From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Jan 23 13:07:18 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 NAA18095 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:07:18 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA23568 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:03:42 -0600 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:03:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199801231903.NAA23568@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 #588 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 Friday, January 23 1998 Volume 01 : Number 588 In this digest: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) IN> The Ark of The Covenant Re: IN> The Ark of The Covenant Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking Re: IN> New to In Nomine Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes Re: IN>Lying re: IN>Seven Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> By Any Other Name (long) Re: IN> Yrth Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes Re: IN> Andre Re: IN> Seven IN> Kobal's Last Prank (was Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Re: IN> By Any Other Name Re: IN> Literal Translation (last one) Re: IN> By Any Other Name GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) IN> Alternate Archangels Re: IN> New to In Nomine Re: GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) IN> Suppliments? (was: Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Re: GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:10:15 EST From: MarkDEddy Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) In a message dated 1/22/98 5:48:52 PM, emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: >Yeah, yeah, I *know* you want that hat. No way. Mine. My hat. MINE! As though we *needed* more proof that the DP of Nitpicking was a Djinn... ;D The LE hat of the Demon Princess of Nitpicking *must* be analagous to Laurence's Sword. :) Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:29:26 EST From: MarkDEddy Subject: IN> The Ark of The Covenant If the sources I've seen are correct, there is a very good chance that the Ark isn't lost at all. It's in Ethiopia, and has been since about A.D. 250 (I think...), since it was moved there from an Egyptian Jewish colony, which got it from Jerusalem just ahead of the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. There's this church which has a shrine which is sealed up, and no-one goes into, except once a year, (on the Day of Atonement, IIRC). One family of priests has the right to go in, and they haven't talked. Interestingly enough, this is one of the odd Ethiopian Jewish/Christian hybred churches, the people who brought us the Book of Enoch.... So, for an In Nomine tie-in, what if Angelic PC's run into the Shekina Cherubim? Mark(odd thoughts...) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:51:02 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Ark of The Covenant I have heard the same rumors. I believe there are also Ethiopian Jews who still continue the temple rituals of sacrifice. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:53:24 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> DP of Nitpicking (Re: Raphael) > >Brandon, > >who wouldnt mind serving the Demon Princess of Nitpicking > Hmmmmm! Servitors! Well, I'd do the writeup, but someone else > did first. Hm. I'll have to check it and see if it's right... Hey. We're just a measily servitor and somebody obsessed with Andre.. Feel free to show us how the DP of Nitpicking /really/ is Then I can find out what my attunement is.. (smiles) > Yeeeessssss. I like it. Its a rip off of the Lust attunment ;) Brandon, Habbalah of Nitpicking ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > 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. Exactly. Hell is a fraticious place. They are going to have more minor rulers, as opposed to major servants. It is pride, but more importantly, it is *personal* pride. Angels can take pride in being part of a greater whole. Demons, for the most part, cannot. > 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. Personally, I will probably have Mammon in Haagenti's place, maybe with Haagenti on the rise. (yes, it does screw with Celestial history, but then so does almost everything else I'm doing) Fleurity might be his own Prince; I haven't decided. Furfur is out, or hasn't made Prince yet (I like the idea, even if the name sucks, but his existance would spark an Infernal war). Alaemon is in. Magog - we'll see. The Archangels, however, are fewer, and much changed. Gabriel has the word of Stone; David (Protection), Jean, and Marc are all her Servators. Michael is still commander of God's armies; Laurence and Dominic are his Servators. Yves is the most unchanged; Blandine, Christopher, and Litheroy are his. Uriel is still there - *she* holds the word of Fire (basically taking Gabby's place). Alain holds the word of Animals (basically a name change). Janus and Eli are the same; Novalis is one Eli's servators, although she is AA in all but name and vote. All in all, that's seven Archangels and fifteen to seventeen demon princess. Which fit's fairly well with another of the themes of In Nomine - Quality vs Quantity. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > On the bright side, I use Bethanel (Cities), Charon (Death), Johab > (Salvation), and Raphael (Healing). Yes, you heard me: Raphael. In > my game, he was never the AA of Knowledge and it was the AA of Unity > that went up against Legion and got wasted. And yes, he's a Cherub. Side note, but something that's been bothering me: What was Legion's name, and who did he serve? > Jadis (Winter - a Lilim Prince...why aren't there more of > those?) Because Lilith would shit a brick, sideways, at the possibility of her monopoly on Lilim being broken? Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > BETH, Princess of Nitpicking > > Beth and his Servitors are the Lawyers of Hell. They can convince I would lay money on the fact that anybody who has the title Princess would not have the possesive pronoun of 'his'. (I call first blood...) > Do you really wanna know what a Shedims idea of perfection is?! Chainsaws. Chainsaws and hentai tentacle sex. (Because we Nitpickers already know. Everything.) Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> New to In Nomine Jesse, is it just me, or are you going for the Word of "Tounge- Planted-So-Far-in-Cheek-I-Have-a-Second-Set-of-Lips"? Anyway, to answer the original questions, in a roundabout way; hey, don't sweat it. You don't need permission to post here. Just keep it somewhat related to In Nomine, and we won't bitch. (Okay, *most* of us won't bitch. Some of us just have our days...) We may nitpick, but that's just because we're hoping for an attunement from DP Beth (not that it's likely - she keeps on finding all sorts of problems with our work). > >Second, how are new demons/angels/spirits formed? Are they > >spontaniously generated by the celestial realms or > >consiously created by Superiors? I've got an idea for a > >mechanic for this, but was wondering if one already existed. > > This is another important part of the game and any change to it > could threaten game balance. Look for details in the "How to Make > Love to an Angel" sourcebook. Due out Real Soon Now. > > >I've got a question regarding melding In Nomine with another > >game of a similar bent, but I'm not certain it will be well > >received, so I'll put it on the back-burner for now. > > Many people on the list abandoned other games besides In Nomine. > Others work inside other role-playing groups, trying to convert > them to In Nomine. In any case your idea my be a step in the right > direction, but we seek nothing less than converting all role-players > to In Nomine, not some half baked compromise. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes > There is a potential canon idea being kicked around by yours > truly. To wit: if there's enough Disturbance in an area, the > Symphony becomes chaotic. Songs will not work properly and there > might be other effects. If anyone wants to playtest it (as rare > as the situation is), try it with the following rules: > > For every 100 Disturbance in an area, _any_ use of the Symphony is > at -1. Things that normally don't require a roll now have a roll > of 12 before the penalty is applied. This includes Songs, > resonances, attunments, going celestial, travelling on Tethers, etc. I like the idea a lot. Personally, I'd lower the level of disturbance that would cause that problem, just to really point out that the Symphony is not to be trifled with... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: 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. I *like* it...very inspired. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: re: IN>Seven > Temperance refers to strengthening something by alteation of > temperature. Heat or cold, exposure to a normally destructive force > that yeilds superior strength. Seemed kind of appropriate in the IN > Nomine write up. She is Divine fire after all... Well, close. That's tempering. Though I had the urge to make the same joke. > But I have felt about as uncomfortable with the write up > of Gabby as another person wrote they were uncomfortable with the > absence of Mammon. To think that the angel directly given more > references in any holy book than any other should turn out in IN to > be so ... well ... mad ... bespeaks quite a bit of the 'darkness' > of the canonical universe. I agree, completely. In my game, Gabriel has the word of Stone (with the connotation of Civilization). Uriel, for many purposes, is now the Archangel of Fire from the book. Not that my game isn't dark. It's dark in a different way, that's all... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > I will disagree with Em's dissin' of Austin, though I realize this > is a matter of different perspectives. I do agree, though, on the > overlooked value of maps. Oh, yes. A little off topic, but I recently got Hârnworld in the mail (hey, $5, you can't loose). It's a fairly basic fantasy world, but the *detail*! Yea ethereal Gods! Climate maps. Tectonic maps. Weather maps. Language maps. *Water current maps*. If I ever manage to get a Hârn game going, I am quite sure I will never lack for information, in a very easy to read form. Heaven and Hell would have benifited greatly from maps of Heaven and Hell. The Marches would have benefitted greatly from a map of the Marches (unless it is all just the Valley and the Far Marches). The map in Night Music was good, but more would have been better. > Likewise GURPS' Mysterious Places [of Power?]. Again, a great book. Lots of wonderful little tidbits, and the maps are wonderful, even though they are small. So yes. A picture is worth a thousand words, but a map is worth a thousand well-written words... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes > Anyway, the moral of the story is: Don't Use Nukes. Just Say No. All I can say is, it's people like you that got the disturbance rules made in the first place...nuclear warfare...sheesh... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > > It's traditional. > > So is ramming #2 pencil up one's nose while singing the Star > Spangled Banner. It doesn't mean it needs to be done. My lord...what tradition are you from? [I mean, jeeze - anything less than #4 and you just can't get the penetration needed for those high notes...] Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's three A.M., I must be lonely again..." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name (long) > > 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? Because some people *do* like having all sorts of Superiors. It fits the shattered politics of Hell very well, IMO. > 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'. Well, lesser Princes fill niches. They would be the first up against the wall in the case of full scale Infernal infighting, but it appears that said infighting hasn't happened. Wiping out a servator can still be done safely, but if one DP kills another, no matter how small the victim, the other Princes will look askance at the killer... > And if they are minors, why do they still have the Prince moniker? My theory is, anyone who can manage to get a territory in Hell, and hold it for a fairly long time without the direct patronage of another Prince, will probably be recognized as a Prince. Technically it requires Lucifer's say-so, but that often comes long after the fact. Of course, you have to be fairly good to get the title; the covert support of a couple of Princes doesn't hurt either. Because you have to survive for a while without the protection Prince status gives you. > (I see Archangels being more permissive in this, but only just.) Me as well, but for different reasons. AAs don't like changes to the status quo because the status quo is God's Order. DPs don't like changes to the status quo because it is not in their personal interests. > > > What I worry about is the COOL factor, which struck FASA and the > Shadowrun system pretty hard, along with say, TSR and White Wolf. Okay - I can see White Wolf, and AD&D is *the* munchkin game. But a lot of the Shadowrun stuff has been pretty good; plenty of discussion of tactics, effects of this and that on the world, and so on. Take a look at Awakenings (okay, ignore the Voodoo stuff) - plenty of stuff that is just discussion of how magic has changed life, corporate security, and so on. Plus, the Shadowrun setting is *supposed* to be somewhat mutable; the world *is* changing a lot. Now granted, there are some symptoms of coolism: the most obvious (to me) are the extra metahuman races and the werecreature rules, both from the Compendium. But there is plenty of good stuff, too, which does not suffer as heavily from the coolism of other books in the line. > 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. I think part of the problem is assuming that you must *use* everything that is available. I plan to ignore Zadekiel and Furfur in my game, as well as the Pachadim and Menium. And because of the way that the suppliments are done, I can do so without loosing much material. > 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). Rifts as an example of something that isn't an unplayable mash? Are you feeling okay? Granted, Rifts manages some interesting ideas, and pretty good art. But the fact that the idea of MDC wasn't enough (witness True Atlantian Vampire Slayers, who have more MDC buck naked than a normal man in a battlesuit, and Splyncrith, who has tens of thousands of MDC), plus the absolute plethora of uber-powerful baddies and ever more powerful new character classes that show up in every book... At any rate: what would constitute a wonderful suppliment for you? > 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. Well, maybe. If I understand SJG policy right, most of the books aren't going to require anything other than the main book. There is (AFAIK) no reference to Alaemon in _Heaven and Hell_, and very little mention of other minor superiors. > 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'. Well, yes, it's not canon, and it may contradict future suppliments. Since when did anybody on this list seem to worship canon? > 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? It's going to happen, no matter how matter how good the system is. Their work isn't going to mesh with your work exactly. So far, I think SJG has been very good about making suppliments that are easy to contradict without fear of reproach; the suppliments make reference to material in other suppliments, but it is easy to just edit out those references. For instance: You don't like Furfur? Ignore about a sixth of a page, and he's effectively gone from _Heaven and Hell_. Same for Fleurity. Don't like the Menuim and the Pachadim? They haven't (AFAIK) made it past _The Marches_. > 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. No offense, Em, but that's like saying that you won't eat potatoes because you don't like potato skin. The Demon Prince of Rock and Roll took 15 pages, Blood and Circuses took 14 (and most of that was a setting, rather than a module), and No Dinero took 15. These are out of 128 page books. And while they may not be useful as settings, they might still be useful for ideas. > 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. Just remember the infinitely useful words "Not in my campaign..." You only loose that mystery if you allow players to know that the canon answer is the right answer. Also, canon answers can be really refreshing, in a way. Because it shocks your players all the more when you suddenly start contradicting them, horribly and without warning... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:00:06 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Yrth > But how would the GURPS Fantasy world of Yrth fit into an In Nomine > game?? Has anyone considered running an IN game on Yrth?? Yes, but...only as an extension of a In Nomine/Hârn crossover. It would be interesting, to say the least... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:12:22 -0500 From: johnk@ascc01.ascc.lucent.com (John Karakash - Lucent ASCC) Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > And please make sure that the Humans are responsible for at least half > of what goes on, without everything in History having been caused by > some Celestial or Ethereal Power. We humans have always been very good > at getting ourselves in trouble, and also at being noble enough to make > any angel hang their head in humility. What I would like to see is how > the various events are interpreted [sp?] by the various Heavenly [or > not] factions, their take, spin if you will, on how these things > affected their operations and the Symphony. Exactomundo! The writers and editors love to use what I (privately) term the Humanity Stick. The war between the demons and angels is mostly a stalemate. They plot and work against each other, neutralizing most of the efforts of the other side, leaving humans free to be as evil or good as they please. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:18:19 -0500 From: johnk@ascc01.ascc.lucent.com (John Karakash - Lucent ASCC) Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > So do the Babylonians, the Canaanites, Hittites, early Turkish, Greeks, > Romans, Libyians, Sudaneses, Akkadians, etc, have a cool tie in to not > only Biblical associations by historical accuracy. They don't get the > heavy handed treatment, and if you ask me, Palestine is just more > interesting. Well, maybe once you redecorate it. Add a few pyramids, maybe some tasteful Nouveau-Mummy decor and there you go! =) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ |John Karakash - Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T) | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 18:25:02 +0100 (MET) From: David Skogsberg Subject: Re: IN> Last Night's Quotes On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > > Anyway, the moral of the story is: Don't Use Nukes. Just Say No. > > All I can say is, it's people like you that got the disturbance > rules made in the first place...nuclear warfare...sheesh... It's a great way of making sure not too much remains of your enemies, though. cd - -- d97skog@dtek.chalmers.se | cd skogsberg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 09:33:45 -0800 From: "David M. Barr" Subject: Re: IN> Andre Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > At 3:01 PM -0500 1/22/98, Pee Kitty wrote: > >On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, Kevin Walsh wrote: > > > >> The reason I modelled the attunements on Lust was because I was looking > >> for powerful attunements, and Lust's attunements were the munchiest I'd seen. > > > >I never liked his Lilim attunement. It seemed so...inappropriate. The > >idea is that his Lilim are his favorite servitors, raw creatures of > >seduction and lust, and they get the Elohim of Yves attunement? It seemed > >like a cop out...like Derek couldn't think of a suitably good one, so he > >just gave them a very useful one that was bland enough to fit in anywhere. > > Oh, but the *results*... "Oh, he needs me to do *this*, and touch > him *there*, and lick *here*, and let's let this need build up and > build up and he really *needs* a little more pressure *there* but > he'll need it even more if I keep going..." > [sudden need for cold shower...] Yeah, that works. Not only sense the need, but make it more...urgent. - -Daiv ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:45:06 -0500 (EST) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: IN> Seven Nathaniel Eliot writes: >> Faith - Michael ("Who is like God?") > >You know, I have read that translation plenty of times, but I've >always wondered - is the question inherent in the name Michael, or is >it just taken as such by the translators? If it's added in the >translation, then I have even more proof for my "God has the word of >Conflict" idea. I think that the intent of the question mark is to express the writer's uncertainty of the translation, not a querying tone to the name itself. (Of course, it should properly have gone outside rather than inside the quotes in that case, just to strengthen the Word of Nitpicking.) Over the years I've seen English translations of "Michael" that included: Who is like God Like unto God Who is what God is Godlike so it's fairly clear that the "who" is introducing a descriptive clause, not a question. ("I spoke to the man who sells soda at the corner.") Idle curiosity: Would a servitor of Michael, addressing his Superior in English during a corporeal-world interview, use the lax and corrupt "MIKE-ull" pronunciation, or the proper archaic "MEE-khay-el"? How would the Archangel pronounce his own name, if he needed for some reason to identify himself to an English-speaking mortal? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:00:19 -0500 (EST) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: IN> Kobal's Last Prank (was Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Nathaniel Eliot writes: [...] >> I do hope Kobal's final prank is one of the things that never gets >> defined in canon tho. > >Definately - it's a plot hook that just won't quit...until you saddle >it with canon. It just hit me that the nature of Kobal's final prank is obvious, though it was clearly prepared in collusion with Vapula. All over the world programmers are racing to fix code on their computers, which will otherwise break in myriad ridiculous and painful ways on 1/1/2000. Many doubt that these efforts will be completed in time. Armageddon itself might break out "by accident", depending on exactly *which* computers failed to get patched (The last report from the radar system is 99 years old? Massive system damage--alert human operators to enemy first-strike!) The problems stem primarily from the date-function primitive in a certain computer language, which assumed that "year" can be expressed as two decimal digits. The language in question happens to be named phonetically for Kobal, though admittedly the spelling differs -- still, he actually went and *signed* the Joke. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:00:22 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > Hmmm.. I guess im weird.. Ill probally end up buying every In > Nomine book I can get my greedy little hands on, simply because im > addicted.. Hmmm. Yeah, I know. > :) Im the same way with Vampire: the Dark Ages and am rapidly > getting that way with GURPs.. Of course, I have the problem that I > simply cant afford to scoop up every GURPs book that I can... :) Well, I'm currently feeding addictions to In Nomine and Shadowrun. Shadowrun is nowhere near as bad (as most of my friends have books). GURPS, well, I'm relapsing (got into a GURPS game recently...) > One day ill break down and get the GMs screen. and I hate GMs > screens.. Well, the screen itself sucks, except just as a screen between you and the players. The value is in the adventure, and the two superiors bundled with that adventure (after all, you can't do Ophanim of Litheroy without it). Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:00:22 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Literal Translation (last one) > >I don't speak any Hebrew, but the translations *I've* found don't > >generally imply a question. They usually run more along the lines > >of "Like unto God". > > Ca'El means 'Like God'. 'Mi' means 'who?' -----> Mi ca'el (or > michael in the anglicisd form) means 'who is like God?' So Mi must be interogative? Actually, it makes sense - the interogative "who" and the declarative "who" in english aren't that connected logically. > That is a literal translation and I'll shut up now. Oh well - I'll just have to ignore the absolute truth in this case... Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:07:03 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> By Any Other Name > Side note, but something that's been bothering me: What was > Legion's name, and who did he serve? Oh boy - can you tell I wrote that at 2am? What was Legion's WORD, and who did he serve? Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:18:31 -0500 (EST) From: "York H. Dobyns" Subject: GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) >Hmmmmmmmmm... Ill probally wanna use the GURPs In Nomine rules for >this.. Yeah.. Make some NPCs that will arrive too.. GURPS In Nomine? Is this an actual product? I realize that the creators of GURPS pride themselves on their system's ability to work in any genre, anywhere, anytime. And it really is almost as good as their self-congratulatory prose would make it. But -- if GURPS In Nomine is real and not a running gag of some kind -- can someone explain to me why SJG has decided to go into competition with itself? Is it sheer corporate masochism, or am I missing a reasonable point of some kind? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:24:10 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> Alternate Archangels Nathaniel Eliot wrote: > The Archangels, however, are fewer, and much changed. Gabriel has > the word of Stone; David (Protection), Jean, and Marc are all her > Servators. Michael is still commander of God's armies; Laurence > and Dominic are his Servators. Yves is the most unchanged; > Blandine, Christopher, and Litheroy are his. Uriel is still there - > *she* holds the word of Fire (basically taking Gabby's place). Alain > holds the word of Animals (basically a name change). Janus and Eli > are the same; Novalis is one Eli's servators, although she is AA in > all but name and vote. I like this system. Does anyone else run a markedly different set of Superiors? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:37:06 -0500 From: JESSE Subject: Re: IN> New to In Nomine >Jesse, is it just me, or are you going for the Word of "Tounge- >Planted-So-Far-in-Cheek-I-Have-a-Second-Set-of-Lips"? I just call them like I see them. - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:47:03 -0500 From: JESSE Subject: Re: GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) >>Hmmmmmmmmm... Ill probally wanna use the GURPs In Nomine rules for >>this.. Yeah.. Make some NPCs that will arrive too.. > >GURPS In Nomine? Is this an actual product? > >I realize that the creators of GURPS pride themselves on their system's >ability to work in any genre, anywhere, anytime. And it really is almost >as good as their self-congratulatory prose would make it. > >But -- if GURPS In Nomine is real and not a running gag of some kind -- >can someone explain to me why SJG has decided to go into competition >with itself? Is it sheer corporate masochism, or am I missing a >reasonable point of some kind? That is an easy answer. If SJG links GRUMPS with In Nomine then marketing can label all GRUMPS books as In Nomine books and visa versa. You think you are buying to many books now? Just you wait. Besides, any GRUMPS - In Nomine book is going to be lacking in setting, most of it will do with mechanics and rules. Anyone who wants to combine the two games will have to go out and buy some of the endless books SJG puts out. I mean GRUMPS Krishana? Come on here people! - -Jesse remember that, folks: trust your government, or skinheads will find you and kill you... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:56:24 -0500 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: IN> Suppliments? (was: Re: IN> By Any Other Name) Emily Dresner wrote: > > > > > 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. Many of them, yes. But many gamers are aging, taking on more RW responsibilities and just generally not able to devote the hours of loving creation on an RPG setting that they might once have done. Thus, suppliments of many flavors occur (and a good thing, too, or your favorite game companies would swiftly be filing for bankruptcy). It's easier to keep a customer you already have than to attract a new one, and in the game industry particularly, it's easier to convince a potential buyer to extend an investment in a game they are already playing than to buy entirely new systems on a regular basis. This is true in terms of time as well as money; I, for one, would rather play one game well than 10 games on a shallow, casual basis. YMMV. - -snip- > 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. > There seems to be an ongoing assumption that "non-canon" is, by definition, a "Bad Thing (tm)'. If so, I guess I'm bad. I assume that the point of any "official" shared game world is to facilitate play between comparative strangers (for instance, convention play), giving them a starting point that everyone can agree upon (or, for another example, the "Basic Rule Book only" gamers). In most cases, your home campaign is going to diverge from the "party line"; there is simply no way to avoid it. My home campaign is so far off-canon, it's practically a different game (required to make my particular setting work, as it happens, not because I dislike IN especially). However, I can get away with that because I set the ground rules for the campaign and my players abide by them. If something in Night Music (for example) contradicts established campaign lore, we deal with it by the simple expedient of ignoring it - "that's not the way things happen in Trinity". IN happens to be set in a contemporary Earth - but not "the" contemporary Earth. If there is a compelling reason to decide that in my campaign, Des Moines is the capital of the US , or does not exist at all , or was wiped off the map in an unfortunate yogurt mishap, then so be it. I bought Night Music because I wanted the background on the Marches, not for the "module". I pick and choose what works for my setting and scenario, and leave out the rest. - -- Mark McKenzie E-mail: markadv@kinekom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 13:54:52 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: GURPS In Nomine? (was Re: IN> Yrth) > >Hmmmmmmmmm... Ill probally wanna use the GURPs In Nomine rules for > >this.. Yeah.. Make some NPCs that will arrive too.. > > GURPS In Nomine? Is this an actual product? Sorta. It's a free conversion, put up on the SJGames website; you need the basic In Nomine rules to use it, as well as GURPS Basic; GURPS Supers wouldn't hurt, either. It's at http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/gurps/. Go check it out. Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@ix.netcom.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #588 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.