From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Mar 20 23:57:46 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 XAA04282 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 23:57:46 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id XAA11480 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 23:51:29 -0600 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 23:51:29 -0600 Message-Id: <199803210551.XAA11480@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 #687 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, March 20 1998 Volume 01 : Number 687 In this digest: IN> Re: Sharon Re: Shedim and Possession (Re: IN> Fallen) IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> Anti-Puritans IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. IN> Wars and rumors of wars (for the In Nomine Campaign Links) IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim IN> Top 10 Signs You're Redeeming Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution Re: Rewards and character evolution (was Re: IN> Re: IN- Free Lilim) Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim IN>Kobal's big joke Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Re: IN> Discord (was: Free Lilim) Re: IN> More On Campaign Linking Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Re: IN> Prophecies ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:51:13 -0000 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: IN> Re: Sharon Oops, sorry. I sent that to the wrong email. (Don't you just hate Friday afternoons...) jo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 12:41 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: Shedim and Possession (Re: IN> Fallen) >>Uh, where does it say, Canon wise, that Shedim can't possess animals? eh? The Shedite resonance is always dicussed as applying to "humans" (or maybe it's "people" in one or two places), rather than some more generic phrasing. The main reason for this is to avoid the issues of what happens with the notion of "corrupting" an animal. This can be overridden by a Prince, of course -- Vapula's Shedim get to inhabit special infernally-built computers, presumably another Prince might grant inhabitation of animal hosts as a Band attunement. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:46:42 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: IN> IN Slang, Take Two I haven't sent anything to the List of any real _worth_ in a while. I've been bad. Bad Balseraph, no donut. It's mostly because my very soul has been sucked by Maya and the Fiat game, and she's shown no signs of returning it. So if you have complaints, you can go right to the source. :) (Actually, I highly advise reading the logs, because A - it shows you how an IN game should be run and B - I do lots of very silly things and C - - it's totally cool. Shameless Plug over.) I had promised that I would write up some of the slang I seem to have concocted after 10 straight months of playing IN. For the original slang, I point to Kingsley's IN Slang Page at: http://www.a-ztech.com/lintking/jnmmnj/slang.html IN SLANG - -------- CABBAGE: Originally for 'cherubs', now a catch-all term for Player Characters. Coined by Archangel Beth. NO DONUT: Term for when a critical roll fails. "Oh, Daimie, you failed your Song of Motion. Bad Lilim, No Donut." Coined in an Amber Game long ago. (Demons) BALSERAPH HAIR: Term for a, well, Bal's hair, which is always good. Trust me. "Your hair is so good it could be Balseraph Hair!" GREENIES: Term for Lilim. Less likely to get you decked then 'Honey Chick' or 'Cutie Pie'. GAMESTERS: Term for those who work for the Game, short for 'Servitors of the Game'. COMEDIANS: Term for those who work for Kobal. LUSTIES: Term for those who serve Andrealphus. MEDIA: Term for those who serve Nybbas. "My God, we're all going to die, and you called MEDIA?" TECHIES: Term used for those who serve Dr. Vapula. THIEFIES: Term used for those who serve Valefor. They can dress, man. (Angels) CREATIONERS: Those who serve Eli. They are still trying to get their Archangel to match socks. WINDIES: Those who serve the Wind. Often mistaken for THIEFIES. MICHAELITES: Those who serve War. GABRIELITES: Those who serve Fire. GEEK: Those who serve Jean. A really high ranking servitor would be a TECHNOGEEK or a CYBERGEEK. LAURENTINE: Those who serve the Sword. GOOD: The view from behind any Laurentine Malakite. Occasionally referred to just the right War or Judgment Seraph. A CONFUSION OF KYRIOS: Coined in Fiat, a group of two or more Kyrios running around possessing people. We were confused. Well, that's what I can think up off the top of my head. Don't be afraid to add your own. :) - - Em, Bal of the Game. "So what do you think you're doing, eh?" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:11:14 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans gantr@NKU.EDU wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Simon Hailes wrote: > > > At 10:56 PM 19/03/98 PST, you wrote: > > >>> I am calling on all you pro Blandine, pro Ethereals out there to stand > > up for the Ethereals right to live, and to denounce Uriel's abhorent Crusade. > > Well, I am obviously the voice ot the opposition here. I will be > addressing your rather demagogic [ :::) ] claims point by point. This > should not be construed as an attack; rather, it is an attempt to explain > why the Crusade *had* to occur. > > > I am calling this club the Anti-Puritans and am using this to shed light > > on the Ethereals predicament. The ethereals are not lecherous entities who > > are sucking the Essence from our dreams, they are our children, the fruits > > of our creative labor given form. They are the magical denizens of the > > Marches, the spirit of the Marches, the Voice of our Musings. > > If by "our", you mean mortals, then yes. I agree. They are the product > of human dream and imagination. So far, we have no disagreement. > > > Imagine these poor things, who have spent centuries of blissful > > co-dependance with Man, only to discover that because they aren't 'Of > > Heaven' they must be destroyed! It is probably the way the jews felt when > > the Third Reich said they were slated to die because of impurity, in fact, > > had Uriel continued he probably would have whole heartedly endorsed the Nazis. > > Ahem. They were not destroyed because they were not "of Heaven". They > were destroyed because they were a threat to the plan of the Divine. The > Lord God had commanded through several servants that "thou shalt have no > other Gods before Me". Had the mortals continued to hold Our Lord > foremost in their thoughts, and then also worshipped the creations of > their imaginations, there would have been no conflict. However, the > Ethereals seduced the mortals into worshiping *them* first, and into > disregarding Our Lord. This could not be tolerated. Glad am I that I am a Cherub and not a Seraph when you make such statements as this. How many temples did the unicorns cause to be built to honor them? How many Churches of the Griffin were constructed at the urging of those same Ethereals? Whyfor were they destroyed, who are/were held to be living symbols of purity, and steadfast vigilance? Why was the Phoenix destroyed, never again to remind Man of Good arising from the ashes of defeat, do they [mankind] but hold the faith, believe and work towards the rebirth of Good, then surely it will spring reborn, phoenix-like from the defeat and vile works of the Foe. But the Phoenix is reborn no more, the Unicorn leaves no hoofprints to inspire mortal minds, the Griffin cleaves the air no more, reminds no man that he is watched by others and his actions are seen, his motives known. > [snip] > Now, as to your slanderous charge that Archangel Uriel would have endorsed > the German National Socialist Party. The short answer is to simply state > that you are wrong. The Word of Uriel is Purity, not Fascism (as you seem > to believe). And it was in the name of Purity, not Fascism, that Hitler said that the Jews must die. To my mind, the point, as made, stands. > The Crusade was an unprecedented and extreme aspect of his > Word, but it is hardly an atrocity comparable with the Holocaust. Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, and 100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two events do not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy of the two. >Uriel's > Word resonates with all that is pure and holy, and against all that is > unclean and unholy. And what unholiness attaches to the Unicorn? It was rather known for its ability to remove all taint, all uncleanness, all poison and evil from what it touched. Yet even this symbol of Uriel's own Word was destroyed. "Only the unclean and unholy", indeed! > > > Now a lot of people counter 'Uriel was just doing his job' really, so > > were the people who dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, they were doing > > their jobs, does that make what they did right? does that make Uriel right, > > no, It makes Uriel a narrow minded fanatic willing to do anything to make > > his Word Ascendant. > > Perhaps the same could be said of any Archangel? You accuse Uriel of > being "a narrow minded fanatic willing to do anything to make his Word > ascendant". Is Dominic a "narrow minded fanatic" for pursuing his Word, > and maintaining the Celestial Inquisition? Is Jordi a "narrow minded > fanatic" for promoting the good of animals above all? Is Michael a > "narrow minded fanatic" for seeking victory for Heaven in the Great War, > even at the cost of occasionally defying Laurence and the Seraphim > Council? Is Novalis a "narrow minded fanatic" for seeking peace, even at > the price of obstructing Michael and Laurence? The list could continue, > but I think you see my point. > > You speak as if being "narrow minded" is a bad thing, but you fail to > define the term. In my experience, this typically means that the "narrow > minded" person has committed the awful, unpardonable sin of not agreeing > with the person making the accusation. No effort is made to understand > why the "narow minded" person may have another point of view; instead, a > simplistic accusation is made. The charge of "narrow minded" then sticks, > as the person accused fears being thought of as "narrow minded". No > thought is given as to what the accused actually thinks. His view is > automatically invalid because it is "narrow minded". > > I agree that having an open mind is a good thing, but it can also be worse > than having a "narrow mind". A narrow mind can also mean a focused mind, > one that sees what needs doing, and does it. Focused mind or narrow mind--I think my previous comment about destroying the living embodiment of Uriel's Word carry some weight here; how to explain it? Simple: it was Ethereal--Uriel, personally or through those he commanded, killed it. This sounds not like the work of a balanced, focused mind, directed toward a goal; rather it does sound like the work of a *closed* mind that will not look at what it is doing, will not think, but blindly follows the last directive it was giving. I am minded of the Nazis at Nuremberg: "I was just doing my job, following orders". Phawww! [spit] Felix, Cherub of Jordi tom timberlake's Character in the Eternal Dawn PBEM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:19:15 PST From: "Chris Crowe" Subject: IN> Uriel v. Anti-Puritans: round 1 scores. Damn Gant, that was one hell of a counterstroke if I must say (and I must). One point for the Malakim of Purity. Uriel->[1] Anti-Puritans->[0] I must point out, however, (and I don't have my books here, so excuse missquotes) that some of the targets of the Crusade were not Ethereals. Rather they were creatures "of myth", such as dragons, griffons, and chimera. These were living, corporeal creations of God (and it pissed Jordi off a great deal when Uriel slew them). I believe in the intro to the Marches he (Uriel) gave his reason for destroying them, but i don't remember it now. I do like the point about God's choice to "pull up" Uriel. It DOES make sense. Because.... >First, the obvious. Uriel cannot Fall. David cannot Fall. Laurence cannot Fall. They are all three Malakim. Malakim cannot Fall. Then why is there such a big deal about the Fall of the Malakim? Literally (i.e. by the game mechanics), Yes, Malakim do not Fall. But spiritually and conceptually, they CAN. A Malakim could become quite selfish and decide to no longer serve Heaven, though he would not serve Hell either. Call it extremely Outcast if you want, but to me it's still Falling from grace. I'll consider that a half-point. So.... Uriel-->[1] Anti-Puritans-->[.5] Come on Gant, I know you can do better. I wanna see a 10 point spread by this time next week. :) Krowe Malakim of Destiny, (Arch)Angel of Redemption. "Don't eat that." --Gabriel, The Prophecy II ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:23:17 EST From: MarkDEddy Subject: IN> Wars and rumors of wars (for the In Nomine Campaign Links) I think Campaign Linking is a great idea, and so, without further ado, here are rumors that are coming out of the game I'm running: 1) The Lusties in Seattle are being investigated by the Game. It seems they lost two soldiers, and let at least one lillim Redeem. 2) The Archangel Eli has been spotted in Seattle- he seems to be trying to promote Rastafarianism. 3) A human Sorcerer may have figured out a way to damp disturbance in the Symphony, and Laurence, Dominic, and Yves are all concerned. 4) The Dominican Friars are actually servants of Dominic. (Witting or not, who knows?) I think that this sort of thing would be the way we will want to do this in the future... If anyone has any comments, let me know. If this isn't what you had in mind, let me know that, too. Mark (Rumormongering GM) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:24:49 PST From: "Chris Crowe" Subject: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim I noticed something last night while reading through some of the profiles of Demon Princes in IN NOMINE. In Kobal's description it says something to the effect of: "The biggest joke of all time is slowly forming in the back of Kobal's mind and when he plays it and on who will have a dramatic effect on the War." Could this be a hint as to the reason Malakim Fall? The preverbial banana peel under their feet, as it were? Hmmm..... It has potential. };) Krowe Malakim of Destiny, (Arch)Angel of Redemption ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 18:25:30 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans At 12:11 20/03/98 -0600, you wrote: > >> The Crusade was an unprecedented and extreme aspect of his >> Word, but it is hardly an atrocity comparable with the Holocaust. >Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, and >100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two events do >not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy of the two. No offence intended to anyone but do you think we could leave this stuff out, or at least offlist? jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:39:36 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim > In Kobal's description it says something to the effect of: > "The biggest joke of all time is slowly forming in the back of Kobal's > mind and when he plays it and on who will have a dramatic effect on the > War." > Could this be a hint as to the reason Malakim Fall? > The preverbial banana peel under their feet, as it were? > Hmmm..... > It has potential. };) No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. One day in the Seraphim Council, during an especially trying case, with all eyes on him and waiting for him to finally pronounce Judgment, Dominic's going to reach up, and pull away that hood - and there will be Kobal standing there, grinning, with six bicycle reflectors taped to his face. "You guys are SO gullible. Sheesh." - - Em. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 18:52:27 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim At 13:39 20/03/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. > > Nice, but the joke is that Kobal is really Lucifer. He is waiting for Asmodeus to seriously harass him so he can reveal himself and watch the Game eat itself up for high treason ;) jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:59:34 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: IN> Top 10 Signs You're Redeeming Another Fun Transcript! ************************************************************** Liz says "Hey, Shannen, I might have found another Demon for you to help Redeem. Or maybe an Outcast to bring back into the fold." Hitherby says "We should open up a Redemption Clinic." Hitherby says "With information pamphlets." Daimon says "I'm NOT REDEEMING. Honestly." Daimon says "Although the pamphlets are cool..." Daimon says "Will there be cookies at said clinic?" Shannen passes out pamphlets. Hitherby says "Probably!" Daimon takes pamphlets and cookies. Daimon reads the pamphlet, munches the cookies. Hitherby | "Do other demons pick on you?" "Ten signs that you might be ready to Redeem." "Balseraph Propaganda: Truth or Lies? (Duh.)" Daimon squints at the Top 10 signs. Hitherby | 10. You have replaced your death's-knell doorbell with a short selection from the William Tell Overture. (Calabim, take especial note.) Daimon laughs, and hums the William Tell Overture. Hitherby | 9. Micronuked dinners just don't taste as *good* as home-cooked meals any more. Daimon ponders this. Hmmm. Hitherby | 8. You care whether a product has been tested on animals. Daimon peers at the cookie. Has this cookie been tested on animals? Hitherby | 7. You have purchased a Geo because "the gas mileage is wonderful." Daimon looks in parking lot for Geos. The parking lot is full of Geos. It's scary, huh? Liz says "Hoo boy." Hitherby | 6. As you stand over the bloody corpse of a Soldier of God, you feel a sudden urge to give something back to society to make up for his/her loss. Liz | 5. (Habbalite Specialty): You spent the last week watching Mr. Spock and Data on re-run episodes of Star Trek. Daimon watches Star Trek... though... uh oh. Liz | 4. (Media Special): Pamela Lee Anderson looks 'fake' and undesirable. Daimon . o O ( Uh oh. ) Liz | 3. (Game Special): Sudden, inexplicable desire to volunteer to be an Advocate for the Defense. Daimon looks around for lawyers. Liz | 2. (Lust Special): A room full of Balseraphs delightfully chained to the walls, all you can think of was that cute Mercurian you ran into last decade. Liz | 1. You order 10 lbs of feathers, and start gluing them to your wings. (Calabite Variant: you set yourself on fire twice daily and rotate around something, but you don't work for Belial.) Daimon giggles. "COOL!" Daimon doesn't have wings. He doesn't even have feathers. So he's NOT redeeming. Nyah. Liz nods. "Of course not." Liz says "But if you did, we could get you a regular gig at Sistine's." Daimon says "Oh. Hmmmm. Ah. Er." Liz says "No rush. Sistine's is remarkably good at last minute bookings." You say "Oh. But redemption is _bad_." Daimon looks at the other two pamphlets. Liz says "Says who? Other than the Game." Daimon says "Well, everyone." Hitherby nods. Oddly enough, almost every demon who doesn't Redeem thinks Redemption is bad. Daimon says "EVERYONE says it's bad." Hitherby says, smugly, "God doesn't." Daimon says "Well, I've never heard from this God guy." Hitherby says "You've never heard from *most* of 'everyone.'" Daimon says "Well, that includes this God guy." Liz says "Ever ask a Demon who's Redeemed and become an Angel if it's bad?" Daimon says "No, because they've been brainwashed to think it's good." Hitherby says "You can sort of figure out what Saminga's opinion on this is without asking him, right? Something similar applies to God." Hitherby says "And, actually, here's the kicker: do you *want* to share an opinion with *Saminga?*" Hitherby says "And *Asmodeus?*" Daimon says "Um, no, not really." Daimon munches on cookies. **************************************************************** Emily K. Dresner, M.S.Eng. Applications Programmer III and Balseraph of the Game Desktop Applications Team - Medical Center Information Technology Current Quote: "You can lead a Seraph to holy pizza, but you can't make him eat!" - Maxwell ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:02:22 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two Emily Dresner wrote: [snip] > I had promised that I would write up some of the slang I seem to have > concocted after 10 straight months of playing IN. For the original slang, > I point to Kingsley's IN Slang Page at: > > http://www.a-ztech.com/lintking/jnmmnj/slang.html > > IN SLANG [snip] > NO DONUT: Term for when a critical roll fails. "Oh, Daimie, you failed > your Song of Motion. Bad Lilim, No Donut." Coined in an Amber Game >long ago. Here I thought it meant "no goodies for you", originally from the cliche "bad cop, no donut". [snip [again]] > LAURENTINE: Those who serve the Sword. I like SWORDTHANE for these folks, myself. > Well, that's what I can think up off the top of my head. Don't be afraid > to add your own. :) OK, how about... HYDRA[E]: Kyrios, as in "nine-headed monsters" *g*. Leading to such cute references as WARHYDRA, ROCKHYDRA, etc... for Kyrios of Michael, David, etc... MEDUSA: Seraph of David DRAKE: short for "firedrake", any Servitor of Fire. Helldrake and Clouddrake are sometimes used to clarify whether the 'drake in question serves Gabriel or Belial. MINOTAUR: A bullheaded [*g*] person, who usually charges headfirst into any situation. see also "JOCK" *g*. PLAY CONNECT-THE-DOTS: Making a straight-line path from point A to point B, regardless of obstacles. A favorite strategy of MINOTAURs. The disturbance caused by the destruction of Corporeal obstacles is why MINOTAURS are seldom allowed Earthside. tomtimb, cadre Cherub of Heaven ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 14:31:07 -0500 (EST) From: Dan Ozdowski Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim According to Jo Hart: > > > >No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. > > > Nice, but the joke is that Kobal is really Lucifer. He is waiting for > Asmodeus to seriously harass him so he can reveal himself and watch the > Game eat itself up for high treason ;) :) Nahhh, the big joke will be when Kobal figures out how to make 'toons. You just can't take angels seriously when they're battling fluffy bunnies wielding big mallets.... Laurence chasing roadrunner round and round a tree trying to get back his sword - MEEP MEEP! Dan Ozdowski - -- I shall henceforth be referred to as: Lord of Chaos ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 14:40 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Rewards and character evolution >Well, in GURPS, Champions, In Nomine and most modern RPGs, experience >tends to be fairly linear, with characters not improving THAT much >beyond their starting power level. In GURPS, at least, that doesn't always seem to be true -- it mostly depends on whether situations come up where skill penalties are common. Ranged combat, for example, it makes a *big* difference what your skill level is. Also happens with GURPS magic a bit. > I was talking more about >disparity in power level between a new character, and characters that >have been around for a few years. You want a new/replacement character >to be of a comparable power level to older characters fairly quickly, or >they'll feel like a fifth wheel. True -- this mostly depends, I think, on how much the important skills and attributes in the campaign are linear. If the choices made in the character design tend to dominate how good a character is in a given area, there tends to be less of the "fifth wheel" problem. But then, I had low-level characters in a AD&D campaign who were grouped with characters 5 levels above them, and it worked out OK. >I like the AD&D system where a new character will basically end up a >level behind older characters when the older characters go up a level >(since each level needs approximately double the previous levels XP). I never used this system after the first campaign I did with AD&D, having gotten into a group that used a more linear approach tacked on. >I'm planning to award 2 character points per session, with the >possibility of 3 for good roleplaying, etc. I'm using the 1-2 range, for "GM awards", for a monthly game. I'll also have "Superior rewards" when they finish the current adventure. (Real Soon Now, I hope....) >I find my players like their characters to evolve fairly rapidly (in a >game mechanics sense). When I'm a player, I do too. I generally am looking for *visible progress* rather than rapid evolution. The one character I had in recent times who evolved rapidly, rapidly became a headache. (See "Selene Holmes" in Elizabeth's GURPS character pages for the sordid details.) >In a sense, as a GM, it doesn't really matter how much XP you give out, >because you can always beef up the bad guys accordingly. You could give >out 30 points a session if you multiplied the bad guys by 5 every >session. I disagree. There are two problems with this: (1) it's an "arms race" model, which generally reaches an explosion point sooner or later, and (2) you'll sooner or later run into points in the game mechanics where suspension of disbelief is no longer possible. >I guess it comes down to how often you play. If you play once a week, >you'll be giving out less XP per session than if you play once every >three months. This is certainly true -- I tend to be more generous in games that proceed more slowly in real-world time. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 14:50 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: Rewards and character evolution (was Re: IN> Re: IN- Free Lilim) [Kevin:] >I'd personally like guidelines for how long it takes to learn a skill >or improve it beyond a certain level, as well as what else it requires. >How far is constant practice going to take you before you need more >training? How does Intelligence factor in? I suspect IN will not publish canon rules for this -- Steve has made it quite clear that he wants IN to be much more "mechanics light" than GURPS, which does address such questions. I suggest you borrow the GURPS rules (1 cp = 200 hours of hard study, sometimes half-speed if you don't have a teacher). There also a useful Roleplayer article from a long way back on learning skills in GURPS that might be adaptable to IN: http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/Roleplayer/Roleplayer18/QuickLearning.html >Concerning points, how does characteristic advancement, as opposed to >Force purchasing, work? Can you develop your characteristics yourself, or >do you have to ask your Superior to increase them for you? I believe you can improve your own characteristics yourself, and if you build them up to the point where an additional Force would be implied, you get that automatically. Otherwise adding a Force requires a Superior to "glue it on". I vaguely recall this being mentioned somewhere in canon as being a feature for demons who don't want the boss to know how powerful they're getting.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 14:57 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? >> For example does anyone else have a real issue with the renaming of >> Dulles Airport? Actually I thought it was Washington National that was causing problems, not Dulles. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 15:34 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two >(Angels) >LAURENTINE: Those who serve the Sword. Also, in Beth-slang, "Swordies". >GOOD: The view from behind any Laurentine Malakite. Occasionally >referred to just the right War or Judgment Seraph. What Judgement Seraph did you have in mind...? >Well, that's what I can think up off the top of my head. Don't be afraid >to add your own. :) The major ones that come to mind from our campaign: POKER-SPINES: generally, any of the angels whose vessels always look like they work for some government agency that buys wind-up clones; primarily used for Servitors of Judgement and the Sword. Mostly used by Creationers and Servitors of Flowers. LEMON-SUCKING EXPRESSION: a common facial expression seen on Seraphim who've just heard an unpleasant Truth from the Symphony. Most commonly seen on Judgement Seraphim when talking with Creationers. CELTIC KNOTWORK: Seraphim pornography. (Not exactly a slang term, but close enough.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 98 15:38 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim [Em:] >No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. Is Elizabeth spilling my plot ideas, or was it just that obvious...? - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 14:54:10 -0600 From: tom timberlake Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim Walter Milliken wrote: > > [Em:] > >No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. > > Is Elizabeth spilling my plot ideas, or was it just that obvious...? > Actually, I think this is wrong; the Biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is God, on vacation... tom ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:17:53 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> IN Slang, Take Two > >GOOD: The view from behind any Laurentine Malakite. Occasionally > >referred to just the right War or Judgment Seraph. > > What Judgement Seraph did you have in mind...? As they say on Highlander, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE! *big grin* - - Em, grinning. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 18:32:58 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Kobal and the Fall of the Malakim At 3:38 PM -0500 3/20/98, Walter Milliken wrote: >[Em:] >>No way. The biggest joke of all time is that Kobal is really Dominic. > >Is Elizabeth spilling my plot ideas, or was it just that obvious...? She came up with it on her own, I think. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:42:54 -0800 (PST) From: Querent Subject: IN>Kobal's big joke There's been a lot of speculation as to what Kobal's "big joke" is. Duh. Any diligent reader of the Weekly World News can tell you that the Chinese have on several occasions organized "mass jumpings". Thousands of Chinese nationals jump in unison in an effort to shift the orbit of the Earth. An asteroid is on a course for our solar system in the year 2028. Scientists argue about whether it will hit. Current theory is no. But, that assumes that Earth's orbit doesn't change. This is why Kobal organizes such mass jumpings. The joke? To render the war a moot point. Every major player is looking toward armageddon, and trying to improve their hand before it gets here. Thousands of years of planning and preparation for "The Final Trumpet". What a cruel joke it would be if, just before the trumpet sounds, the asteroid hits. Poof! No more Earth! What a great gag! "Ha ha, all you lackeys run around for millenia to prepare for what? Nothing!!!! Ha ha ha!" he would shout. It's really quite obvious. You just have to practice reading the fnords. == --Querent, Angel of Widescreen. Mercurian Servitor of Creation. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:47:10 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans Okay, I guess this was a little harsh in its preconception, but I was just trying to get my point across. I accused Uriel of narrow mindedness because he could not accept that the Ethereals had a place in the Symphony, he could not accept anything accept his clean, sterile and 'perfect' symphony, I have thought about his side of the story, that is what i always do, sorry If I left it out of the Post, but you see, Uriel justifies it by saying he leaves only God and his angels as the worshipped and as the only supernatural beings interfering on Earth, I don't know about you but that sounds fascist to me, it sounds a lot like fascism, I don't believe the God of In Nomine is that fascist, or anywhere near that fascist, IMO God is present in all religions, even the Pagan ones, all those who promote positive ideals and the belief in Higher Powers work for God no matter if they think they don't. You say Uriel's word resonate Holiness, need I only draw your attention to the Gabriel incident, and indeed the actual descriptions of Superiors, they are fallible beings! Uriel more so then others because he cracked and called on a war, when others merely plot and play the averages. Purity is important, yes, but let us just think about what Purity means, and just how we should go about achieving it! Simon, Denizen of the Upper Heavens, where all things are possible and perfect. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:53:27 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Anti-Puritans At 06:25 PM 20/03/98 +0000, you wrote: >At 12:11 20/03/98 -0600, you wrote: >> >>> The Crusade was an unprecedented and extreme aspect of his >>> Word, but it is hardly an atrocity comparable with the Holocaust. >>Oh? 6 million Jews versus 99 percent of all Unicorns, all Griffins, and >>100 percent of the Phoenix population. You are right; the two events do >>not compare, but it is the Purge which is the more unholy of the two. > > >No offence intended to anyone but do you think we could leave this stuff >out, or at least offlist? > > >jo >---------- >"I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." >G. K. Chesterton > > >jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ > >sorry about the Jews remark, it was just an example meant to drive my point home, being an anti-nazi, and pro all races and religions I used something I relate to, but if that riled you, don;t by any means read Stephen King's Summer of Curruption, or watch Romper Stomper (the story was disturbing, I hated the movie). I mean no disrespect whatsoever to any individuals of the Jewish faith on list, or any other members of other faiths. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 05:17:02 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Discord (was: Free Lilim) On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Kevin Walsh wrote: > Discord isn't a useful strategy for power-hacking. I disagree. That extra level on your Holy Pistol is always worth a couple of levels of discoloured... but thinking like that means you are geography in any well-run game. From your Superior for whatever you did to earn the discord, and from the GM for being a munchkin. In a straight fight though, you rule. > Song of Healing at level 3. Yeah, but three levels of claws or acid? Or take another level of discord, and make it the totally-hideous tongue/6! > It's very easy to think of excuses for taking Discord, and unless you > say something along the lines of "Baal kills all his Discordant > Servitors", which sounds damned unlikely, then your only real answer is > to say "You can't have Discord because I said so". None of the in-game excuses for discord are an automatic in-game reason for extra character points. What I say is "you can't be ungodly hard for no well-defined reason, because I said so". (He says, preparing for a 14-force demonic one-off tomorrow. I've already had a request for a Vapulan, purely for the sheer gratuity of spending 28 essence on a single roll. Watch those game mechanics flee in fear.) Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 05:30:50 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> More On Campaign Linking On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Chris Crowe wrote: > When Uriel returns, obviously some drastic events will take place on all > three planes, so we can coordinate some of these events. When? Big assumption. Getting two GMs to agree *whether*, when, how and why Uriel returns should be... interesting. > i've seen references on this list to Charon as the Angel of Death, but > what i've read and "known" for a while says the Angel of Death to be > Azrael. I've just finished running a year-long co-gm'ed game. Believe me, that is exactly the sort of detail that will really scupper consistency unless you spend *days* in a small room talking about nothing but the game background. And then a new GM joins in, and you get to do it all again... > For those interested i have a neat background story invovling my Malakim > of Destiny, Krowe--(soon to be Arch-)Angel of Redemption. Similarly, my plan to have Eli tell both Heaven and Hell to take a running jump, and ask which of the AAs and DPs want to join him in setting up a 'third corner' where the humans are actually treated as if they were important, would be unsuitable for simultaneous use by anyone else. I dread to think of the bad feelings when someone redeems Lucifer, and gets 'expelled' because no-one else wants that to happen. This is why I am in favour of something less formal. Thanks to Mark Eddy for getting the ball rolling. Throwing out little ideas like those is much less work, and to be honest is more valuable, to everyone, than an organised network where everything has to be debated and agreed. IMO of course. Tomorrow, I can tell y'all whether the Statue of Liberty has been converted from a tether to Blandine (Hope) over to Lilith (Liberty). Ahem. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 00:35:23 -0500 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- vessels? Kevin Walsh wrote: > It's just very tempting sometimes. The idea that Ian Paisley is a > Habbalite of Factions (or maybe Nightmares in service to Factions) > occured to me this morning, and I just found it funny. That's true. > > For example does anyone else have a real issue with the renaming of > > Dulles Airport? > > > (Don't kill me. I have a Word to serve.) > > Why? What did John Foster Dulles do again? I've heard the name, but I > can't recall what it should mean to me. Where is Dulles Airport? To what > is it being renamed? Dulles is the airport in Washington DC and Congress is currently voting on a bill to change it to Ronald Reagan National Airport. The bill was successful in committee and goes now to the floor of the House where it is expected to pass as is. The Senate is another story and last I heard there were a numbe of Senators that wanted to change the bill and cause another vote, perhaps destroying it by sending it back to committee. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 05:40:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Prophecies On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Soviet wrote: > worth trying (after all what would be a cooler story than Lucifer quiting > his post and closing Hell). That is because Lucifer in the Endless series is very much the person that Gaiman would be if *he* were Lucifer, if you see what I mean. It's great in the right campaign, to be sure, but it isn't very canon-consistent. Mind you, Gaiman's Lucifer is indeed way cool, and hardly anyone runs to canon in any case. If anyone wants to throw around ideas for consequences of Lucifer handing over Hell in IN, then count me in. I reckon one of Dominic, Kronos or Kobal would get the key in the end. But then again... "Mmmmm. Key." Steve. "I've got to admit it, you old bastard... The sunsets are incredible." (From memory. Please correct me.) ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #687 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.