From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Sep 1 11:24:36 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 LAA09369 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:24:36 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id LAA03663 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:15:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:15:59 -0500 Message-Id: <199909011615.LAA03663@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 #1317 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Wednesday, September 1 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1317 In this digest: Re: IN> Recent purchases Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1315 IN> Tibetan mushroom increases lung capacity and energy. Re: IN> Recent purchases Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1315 IN> Corporeal Player's Guide Re: IN> Recent purchases Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide IN> Members - Special Offers.... Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide Re: IN> Recent purchases Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide IN> Rules questions Re: IN> Rules questions Re: IN> Rules questions IN> Malakim [Longish] Re: IN> Malakim [Longish] Re: IN> Malakim [Longish] Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 10:29:25 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Recent purchases Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > I found it to be more coherent and better written than the corresponding > material in Marches and NM. For people who _don't_ have those books, I think > this is a much better buy (assuming the Marches material gets a revamp in the > future.) I believe that Beth (among others) wants to do an Ethereal Players Guide. Would this do? =) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)388-2665(COOL) MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 10:31:57 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1315 Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 1:35 AM -0700 8/30/99, David Streeter wrote: > >And now we have YAH, when will WEH come out?** > > I've been wondering that ever since I heard the acronym. If I ever get > a good idea for a book with those initials... Hey, howabout a guide to restaurants that have become important in the War? You can call it We Eat Here. ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)388-2665(COOL) MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 10:25:53 -0500 From: loomia10@icom.icom.it (covmserh) Subject: IN> Tibetan mushroom increases lung capacity and energy. Athletes, work-out devotees and cholesterol-compromised people take note: The active ingredient of a rare mushroom that grows at 14,000 feet in Tibet and was reserved only for Chinese royalty has been synthesized. Cordyceps sinensis has been clinically tested to improve lung capacity and increase stamina and energy. In most cases it will also increase the HDL (good) cholesterol level. No side effects. Not sold in stores. $24.95 for month's supply. Also, we have standardized green tea capsules equivalent to four cups of green tea. One hundred times more potent an antioxidant than vitamin C, green tea polyphenols are the only antioxidants that penetrate the cell membrane and protect the DNA. Studies show they kill prostate cancer cells (Mayo Clinic) and prevent or alleviate rheumatoid arthritis ( Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences). Our product has 97% total polyphenols-more than any other product in the industry, by far. Only $16.95 for month's supply. For info on how to buy or sell: email north34@bigfoot.com with the subject "energy" or send a fax to : 603-537-0753 To be deleted from the list, email north34@bigfoot.com with the subject line as "remove" Have a nice day OVER---OVER---O ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 14:51:30 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Recent purchases At 10:18 PM -0400 8/30/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >But that doesn't mean those places are going to be all that interesting for >cinematic roleplaying. (Not everyone plays cinematic -- our group, for instance, is more likely to wander around trying to figure out the story behind our 8-Force (!!) human... Some of the authors play with far more high-powered stakes, and I have to constantly remind them to present toned-down options as well.) >>The problem with the first 3 books >>was the transition between LE's, and the lack of general playtest support >>due to them being kept 'secret'. > >"LE"? Line Editor? Yes. >But I agree that the "secret" part probably didn't help. Certainly the >first three books are... uneven. You should hear what I've been known to mutter about them... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 14:51:29 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1315 At 10:31 AM -0400 8/31/99, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> At 1:35 AM -0700 8/30/99, David Streeter wrote: >> >And now we have YAH, when will WEH come out?** >> >> I've been wondering that ever since I heard the acronym. If I ever get >> a good idea for a book with those initials... > > Hey, howabout a guide to restaurants that have become important >in the War? You can call it We Eat Here. ;) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:11:36 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide >>>Sure, I probably should have flipped through the CPG a little more before buying. OTOH, it was by David Edelstein, and I've come to think that Dave's stuff is pretty good; this was my first disappointment in that regard.<<< Did you think the stuff wasn't good, or were you just disappointed that it revised earlier material? Keep in mind, the CPG does *not* just reprint the sorcery, undead, Soldier, and Saint stuff from Night Music and the Marches. It significantly revises it -- a lot of that stuff (especially the sorcery rules) was *broken* and needed to be fixed. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 07:53:04 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Recent purchases John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: > Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > > > I found it to be more coherent and better written than the corresponding > > material in Marches and NM. For people who _don't_ have those books, I think > > this is a much better buy (assuming the Marches material gets a revamp in the > > future.) > > I believe that Beth (among others) wants to do > an Ethereal Players Guide. Would this do? =) Ooooh yeah. Love it. (Will it have fictional characters as a PC option? Who do I beg to get to write that bit?) I mean, yeah. That should do. - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs & misfits - a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage. HUNTER S. THOMPSON, "Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 18:33:38 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide >>>>Sure, I probably should have flipped through the CPG a little more >before >buying. OTOH, it was by David Edelstein, and I've come to think that >Dave's stuff is pretty good; this was my first disappointment in that >regard.<<< > >Did you think the stuff wasn't good, or were you just disappointed that it >revised earlier material? Some of both. I mean, I didn't really feel the need for more _rules_ on playing humans. What I was looking for were new and interesting *ways* to play them, and I felt that this was where the book really fell short. How do you keep humans alive in a campaign that's powered by Celestials who can (literally) eat them for lunch? How can you overcome their rather huge innate disadvantages (low stats, low hits, stay dead)? How do humans interact with Celestials? One part of the book that I _did_ like was the sidebar on "Humans and Celestials" (pgs. 97-99). That was good, but there wasn't enough of this sort of thing. I guess I just didn't feel that the book would let me run a human-centered campaign in the way that the APG or IPG would let me run campaigns with Celestial PCs. I think of it this way: a supplement can give three things -- (1) new rules and resources, (2) nifty ideas and adventure seeds, and/or (3) "flavor"... that indefinable something that makes GMs and PCs say "coooool". These three can overlap, of course -- a new character class may be a new rule (1), that inspires new sorts of adventure (2), and that is also really cool (3). But I figure my money should buy at least one of the three. The APG and IPG scored pretty high in these respects, despite various flaws and problems; they told me a lot more about the Celestials, gave them a lot of nifty new powers, and inspired me to think about them in all sorts of interesting new ways I didn't get much of that from the CPG. Yah, it had a lot of new rules and whatnot, but not much that I couldn't have worked out or fudged or myself... I mean, it's pretty easy to work out rules for drugs and poisions, even on the fly. Adventure seeds there were none, unless you count the rather brief section on "humans in the War". And, I know this is very subjective, but I just didn't find anything that tweaked my "cool" bone. I said earlier that I thought Dave's stuff was usually quite good. In this case, I wonder if he might just have been handed a peculiarly difficult assignment. Making humans work in an IN campaign is *hard*. I've made one attempt at it so far... and the only way I could make it work was running it in a _Call of Cthulhu_ sort of mode. If the players _expect_ that most of their PCs will be insane, crippled, or horribly dead by the adventure's end, it seems to go down easier. Heck, it can even be fun in a sick sort of way. But integrating human characters into a long-term IN campaign seems to be sort of like having Lassie join the Justice League of America: she's a bright puppy, but Darkseid just isn't going to be impressed. The CPG didn't give me any good new ways to work around that basic problem, other than the excessively obvious ones (give the humans Songs and artifacts, make a human the adventure's McGuffin, etc.) >Keep in mind, the CPG does *not* just reprint the sorcery, undead, Soldier, >and Saint stuff from Night Music and the Marches. It significantly revises >it -- a lot of that stuff (especially the sorcery rules) was *broken* and >needed to be fixed. Hmm. What in particular? I'm curious. Sorcerors seem to be designed as an NPC class almost exclusively; I have a little trouble seeing how they'd work as long-term PCs. That seemed to stay the same. Undead can be interesting, but are limited by the Saminga connection (and, let's face it, if people wanted to play undead PCs there are an awful lot of games better suited to it than this one). That leaves Soldiers, and I didn't notice too many big differences there... did I miss something? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 22:53:04 +1000 From: dea93@dockyard.co.nz (vikdsevt) Subject: IN> Members - Special Offers.... For removal email home90@bigfoot.com with subject "removed" Check out these great offers...for members only! _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ UNBELIEVABLE AIR FARES! CHECK THIS ONE OUT! $99 AIRFARE! Hawaii, Las Vegas..etc..7-night stay required. Call for details: 1-888-306-8080 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PLEASE HELP US! THE ANIMAL RESCUE NEEDS YOUR HELP TODAY! If you have a soft spot in your heart for previous little puppies and ponies, please fax us at (903) 536-5023 for info _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ No selling. $100 Comish on every sale, Operates automatically, Products everyone wants. Fax on demand (415) 273-6020 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ It's time to make that change. Time to earn that extra money. Care to earn $500-1,500 a month part time from home? You can! Or care to start at $5,00 a month full time? You can! If you are serious about changing your life and health, visit us at: www.ushbn.com Access Code B1040 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Search over 6500 pages of solid information reports download gigabytes of free software, free money sources, get directed to over 113 database resources, and get free access to application software and more ! www.privatesite.net _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GET RID OF MONEY STRESS TODAY! HAVE HIGH INTEREST LOANS & CREDIT CARDS-- NEED TO CONSOLIDATE DEBT LOANS FOR NEW HOME PURCHASES JUST CLICK HERE WWW.MORTGAGE-BANKERS.NET _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Free Information on Y2K 47% of 1997's PC arent complaint Y2K Bug??? Free Details http://jump.toiy2ksoftware Email y2ksoftware@kfwbmail.com _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ For removal instructions, please read above info. This announcement is for members only! e3@dockya ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 22:54:41 -0500 From: Kris Overstreet Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide At 06:33 PM 8/31/99 -0400, you wrote: >>Keep in mind, the CPG does *not* just reprint the sorcery, undead, Soldier, >>and Saint stuff from Night Music and the Marches. It significantly revises >>it -- a lot of that stuff (especially the sorcery rules) was *broken* and >>needed to be fixed. > >Hmm. What in particular? I'm curious. > >Sorcerors seem to be designed as an NPC class almost exclusively; I have a >little trouble seeing how they'd work as long-term PCs. Just an observation... ... when an NPC-only class of character is created, there will ALWAYS be at least ONE group where the GM caves in and lets a player run such a character as a PC. For that matter, I may just pick up the CPG (since I haven't seen a comp copy in my mailbox I'll have to be a mensch and pay cash), look through it, and maybe offer a campaign for all sorcerer PCs. Be reeeeal interesting to see the politics working in -that- one. }:-{D Redneck Kris Overstreet, too many websites.... http://www.detnet.com/redneck/ - Personal homepage http://www.wren-spot.com/wlp/ - Business webpage http://www.antarctic-press.com/ - Someone else's page ... not enough time ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 21:11:01 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Recent purchases In a message dated 8/31/99 9:34:11 AM Central Daylight Time, johnk@ascc.lucent.com writes: << I believe that Beth (among others) wants to do an Ethereal Players Guide. Would this do? =) >> Huzzah! :) Rev. Brian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 21:32:53 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide In a message dated 8/31/99 2:13:43 PM Central Daylight Time, AmadanSJG@compuserve.com writes: << Keep in mind, the CPG does *not* just reprint the sorcery, undead, Soldier, and Saint stuff from Night Music and the Marches. It significantly revises it -- a lot of that stuff (especially the sorcery rules) was *broken* and needed to be fixed. >> I still think Sorcerers are kind of wussy. But then I suppose it would disrupt the feel of the game for a sorcerer character to say, "Fireballs coming online, B.A." And some of them can make mummies and zombies. (heh heh... kewl!) I think that the sorcerer's most powerful ability is their ability to learn Songs. I think most sorcerous organizations might have more than a couple of Songs in their repitoire, possibly bought from demons, or whatever. And the ones that don't are trying to get them. (Provided they know what they are.) I'll bet a popular song that most sorcerers would kill for is the Corporeal Song of Entropy. I mean, really, just about every sorcerer who ever started into the profession did so with dreams of immortality. Especially considering that they know where they'll probably be going when they die. Reverend Brian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 19:07:08 PDT From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Rules questions 1. If a Malakite resonates a human possessed by a Shedite, does he get results from the human, or from the Shedite? 2. What are the mechanics, if any, for a character "pulling a punch," as when (for example) a Strength 9 Malakite wishes to subdue (i.e. knock unconscious) a human possessed by a Shedite without doing the human any more damage than can be avoided? Thank you for your assistance. Janet Anderson ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:29:28 -0400 From: "Eddie" Subject: Re: IN> Rules questions As to your first question The Shedite - ----- Original Message ----- From: Janet Anderson To: Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 10:07 PM Subject: IN> Rules questions > 1. If a Malakite resonates a human possessed by a Shedite, does he get > results from the human, or from the Shedite? > > 2. What are the mechanics, if any, for a character "pulling a punch," as > when (for example) a Strength 9 Malakite wishes to subdue (i.e. knock > unconscious) a human possessed by a Shedite without doing the human any more > damage than can be avoided? > > Thank you for your assistance. > > Janet Anderson > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 00:18:35 -0500 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> Rules questions At 7:07 PM -0700 8/31/99, Janet Anderson wrote: >1. If a Malakite resonates a human possessed by a Shedite, does he get >results from the human, or from the Shedite? Depends on the check-digit. It's -possible- you'd get both, but I'm not too sure. Checks 1-4 are listed in referance to the subjects own moral standards. . . So if his moral standards are being influenced by a Shedite. . . A Check of 6 -might- be about the only way to really tell. Otherwise, unless you're of Destiny using Divine Destiny, it's next to impossible. >2. What are the mechanics, if any, for a character "pulling a punch," as >when (for example) a Strength 9 Malakite wishes to subdue (i.e. knock >unconscious) a human possessed by a Shedite without doing the human any more >damage than can be avoided? I don't -think- there is any. The system is cinamatic, and leaves a lot up to the individual GM to decide. One possibility is by using some sort of extended risk setup. For each - -1, or -2, to the target number you can modify the check digit +/- 1. If you fail the roll, but it still falls under the unmodified target number, you do full damage. Another possibility is to make a Precision roll immediately afterwards, and subtract the check digit from the damage. If you -fail- then you wind up -adding- the check digit. . . Stuff like that. Hey, it's not PERFECT. . . But who said anything about being fair where Hell is concerned? *evil grin* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur * http://www.best.com/~lyceum/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 06:29:52 +0100 (BST) From: Warsinger Subject: IN> Malakim [Longish] Player looking through the IN rulebook in character generation: "I want to play a Malakim - so I'll take the Fighting, Dodge, Large Weapon etc skills right?... Oh and Song of Thunder..." The Malakim resonance is for Honour not combat - based on pure Resonance the Calabim are overall the more effective Celestial fighters - and on the angelic side I'd say the Ofanim are. So why do all Malakim get lumped into combat bunny category? 'Historically' in IN I'd blame Uriel - psycho little freak that he was :) (I like to make my biases clear at the start :) ), but in game mechanical terms - well the write-ups under each Superior make it clear. And then there is that Oath - "I shall not suffer an evil to live, when it my choice". Stereotypical Malakim of the Sword - there is an evil before me - therefore I will kill it and so the 'live' part of the Oath becomes the critical bit. Malakim under orders from a s(S)uperior to leave this demon/dodgy human alone takes the 'when it is my choice" part as critical. The third option of cource is removing the evil. Redemption. I can certainly see some deeply honourable Malakim of Flowers working to redeem the Fallen - I was always a little uncomfortable with the blanket statement that Novalis has few Malakim as they are too violent - I don't really like the immediate equation of Honour with violence - surely some Malakim could find another way to show their honour. And I can see Malakim of War having some following both attitudes - recruitment of a valuable resource is better than its destruction after all - and there are plenty of hints in the books that Michael is that pragmatic (er his Saints in particular). The rest of the Malakim of War might not generally know of them perhaps... Hmmm - another point here is the general fear demons have of Malakim - particularly with regard to the 'quick' help Malakim sometimes give a potential demonic Redemption candidate - I sincerely hope that they hadn't found confirmation via Resonance or other Celestial means that the demon was a true candidate - I don't see any Archangel being happy with a trigger happy Malakim at that point - even Laurence understands the value of military intelligence after all. Basically angels are discouraging demons from attempting to Redeem which is wrong - I know an argument can be made about the importance of Faith - but there is also a reasonable argument that since the demon has removed itself from God's grace it is up to it to find it's way to a suitable angel as part of its penance and expecting divine help is egocentric in a way they should be trying to deny at that time. But that debate always comes up with Faith - it is described better for IN in the APG (IIRC). While I can see David, Archangel of Stone, taking the tough approach - I really can't see a fair few other Archangels being happy with the idea. Blandine: Her Malakim Attunement is fine as it stands (very nice too :) ) but given her connections to Novalis - and the whole matter of the Word of Fear - I can certainly see strong potential here for redemptionist Malakim. David: Already covered above. Although this could be altered a lot with how you see David - as per Fall of the Malakim - er he's probably too stupid to have an opinion on the issue frankly, but if you look at the idea of growing stronger in groups - then a group an angels pciking a demon to take into that group to gain some of their strength of spirit doesn't seem that unreasonable. Not your average Malakim of Stone admittedly - but an interesting potential. Oh and any Malakim of Stone can use the time while he waiting for his foe to attack to attempt a conversion natch :) Dominic: I'm not getting the debate on Dominic being dodgy and suspicious here - but if you are slanting him you've probably already worked out how his Choirs act anyway - but taking at the main books desc - and the impression I got from his expanded writeup - most of his Malakim would be busy with Triads - but Triads investigating the demonic community on Earth for redemption candiates are a possibility. Eli: Given the general slightly more ah 'relaxed' attitudes of these Servitors I can a distinct split between those who went to work for Michael, those to Gabriel, and those work as redemptionists. Course a faker trying to catch out one of these guys is going have very interesting fight on their hands if they getg caught out :) Gabriel: I'd say these guys are too busy - the world is very full of cruel people who need their attention - Gabriel needs the release from pain they provide her. I'd think they'd be sympathetic though to the redemptionists. And I could see quite a few who would not immediately go for the You're cruel - you die approach - You're cruel - so stop it or else more likely. Janus: Definately sympathetic, and I think even a dodgy Dominic would be happy if it quietened down the disturbance these guys would otherwise make :) Bit too long term though... Although keeping a potential redemption candiate on the move is quite a good idea now that I think about it more. Jean: Not got my book with me - and I can't rem what they get and what they do as an assignment - drat. Jordi: Well I think the relevant word here is predator - and I don't think many of his Malakim would be redempionists - if any. Laurence: There is certainly a place for 'traditional' Demon-Hunter Malakim - and its here. But can see a small group of Redemptionists here taking a slightly different angle on the Word of Purity - purification on the small scale so that each individual soul is cleansed. It's fairly hard to argue against the idea that demons can redeem and those who want to should be helped - it is just how far you are willing to go to meet them that is the issue. Marc: Oh I like the whole style of the canon Malakim of Trade - I'm just not sure about what the Virtues are doing as spies. I like James Bond too, but still... Checking for Demons of Greed and Media within the corporate structure - taking them on in their mutual home ground - but then that does pretty much about to the canon thing... Oh well - fair enough :) Michael: Already covered above. Novalis: Already covered apart from the issue of her Attunement for them. Perhaps an addition to their Resonance so that they can see how the code of honour of the target should(in terms of how best it could be improved and expanded) grow ?- make them popular with Destiny Servitor's certainly. Yves: These guys already have a difficult job but the redemptionist philosophy basically is their job so no problem really. I'll think I'll leave this here for now - Minor Superiors aren't really required to make the point any further. Warsinger Cute and fluffy....(with claws) Kafziel, Ofanim of Light , Master of the Realms of Night (if you can mangle Lilim as a singular -I can mangle Ofanim :) ) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 09:50:48 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Malakim [Longish] >Player looking through the IN rulebook in character generation: "I want to >play a Malakim - so I'll take the Fighting, Dodge, Large Weapon etc skills >right?... Oh and Song of Thunder..." Yep. You see that a lot. >The Malakim resonance is for Honour not combat - based on pure Resonance >the Calabim are overall the more effective Celestial fighters - and on the >angelic side I'd say the Ofanim are. I actually had one player react with surprise when he realized that the Malakim resonance had nothing to do with combat. >So why do all Malakim get lumped >into combat bunny category? The writeup in the IN book probably has a lot to do with it! >And then there is that Oath - "I shall not suffer an evil to live, when it >my choice". Stereotypical Malakim of the Sword - there is an evil before >me - therefore I will kill it and so the 'live' part of the Oath becomes >the critical bit. Malakim under orders from a s(S)uperior to leave this >demon/dodgy human alone takes the 'when it is my choice" part as critical. Superiors learn that they have to give their Malakim fairly detailed instructions... usually along the lines of "don't do this or this or this, unless you have permission, or are directly threatened". Otherwise the Mals would just be walking down the street resonating and killing random evil humans. Mind you, there are ways for the Malakim to be subtle. A number of famous policemen and prosecutors have been Malakim. Sending an evil human to the electric chair satisfies their oath just fine. Remember, the Mal doesn't have to kill the evil himself; he just can't suffer it to live. And if the jury lets the bad guy walk, hey, it's not the Malakite's fault or choice (this assumes that the Superior has instructed him to hold that Role, of course). Another point that gets missed is that the Malakite resonance is pretty handy for digging up information about humans... all humans, not just the spectacularly good and evil ones. After the Seraphim, the Malakim are tied with Mercurians for "best Celestial detectives". A Malakite who can come down off his high horse can work surprisingly well with humans. After all, he *knows* who the good ones are. It's easy to imagine a Mal running a group of Soldiers. The humans would know with absolute certainty that they could trust each other! A Mal could also be used to keep a human organization -- anything from a corporation to a school to a church -- honorable, upright, and free of evil influence. Again, careful instructions would keep the Mal from getting distracted by evil or going on a killing spree. >The third option of cource is removing the evil. Redemption. Excellent point. >I can certainly see some deeply honourable Malakim of Flowers working to >redeem the Fallen - I was always a little uncomfortable with the blanket >statement that Novalis has few Malakim as they are too violent - I don't >really like the immediate equation of Honour with violence - surely some >Malakim could find another way to show their honour. Another very good point. [snip re specific Superiors] Mind you, redemption isn't easy or simple; it involves a demon more or less turning itself inside out. There are probably a dozen plausible potential candidates for Redemption, already dissonant and Renegade, for every one that actually makes it. So the angels have to balance potential benefits - -- a redeemed demon is a Very Good Thing, but a dead demon is a Good Thing too. And, of course, there's always the chance of a ringer... Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 10:23:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim [Longish] On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Warsinger wrote: > Janus: Definately sympathetic, and I think even a dodgy Dominic would be > happy if it quietened down the disturbance these guys would otherwise make > :) Bit too long term though... Although keeping a potential redemption > candiate on the move is quite a good idea now that I think about it more. Actually, I'd say definitely redemptionist... what could be MORE of a change than a demon repenting, redeeming, and becoming an angel? It affects things on both sides of the celestial wall, and often makes others nearby question things about themselves. IMC, Janus is the one who pushes for redemption the most (and, unfortunately, seems the least bothered - though still bothered - when an angel falls). > Jean: Not got my book with me - and I can't rem what they get and what > they do as an assignment - drat. They're basically really, really good mechanics. No real assignment given. With their Superior, I'd say they'd probably have no bias towards either destruction or redemption; they'd be expected to evaluate each demon and each situation individually, and act appropriately. PK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:14:44 +0100 From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) Subject: Re: IN> Corporeal Player's Guide On Tue, Aug 31, 1999 at 09:32:53PM -0400, BillionSix@aol.com wrote: > I think that the sorcerer's most powerful ability is their ability to learn > Songs. I think that the sorceror's most powerful ability is the ability to summon infinite reliquaries who can also do cool tricks on demand (also known as Ethereal spirits). (Unless it was revised as of the CPG.) 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 ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1317 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.