marches later on that night. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:16:23 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > > I totally agree. > > I'm glad to see I'm not just hallucinating. :) > > Not that your hallucinating but I disagree :) I may be hallucinating anyway. I'm very suspicious of the drinking water in the building, considering everything else that has gone on the last two days. > > It's a good thing that I have Wired 3, two smart links, and a pair of Ingram Smartguns with exploding and hollow headed bullets alternating in threes. :) > I kinda like the expanded Superior writeupes. Atleast, the ones that > ive read so far. I thought Laurence was written up very well, although > I wasnt too thrilled on the write-up for Saminga (abit too stupid for > death, if you ask me). > I like them in an off hand sort of 'Hmmm... nice' way. Certainly not in a 'Oh my god this is so cool I need it right now' sort of way. It's a perk, and they would be better if they came in just one big volume. > The new superiors.. Well, I agree with you there. We dont need > any more superiors. Fluerity almost got thrown out from my game, as > I /had/ a demon of drugs in my game-- but I did get an idea from > the writeup that ended up helping my plot more than anything else.. > > If id gotten the book any later into my game, though, he woulda > been thrown out. However, usually you can ignore the new princes > and still stick to canon. Afterall, they are /minor/ superiors. So my question is, why put out minor Superiors? Is not everything equal? I would think that a Superior is a Superior, and among the Demon Princes only the strong survive. You don't get to be 'lesser' or 'greater', unless we want to have a new scale of advancement for NPCs, putting a new step between 'Duke of Blah' and 'Prince'. And if they are minors, why do they still have the Prince moniker? (I see Archangels being more permissive in this, but only just.) > I /like/ broad words. In my In Nomine game-- Novalis' word of flowers > equals Peace, Love, Some Rock (woodstock and things like that) certain > drugs, hippys.. Even if we get an archangel of love--- his word will > be weaker, simply because Novalis overlaps his, and she has more > servitors.. Er, and spanking naughty Seraphim. Long story. > > This is something mimicked in some Vampire games I see around - people > > advertizing with 'Original Sourcebook Only'. That is how we play as > > far as I know. We find there are plenty of fun things to throw into > > a game without resorting to Deux Ex Expansion-Sourcebook. (Although > > with Susan, one can never tell these things.) > > Well, as cool as it would be. If Vampire only printed the basic > set and then no suppliments they wouldnt make any money. People would > eventually all have the basic supplement. > Ah ha. This is an official RANT warning. If you have a RANT filter, enable it NOW. It'll save me some time and irritation later. Thank you, the Management. That, I think, is the entire problem. My friends/player characters explained it to me pretty well - the first sourcebook, and usually it's updated editions, are generally interesting, helpful, flexible, and a decent game, all things considering. But gamers who are in it for the role-playing, as in creating new universes, dealing with well designed new characters made out of the ether, the whole nine yards, are really in the minority. Gamers buy games to be, well, gamers. There are tons of examples, just go on IRC and talk to them for a while. Nothing is cooler then a new spell, toy, or gadget, if it makes them more powerful, and can add something cool to the new character sheet. As long as these people will buy the supplements, they'll continue to be published, and I'll continue to froth because it's what I do best. What I worry about is the COOL factor, which struck FASA and the Shadowrun system pretty hard, along with say, TSR and White Wolf. It's like some sort of weird arms race, where each supplement has to be cooler, neater, and slicker then not only the rest, but the entire gaming world, to attain some unreachable height of 'Ubercoolness'. After a while, when the world has been blown up five times, hundreds of Superiors have been added, dozens of new choirs are available, and thousands of songs, NPCs, and equipment, the game just becomes an unplayable mash. Am I wrong? I don't think so. There are things that can be done with this system to put out really cool supplements (see RIFTS as an example) but I'm still waiting. There has yet to be as anything as wonderful as, say, when the first Rigger Black Book came out (a marvel of gaming as I've ever seen). Even KULT suffers from this, but at a MUCH lesser extent. In a quest to be cool, they put out two unreadable magic supplements, and they 'Outed' the Demiurge. Many people feel this destroyed the game as a whole. Did it? The GM can easily ignore such material, of course, it's 'their game', but it's hard to buy further from the company (Target), because this is now carried through all future supplements. As a GM, I can theoretically 'ignore' all supplements, but if there is something I WANT that comes out, then it incorporates all the past information I DIDN'T want. I'll put in the 'you suck' line and save the trouble: "Em, how dare you not buy stuff. You suck." There, and done. But, that's the major problem. I could post say, my writeup of Raphael (to push a few buttons) but it isn't 'canon', it 'contradicts future supplements' and it is 'not recommended for use'. Great. Wonderful. Why don't I just hang myself now? What is the point of a gaming system you cannot expand on by yourself and STILL get the pleasure of buying the supplements and adding new stuff? I feel pretty detered from adding anything new to the system, and since that was my main interest in the game, it's hard to keep passing it around as 'the greatest thing since sliced bread' via word of mouth. Not that I don't respect the writers and appreciate what they do. I just think they need a little customer input from us hard-cores. So that's my rant. Happy to get it out of my system. > Despite the fact that the game promises to be 'living and breathing' > I havnt noticed all that much diffrent from the other games.. The > supplements have a short adventure at the back. Thats > perfectly fine.. Im all for it.. Me neither, but my rant which started back in August was that I didn't like my information with the modules, because I don't play modules. > When a game first comes up, to be playing it-- you /will/ make some > things that will be true to your game and not to others. Thats because > there /isnt/ a canon. Thus, when they publish this other stuff, it > will conflict.. And that gets to be a problem when one interacts heavily on mail lists. :) > That dosnt mean they shouldnt make new superiors and expanded write-ups. > Ill use them. Im sure others will too (look at some of the online > writeups, there's more new superiors than you can shake a stick out-- > obviously some people think there arnt enough) > Apparently. This is all just criticism from one player to another. I really really like the system, which is why I worry about where it is going. The original source book was wonderful, for all it's bugs and bad combat system and all that other good stuff. There was so much material to play with, it was amazing. Like a breath of fresh air. But the game is becoming, like you said, like every other gaming system. Maybe it's a symptom of the gaming industry, or maybe I had really high expectations and wanted another KULT (except not in Swedish). It's hard to tell. Me, I keep playing like a junky crack addict needing another fix, and I will my game again in a week. I'm disheartened, but there's not much else I can do except ignore the supplements and hope for the best. The worst part is the removal of the mysteries, and the end to idle speculation. The more source material there is, the less speculation there can be, because it's all defined in canon, just buy the book. And that's what really makes me sad. It's too bad, really. But there is nothing I can do about it without bringing on three page rants. Oh well. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:31:42 GMT From: maya@tcp.co.uk (GR Cogman) Subject: Re: IN> Fair Exchange >At 15:23 20/01/98 -0500, you wrote: >>Oh man, this stuff is priceless, even if I don't get half the Brit jokes. > >Thanks! Thanks also (or blame if you prefer) to Maya for the initial >encouragement/nudge. > >jo I'm very glad I gave it. That was _excellent_. (Write some more? :)) Maya, working now on more Caliah and Maher - --- Maya, Elohim of Eli in service to Blandine maya@tcp.co.uk - -- "There are those who say that wizards are subject to temptations and addictions beyond the understanding of ordinary men: the addiction to shape-changing, or to meditation under the influence of certain herbs and conditions of the stars; the obsession with knowledge, and the development of power. Yet this is not so. Temptation is temptation, obsession is obsession, and choice is choice." - Isar Chelladan, Precepts of Wizardry. -- "Dog Wizard", Barbara Hambly. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:09:12 -0500 (EST) From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Hart, Joanna wrote: > I totally agree. Like, how many people are using any of the superiors who > didn't appear in the original sourcebook? *raises hand* Though I am selective about it. As my players will attest, I'm more inclined to use a new Prince than Archangel, due to how I perceive the powerbase of Heaven and Hell. Angels, in my game, tend to work together, just because they're the good guys and therefore are united in their cause to Kick Demon Butt. Thus, there are fewer Archangels, because the Host is more concerned with doing its duty than worrying about who can be an Archangel and who can't. Demons, OTOH, are a squabbling, fractious lot, who are just as likely to engage in internecine warfare as they are to fight with angels. Hell is all about personal power, so there are more Demon Princes. So Fleurity, Mammon, etc are all in use, whereas Christopher is just a (powerful) Cherub of Creation in service to Destiny. Zadkiel I like, and intend to use. > I do hope Kobal's final prank is one of the things that never gets defined > in canon tho. As for cruelty, I actually think he is the one who probably > has the best claim. Its in the nature of dark humour to /really/ enjoy other > people's misfortune, I'm fond of stating that Kobal's word should actually be Schadenfreud. (I hope I spelled that right.) > and his impudites don't even pick up dissonance for > killing people in a prank (which I guess includes torture as well) -- that > sort of indicates the mindset -- they can shrug off anything as 'oh well, it > was funny at the time'. "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke." > some players together for some reruns of 'Dad's Army' playing squaddies in > one of Baals more notoriously useless regiments -- I adore incompetent evil > -- all their mission briefings could begin with 'If this was at all > important to the cause, you rabble would not have been assigned to it' and > go on from there, and I could base all their NPC army officers on the guys > from Blackadder Goes Forth. But I digress.). If you write it, I will plunder it for use. :) - -- Casca, Seraph of Archives (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, 21 Jan 1998 14:12:27 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking (Nice try, Kevin. Beth, however, seems more related to Asmodeous than Andre, though.. Here's my shot) BETH, Princess of Nitpicking 'the world isnt that! this refrence on page 562 clearly states that it couldnt even be anything even remotly like that.' Beth and his Servitors are the Lawyers of Hell. They can convince /anyone/ of /anything/ and usually find several refrences in some obscure context to prove that they are right. The Princess of Nitpicking, a Djinn, isnt all that powerful in Hell-- She gets along very well with Asmodeus, who values her abilitys. She is widly feared, however, for her Balseraphs often serve closly with Asmodeus' as *hells lawyers*. What could be more feared than the lawyers of hell? Above all Beths' purpose is to prove that she is right, and all others are wrong. *Noone* has ever one an arguement with Beth, except Lucifer himself-- and even then, she put up a fairly good debate. A debate soo well that afterward Lucifer gave her the word she bears proudly to this day. DISSONANCE: Servitors of Beth generate dissonance if they refrain from correcting what they percieve as an error on the part of anyone-- even their dearest friends. BAND ATTUNEMENTS - ---------------- BALSERAPHS Beths' Balseraphs can add their Ethereal Forces to any attempt to attack someone elses arguement, or defend their own. Balseraphs of Beth are the best debaters in hell. DJINN Djinn working for Beth can, on a successful perception roll, divine a page number (and, at highter check digits, even quote abit from the book) of a book that will disprove the arguement of anybody-- even if they are correct! Optionally, he can find a refrence that would defend an arguement--- but whats the fun in that?? CALABIM Beths' Calabim can use their resonance on any refrences aimed at destroying their arguement. Sources suddenly agree with the demon, and the person who was using these refrences seems foolish. HABBALAH Habbalah radiate an aura of 'correctness'. Anyone must make a will-roll to contradict a Habbalah of Beth. They can usually stop a arguement with mortals simply by stating their opinion. LILIM Beths' Lilim can look in someones eyes, and make a resonance roll (perception based). They can tell any doubts that person has-- about a debate, or even about their life in general. SHEDIM Beths' Shedim not only disagree with the way you live your life, there pigheaded about it. They dont have to pervert you, but by the time there done you're life will be the Shedims idea of 'perfection'. Do you really wanna know what a Shedims idea of perfection is?! IMPUDITE Impudites can steal essence from someone they have successfully defended or attacked in a debate without having charmed them. If the target is charmed, they may add their Celestial Forces to the resonance roll. Brandon, Habbalite of Nitpicking ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:19:26 -0500 (EST) From: Dan Ozdowski Subject: IN>Lying So anyways, I was sitting around considering Balseraphdom (since it looks like I'll be playing my first one very shortly), and I kinda got the giggles. This is what did it: (Hmm, I should have marked this as fluff, cause it's not meant to be serious) A Balseraph totally believes his lies, correct? A balseraph doesn't consider his lies lying. Also, unlike the Habbalah, a balseraph doesn't maintain delusions of being an angel - so CONSCIENTIOUS lying shouldn't offend it as it would a seraph. Therefore, a balseraph with the lying skill could delude itself in preparation to lying and believe something false, then decide to lie and tell the truth - but it would show up as lying to a detect lies scan :):). This kind of "am I lying" double-whammy could be all kinds of fun if you were trying to delude a seraph or something. You'd never be able to trust your detect lies abilities again :):). DISCLAIMER: I'm not actually suggesting trying this. I also realize that the sourcebook says a balseraph would no more lie to you than a seraph would, it just believes what it says. I just kind of got the giggles thinking of stupid mind games a balseraph could play. Besides, Kobal might even help some of his balseraphim try this just because it would be funny to mess with the host's minds - but now I'm starting to get close to Em's territory with Kobalitic balseraphim that can truthfully lie (falsely truth?). Later all, Dan Ozdowski - -- I shall henceforth be referred to as: Lord of Chaos ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:48:08 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN>Lying [Fluff] > Later all, > Dan Ozdowski > > -- > I shall henceforth be referred to as: > Lord of Chaos There's an Ethereal Named Arioch who wants to have a word with you, mighty "Lord of Chaos"..... tom t. [James refuses to take the rap for _this_ one!] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:45:55 -0700 From: Chris Piekarski Subject: Re: IN> Seven > Pride - Lucifer > Avarice - Mammon > Envy - Malphas > Gluttony - Haagenti > Lust - Andrealphus > Sloth - Ralph > Wrath - Belial (I think; the fire-bug, anyway) Well, Lucifer isn't a Prince...he's above (below?) them. Remember Wrath is about doing harm to other human beings, not *necessarily* physical harm (from my sources anyway). And since we all agree Ralph isn't canon... Pride - Kronos (in a twisted way, Kronos embodies all Pride) Wrath - Malphas Envy - Valefor Sloth - Nybbas - -- --¥-Chris-¥-- Webmaster of -Anime News and Reviews- "In the middle of difficulity lies opportunity."--Albert Einstein GodGundam@humanoid.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:50:03 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking At 14:12 21/01/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >BETH, Princess of Nitpicking >'the world isnt that! this refrence on page 562 clearly states that >it couldnt even be anything even remotly like that.' > >Beth and his Servitors are the Lawyers of Hell. She'll have to fight that one out with Valefor then... Naked mud-wrestling at dawn? (Hey, I'd turn up to watch, if I thought I could catch him ;-)) Very cute write-up. I wonder if the dissonance condition should be 'failing to have an opinion on any single topic that is brought up in conversation, however remotely' ;) jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #581 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.