From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Aug 4 19:57:15 1999 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20175 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 19:57:15 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id TAA21751 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 19:50:55 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 19:50:55 -0500 Message-Id: <199908050050.TAA21751@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 #1299 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, August 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1299 In this digest: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions Re: IN> Two bizarre questions IN> Two bizarre questions Re: IN> Two bizarre questions IN> Re: IN- Two bizarre questions IN> FREE!!!....THOUSANDS OF BOOKS! IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> Two bizarre questions IN> A call to those on AOL Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> Two bizarre questions Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> Two bizarre questions Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN>Not really [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel IN> Looking for online games IN> Garden of Eden IN> Summoning Gabriel: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 19:15:02 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions - - Dennis H. Groome V "Amo Nympham" nallix@bellsouth.net ICQ: 11430261 "I think I woke up screaming 'cause I had a dream that you still loved me" -"ACF", Stabbing Westward - -----Original Message----- From: Michael Tarr To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 7:09 PM Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions > That was something we hadn't considered. Can a celestial form on earth be >unconcious, though? The book says that you are knocked unconcious as well. >And if unconcious too long, you'd be knocked back to wherever your heart is? >The thought of a unconcious 30m-long winged snake laying on the ground is a >strange in my opinion. > > Mike > > but don't forget that celestial forms are not corporeal, and are not subject to this plane's physics (gravity, can move though objects) and they do not reflect photons, so they aren't visible in the strictest sense of the word. you can _perceive_ a vessel, however, which equates to being able to interpret the celestial plane entity overlapping into they corporeal realm. even a blind person could sense a celestial form. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 20:24:02 -0400 From: "EDG (and Orc)" Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions At 06:07 PM 8/3/99 -0600, you wrote: > That was something we hadn't considered. Can a celestial form on earth be >unconcious, though? The book says that you are knocked unconcious as well. >And if unconcious too long, you'd be knocked back to wherever your heart is? >The thought of a unconcious 30m-long winged snake laying on the ground is a >strange in my opinion. That's something I'd been considering, too. I'm not sure the "you're knocked unconscious" rule ought to exist, since (at least for those coming from the corporeal realm) you're going to be unconscious when you _enter_ the Marches, almost by definition. Regardless, though; the vast majority of people can't /see/ celestial forms on the corporeal plane. A thirty-foot many-eyed winged snake isn't that bad when only other celestials can see it. Then again, other celestials can see it... - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 21:01:29 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Two bizarre questions >>>1) When using the Celestial Song of Seals, contained in a room, and a >celestial's vessel inside this area of the song is destroyed, does he still >go into Trauma, appearing next to his heart, or does the song contain the >celestial inside, leaving it open to soul damage? I'd assume that the celestial is trapped ("anyone completely contained within the barrier cannot ascend to the celestial realm...").<<< Hmm. The Liber Canticorum doesn't exactly cover that situation, but I think I would not allow a soul in Trauma to be held by the Celestial Song of Shields. Or else I would require it to be a Virtuoso performance. They aren't exactly "ascending" and it's never been explicitly stated (AFAIK) that a soul actually has to travel the distance between the dead body and his Heart or Limbo. This is sort of a munchkinish trick, so the GM should feel free to forbid it if he doesn't like it. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 21:33:53 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions actually, the wording leads to something other than traveling..."When the corporeal vessel of a celestial is. . .is killed, his Forces regroup in the celestial realm" (IN, p 67) so it seems they tend to just mystically transport there. - - Dennis H. Groome V "Amo Nympham" nallix@bellsouth.net ICQ: 11430261 "I think I woke up screaming 'cause I had a dream that you still loved me" -"ACF", Stabbing Westward - -----Original Message----- From: David Edelstein To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com Date: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 8:08 PM Subject: IN> Two bizarre questions >>>>1) When using the Celestial Song of Seals, contained in a room, and a >>celestial's vessel inside this area of the song is destroyed, does he >still >>go into Trauma, appearing next to his heart, or does the song contain the >>celestial inside, leaving it open to soul damage? > >I'd assume that the celestial is trapped ("anyone completely contained >within the barrier cannot ascend to the celestial realm...").<<< > > >Hmm. The Liber Canticorum doesn't exactly cover that situation, but I think >I would not allow a soul in Trauma to be held by the Celestial Song of >Shields. Or else I would require it to be a Virtuoso performance. They >aren't exactly "ascending" and it's never been explicitly stated (AFAIK) >that a soul actually has to travel the distance between the dead body and >his Heart or Limbo. This is sort of a munchkinish trick, so the GM should >feel free to forbid it if he doesn't like it. > >-David > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 20:48:42 PDT From: "Miles 2 Go" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Two bizarre questions David Edelstein wrote: >>1) When using the Celestial Song of Seals, contained in a room, >>and a >>celestial's vessel inside this area of the song is destroyed, >>does he >>still go into Trauma, appearing next to his heart, or does >>the song contain the celestial inside, leaving it open to soul >>damage? > >I'd assume that the celestial is trapped ("anyone completely >contained >within the barrier cannot ascend to the celestial >realm...").<<< > > >Hmm. The Liber Canticorum doesn't exactly cover that situation, but >I >think I would not allow a soul in Trauma to be held by the >Celestial Song of Shields. Or else I would require it to be a Virtuoso >performance. They aren't exactly "ascending" and it's never been >explicitly stated (AFAIK) that a soul actually has to travel >the distance between the dead body and his Heart or Limbo. >This is sort of a munchkinish trick, so the GM should >feel free to forbid it if he doesn't like it. > >-David I don't think the virtuoso requirement is strong enough. That won't stop a munchkin (ooh I'll just buy more songs). I also don't like the collorary, namely that the soul of a human that had met its destiny (or fate) could be prevented from reaching heaven (or hell) by a song. If you do choose to allow this, bear in mind it dramatically changes tactics for all sides. My humble opinion, Tim _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 05:21:27 -0500 From: befu85@teloz.latrobe.edu.au (Boookss) Subject: IN> FREE!!!....THOUSANDS OF BOOKS! THOUSANDS OF FREE BOOKS TO DOWNLOAD. OUT OF THE THOUSANDS OF FREE BOOKS ON THE WEB THERE IS NOT ONE THAT WILL HOLD YOUR ATTENTION LIKE THIS ONE! THE IMMORTAL By J. J. Dewey For this and links to thousand s of other free books do not hit return but send reply to: 7more@bigfoot.com Write BOOKS in the subject area. The Immortal is the story of an average truth seeker who stumbles across a fascinating teacher, only to discover that the man is John the Revelator of Apocalypse fame, who has been wandering the earth incognito for the past 2000 years. John begins the task of teaching his new student the first of the Twelve Keys of Knowledge. The first question addressed in Book I is WHO OR WHAT AM I? The student gives all the standard answers...and they are all wrong. The lead character then realizes he is under the tutorage of no ordinary teacher and must apply himself in a quest for knowledge. WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING ABOUT THE IMMORTAL My God man, you are one heaven sent story teller.... I just finished the Book. Whew... BT Just wanted to drop you a short note to tell you that I just got THE IMMORTAL and could not put it down. It is a fantastic book. I feel almost a sense of loss having finished it... CC I have finished reading Book 2, and I am totally amazed by the claims you make; I am fully aware that such high levels of information could never be invented or brought up by the human brain for a fictional story. WL I've recently finished reading The Immortal - Thank You! I've already told dozens and dozens of people, "If you read only one book this year, consider having it be The Immortal." And everyone that I've spoken with has had as enthusiastic response as Diane This is the best esoteric novel - by someone still living - I've come across so far. Book Review by Joseph Polansky, Editor of DIAMOND FIRE For this and links to thousand s of other free books do not hit return but send reply to: 7more@bigfoot.com Write BOOKS as the subject. For email removal - email 7more@bigfoot.com with the subject remove You will be removed immediately ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:52:56 EDT From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Okay, the Ofanim of Gabriel attunement states that Ofanim are immune to heat, does this include fire? because if so, a starting off ofanim can just say "Eh, I wanna summon Gabe" and light themselves on fire gaining a +5 or +6 (can't remember which) and suffer NO ILL EFFECTS hell, to get Michael's +6 it is a battleground on the day of the battle. Cherub of the Sword ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 11:17:14 -0400 From: Matthew Rice Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: > > Okay, the Ofanim of Gabriel attunement states that Ofanim are immune to heat, > does this include fire? because if so, a starting off ofanim can just say > "Eh, I wanna summon Gabe" and light themselves on fire gaining a +5 or +6 > (can't remember which) and suffer NO ILL EFFECTS hell, to get Michael's +6 it > is a battleground on the day of the battle. > > Cherub of the Sword Yep. Neat trick, huh? Actually, that's the sort of summoning gimmick that Gabriel would probably appreciate. And besides, she's an Ofanite herself. So when you really want to summon Gabriel, just grab that gas can and a lighter. And, of course, have a really good reason. Matthew Rice ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 11:54:25 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions Since a spirit in Trauma is said to have its forces "regroup" around its heart, this might imply that the spirit briefly falls apart and ceases to exist, except as separate forces, now homing in on the Heart. This, in turn, could mean there *is* no celestial to trap (at the moment) within the Song of Seals. It would also explain why Trauma is so traumatic -- you've briefly ceased to exist. Also, it makes a celestial in a vessel sound like an Undead -- the forces of its being disbanding on the death of the body -- but with the added ability to re-group at a Heart or, failing that, in Limbo. So it sounds like making Undead is a sort of unsuccessful attempt at making a human into a celestial. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:00:11 EDT From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: IN> A call to those on AOL Hi, sorry to bother you all, just wanted to invite everyone to join the first Americal Online In Nomine game ever (I think), for more information, please visit: http://www.angelfire.com/nh/SwordCherub/ Also on this site is a low power Archangel I created, for anyone who is interested, feel free to use her in your games, the only thing I ask is you give me some feedback on how things went. Thanks, Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:44:41 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel At 9:52 AM -0400 8/4/99, SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: >Okay, the Ofanim of Gabriel attunement states that Ofanim are immune to heat, >does this include fire? because if so, a starting off ofanim can just say >"Eh, I wanna summon Gabe" and light themselves on fire gaining a +5 or +6 >(can't remember which) and suffer NO ILL EFFECTS hell, to get Michael's +6 it >is a battleground on the day of the battle. > > Cherub of the Sword 1. Do you really WANT to summon Gabriel? Even for a good reason it can be a rather risky proposition. 2a. Did you take into account the negative modifiers for summoning a Superior other than your own? 2b. Do you really want to summon Micheal? It'd better be for an even better reason, as he expects warriors to cut it on their own 99 times out of a hundred. Sure he may pull your winged tuchis out of the fire this time, but impress him negatively enough, he might just float the suggestion that the corporeal plane is too dangerous to you and you may just find yourself sitting out the rest of the War playing the proverbial harp. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:15:31 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions At 11:54 AM -0500 8/4/99, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > >So it sounds like making Undead is a sort of unsuccessful attempt >at making a human into a celestial. > >Earl It's probably more accurate to say that making Undead is the closest that the Diabolicals can come to come up with an answer to Saints. Problem is, having deliberately excised the Symphony from themselves, the best they can do is bollix up existing constructs (like Human souls), and make do with the pieces left over to try to fit them together. Frequently it doesn't work, sometimes do to mischance. (the soul's Forces disband permanently), sometimes to the failure of experimentation (lots of Souls get shredded by Saminga's attempts to recreate Legion and/or develop new varieties of undead servant, or by Vapula's latest experiments) There are a scant number of configurations that work more often that they fail, and those are the undead archetypes presented. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:19:24 EDT From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel In a message dated 8/4/99 12:17:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, fmlazar@cyber-wizard.com writes: > 1. Do you really WANT to summon Gabriel? Even for a good reason it > can be a rather risky proposition. Not the point I was making, I was saying it sounds too easy for Ofanim of Gabriel to Summon her > 2a. Did you take into account the negative modifiers for summoning a > Superior other than your own? This has nothing to do with any of my existing characters > 2b. Do you really want to summon Micheal? It'd better be for an > even better reason, as he expects warriors to cut it on their own 99 > times out of a hundred. Sure he may pull your winged tuchis out of > the fire this time, but impress him negatively enough, he might just > float the suggestion that the corporeal plane is too dangerous to you > and you may just find yourself sitting out the rest of the War > playing the proverbial harp. I was making a comparison about how much harder it is to summon Mike Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:29:43 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Two bizarre questions From: Earl Wajenberg > > Also, it makes a celestial in a vessel sound like an Undead -- the > forces of its being disbanding on the death of the body -- but with > the added ability to re-group at a Heart or, failing that, in Limbo. > So it sounds like making Undead is a sort of unsuccessful attempt > at making a human into a celestial. Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh... Me likes this. A LOT... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 18:13:52 +0100 From: Hilary Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel >I was making a comparison about how much harder it is to summon Mike< Some Superiors are easier to summon than others. This is 'built in' to the system deliberately, (as far as I can tell). Superiors are not =supposed= to be equivalent therefore there is no reason to expect the ease of summoning them to be 'balanced'. System-wise this is reflected in the 'base chance' given for each Superior. The =real= point is, what is a character summoning them =for=? I don't think this is something that can be ignored in any discussion on the matter. Summoning any Superior without good reason is =very= poor for a character's health (at least when I'm GMing). Apart from what the Superior might do in response to being called away from whatever S/he was doing, it makes a large disturbance in the Symphony. - - Regards Hilary "Truth is a value" - Nietzsche hilary.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 14:22:48 EDT From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel I agree that you should have a damn good reason to summon your superior (exception here is Eli, I am sure he wouldn't mind hanging out with you ;) But again my point is, given a good reason, any joe-bob Ofanim of Gabriel has a +5 invocation modifier for free, no bad affects what so ever, just poor on some gas, light a match and boom +5 without even having to try, my point is a +5 modifier should be something hard to do, everyone else's is, but Ofanim of Gabriel don't even have to blink, they just light up (so to say) and Gabe appears, seems pretty gyppie to the other players who have to work to summon their Superior. Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 14:32:23 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: >seems pretty gyppie to the other players who have to work to summon > their Superior. As I think David Edelstein said, the Superiors aren't meant to be "balanced" as regards summoning. Anyway, considering how risky and/or useless it would usually be to summon Gabriel, I don't think this is a big advantage. So Ophanim of Gabriel have an easy time of summoning the only certifiably insane Archangel. Whee. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 14:36:30 EDT From: SwrdCherub@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel But these still doesn't touch on the fact thst does invulnerability to heat = invulnerability to fire for Ofanim of Gabriel? Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 19:57:55 +0100 From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel On Wed, Aug 04, 1999 at 02:36:30PM -0400, SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: > But these still doesn't touch on the fact thst does invulnerability to heat = > invulnerability to fire for Ofanim of Gabriel? > It does, and also immunity to electricity. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "... the expression "secret society" means an association, society, or other body the members of which are required by the regulations thereof to take or enter into, or do in fact take or enter into an oath, affirmation, declaration or agreement not to disclose the proceedings or some part of the proceedings of the association, society, or body." Offences Against the State Act, 1939, Appendix A, Section 3.2 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 21:32:24 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel >>I agree that you should have a damn good reason to summon your superior >(exception here is Eli, I am sure he wouldn't mind hanging out with you ;) << Few servitors of Eli have had contact with him in a =very= long time. Being seriously cool enough for Eli counts as a massive effort. If he =did= turn up when summoned, it would disturb the Symphony plenty enough for any servitors of Dominic in the area to get very interested..... I thought most of his angels were out on loan anyway >But again my point is, given a good reason, any joe-bob Ofanim of Gabriel has >a +5 invocation modifier for free, no bad affects what so ever, just poor on >some gas, light a match and boom +5 without even having to try, my point is a >+5 modifier should be something hard to do, everyone else's is, but Ofanim of >Gabriel don't even have to blink, they just light up (so to say) and Gabe >appears, seems pretty gyppie to the other players who have to work to summon >their Superior.<< In Nomine is not a balanced game. One of its many attractions. Like life itself, it's not always fair. However, said Ofanite of Gabriel has other problems. S/he would have problems staying in the same place for a long time, for instance. They have to act like bounty hunters... fine if you enjoy that sort of thing. Every possible celestial character in In Nomine has some sort of 'unfair' advantage. Though, in my own opinion, nothing really compares with the advantages of playing an Elohite of Yves. Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 17:12:41 -0400 From: "EDG (and Orc)" Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel At 09:52 AM 8/4/99 EDT, you wrote: >Okay, the Ofanim of Gabriel attunement states that Ofanim are immune to heat, >does this include fire? because if so, a starting off ofanim can just say >"Eh, I wanna summon Gabe" and light themselves on fire gaining a +5 or +6 >(can't remember which) and suffer NO ILL EFFECTS hell, to get Michael's +6 it >is a battleground on the day of the battle. Are clothes part of the Vessel? If not, you'd better take them off, unless you have a high clothes budget. If so, they're immune to heat and fire and electricity and such; why should they catch on fire? The same goes for the skin'n'bones part of the Vessel. Why should it catch on fire if it's immune to fire? Gabriel's +5 invocation bonus is "In, or surrounded by, flames." An Ofanite could probably do this fairly readily (nude or not) - but is your Ofanite prepared to deal with the consequences of the property damage? - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 17:43:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Eslin Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Omentide wrote: > Every possible celestial character in In Nomine has some sort of 'unfair' > advantage. Though, in my own opinion, nothing really compares with the > advantages of playing an Elohite of Yves. Hey, Impudites of Fate are even better information-gatherers than Elohim of Yves. (Reread that attunement again. All you have to do is /touch/ them.... and you don't even have to roll...) - Eslin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 17:55:18 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel >SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: > >>seems pretty gyppie to the other players who have to work to summon >> their Superior. > >As I think David Edelstein said, the Superiors aren't meant to be >"balanced" as regards summoning. In fact, one would particularly expect Gabriel to be... well... unbalanced. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 18:37:33 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel At 9:52 AM -0400 8/4/99, SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: >Okay, the Ofanim of Gabriel attunement states that Ofanim are immune to heat, >does this include fire? Most definitely. >because if so, a starting off ofanim can just say >"Eh, I wanna summon Gabe" and light themselves on fire gaining a +5 or +6 >(can't remember which) and suffer NO ILL EFFECTS Why, yes. Of course, people tend to notice. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 18:41:00 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel At 12:19 PM -0400 8/4/99, SwrdCherub@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 8/4/99 12:17:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >fmlazar@cyber-wizard.com writes: > >> 1. Do you really WANT to summon Gabriel? Even for a good reason it >> can be a rather risky proposition. > >Not the point I was making, I was saying it sounds too easy for Ofanim of >Gabriel to Summon her (Psst -- he was teasing you, oh Cherub of the Sword. O;> ) As a note, the summoning modifiers are more akin to, "How strong a manifestation of this Superior's Word can I arrange?" Yeah, it can be easier for some than others. Still -- Gabriel's not very sane. Do you _really_ want her attention, even if it's easy to get? (And when you're running from the gang of Hellsworn, do you have time for the gas, the match, and the 10 seconds to call her?) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 23:35:05 +0100 From: Hilary Subject: Re: IN>Not really [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel At 17:43 4/8/99 -0400, you wrote: >On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Omentide wrote: > >> Every possible celestial character in In Nomine has some sort of 'unfair' >> advantage. Though, in my own opinion, nothing really compares with the >> advantages of playing an Elohite of Yves. > > Hey, Impudites of Fate are even better information-gatherers than >Elohim of Yves. (Reread that attunement again. All you have to do is >/touch/ them.... and you don't even have to roll...) Ah, it had little to do with statistics, powers or attunements. More to do with my personal fantasies which definitely involve knowing my way round Yves' library, access to the lost plays of Euripides etc. etc. It's got very little to do with information gathering (sounds horribly =subjective= to me). I'm talking the kind of Elohite who, if he fell, would become a Habbalah of Nitpicking rather than Kronos. I'm not denying the serious fun of Kronos and, if asked, I'll roleplay =anything= to the best of my ability. My liking for Elohim of Yves says more about my personality than it does about the game. - - Regards Hilary "Truth is a value" - Nietzsche hilary.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 18:45:04 -0400 From: Matthew Rice Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel Eslin wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Omentide wrote: > > > Every possible celestial character in In Nomine has some sort of 'unfair' > > advantage. Though, in my own opinion, nothing really compares with the > > advantages of playing an Elohite of Yves. > > Hey, Impudites of Fate are even better information-gatherers than > Elohim of Yves. (Reread that attunement again. All you have to do is > /touch/ them.... and you don't even have to roll...) > > - Eslin Powerful attunements? Look at the one for Impudites of Vapula... even a starting character is an impressive power-battery. Factor in their techno-gimmick that lets them measure Essence, and of course the Impudite knack for gaining Essence quickly, and you've got a deceptively formidable celestial. Matthew Rice ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 18:52:25 -0400 From: Matthew Rice Subject: IN> Looking for online games Is anyone currently running any online In Nomine games, by email, IRC, ICQ, or whatever? I never get a chance to play anymore (all my gaming buddies have differing work schedules now), and I'd be interested in joining a game if anyone has room, or is starting a game. Feel free to contact me at my own email address, so as not to bring the wrath of our beloved list-admin down upon my head. Thanks! Matthew Rice ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 18:19:05 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: IN> Garden of Eden There's a fascinating article about the Garden of Eden by Dora Jane Hamblin, originally published in the Smithsonian, on the web at: http://www.best.com/~dolphin/eden/ She argues that the tale in Genesis is a myth arising from the transition from hunter-gathering to agriculture, but that the place (though considerably bigger than a garden) existed and is now underneath the sea of the Persian Gulf. This gives me a couple of interesting thoughts. First, the idea of having the Garden of Eden underwater is an interesting one. Second, the idea that humans find out the location of the Garden and attempt to explore it is a classic. Third (and at much greater length,) the term 'Eden' may well have come from Sumerian, in which it meant 'fertile plain.' Well, that suggests more than two people. Which immediately made me think that what if the tale were allegorical and based on two *tribes* rather than two *individuals*. Or the tale is about two tribes (possibly one matriarchal and one patriarchal) and Adam and Eve were the leaders thereof and therefore their sins fell upon their tribes. From there, you can take things in several directions, depending on how sympathetic you want to make Lilith and how righteous you want to make God. One possibility is to make Adam and Eve leaders of two tribes and Lilith Adam's first wife of his own tribe. In this varient she left not because she was commanded to obey Adam, but because she wasn't about to share him with another woman. Or because she was commanded to obey *Eve*. Another possibility is to have Eve and Lilith members of a tribe that was conquered by Adam's tribe, either because they had sinned in Eden, or because God gave Eden to Adam's tribe and Eve's tribe was already there. Or Eve's tribe agreed to become subordinate to Adam's in order to live in the Garden. In any case, Eve accepted her subservient position and Lilith walked out. Eve's eating the apple first could indicate that her tribe really was lesser in morality than Adam's, and led his tribe into sin. Note in that varient that a Jewish folktale has it that the Fall happened because Adam got the commandment not to eat the apples directly from God and when telling it to Eve, added the further caution, "Don't even *touch* the tree." When tempting Eve, the serpent pushed her into the tree, pointed out that nothing had happened, and used that as ammunition to disregard the rest of the commandment she'd received from Adam, which was the only portion he'd received from God. If you apply that to the tribal theory, certainly Adam's tribe was closer to God and may well have been in Eden longer. Possibly the only sense in which Eve and her tribe were supposed to be subordinate to Adam and his tribe was in the sense that Eve's people had to rely on Adam's for the Word of God. Or maybe it was all one big tribe. One interesting but bizarre possibility: what if the tribe had two governments, a woman ruling the women and a man ruling the men? To make sure that the rulers of each sex was acceptable to the other, the men chose which woman out of the set suggested by the women, and the women chose a man out of the set suggested by the men. Say Lilith swung the decision for the men to Adam and was mightily peeved when he swung the decision for the women to Eve. (And maybe Lilith was the best for the job and Adam chose Eve because he wanted to sleep with her; Eve's eating the apple becomes a hint that she wasn't up for the job, and Adam's eating it along with her then suggests that he cared more about Eve than the well-being of the group. Could Lilith have prevented the fall of humankind if she'd stayed behind to help her weaker kinswoman instead of stalking off in a huff because she didn't get what she thought was her due?) And yes, I know these possibilities contradict canon and the Bible. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 17:07:12 PDT From: "Micheal Knight" Subject: IN> Summoning Gabriel: It should be added here that summoning Gabirel is >also< muy easy in say... a firefight? Where your character is in ANY sort of life-threatening trouble at all? +6, right there. Micheal _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 19:42:28 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel only problem is, Gabriel doesn't necessarily "just appear." a lot of times a Superior may not respond immediately to an attempt to summoning, and even more often a Superior him/herself doesn't answer personally. in the case of Gabriel, they may wind up talking with Soldekai while Gabe's on a mad bender in a volcano. - - Dennis H. Groome V "Amo Nympham" nallix@bellsouth.net ICQ: 11430261 "I think I woke up screaming 'cause I had a dream that you still loved me" -"ACF", Stabbing Westward - -----Original Message----- From: SwrdCherub@aol.com To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 1:28 PM Subject: Re: IN> [RULES] Ofanim of Gabriel >I agree that you should have a damn good reason to summon your superior >(exception here is Eli, I am sure he wouldn't mind hanging out with you ;) >But again my point is, given a good reason, any joe-bob Ofanim of Gabriel has >a +5 invocation modifier for free, no bad affects what so ever, just poor on >some gas, light a match and boom +5 without even having to try, my point is a >+5 modifier should be something hard to do, everyone else's is, but Ofanim of >Gabriel don't even have to blink, they just light up (so to say) and Gabe >appears, seems pretty gyppie to the other players who have to work to summon >their Superior. > > > Dave > ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1299 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.