From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Sep 9 19:11:14 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 TAA05510 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 1999 19:11:13 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id TAA00313 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 9 Sep 1999 19:05:34 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 19:05:34 -0500 Message-Id: <199909100005.TAA00313@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 #1325 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 Thursday, September 9 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1325 In this digest: Re: IN> Rules Questions. Re: IN> Rules Questions. IN> Another rule question IN> How do people play demons? IN> Malakim Re: IN> Another rule question IN> How to Play Demons (and Angels) Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Rules Questions. IN> The new GURPS In Nomine Re: IN> Rules Questions. Re: IN> The new GURPS In Nomine RE: IN> Another rule question RE: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Rules Questions. Re: IN> Rules Questions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 16:45:58 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. At 1:49 PM -0500 9/9/99, Ben Glickler wrote: >I was running a session in which my angels were required to bring down the >demonic heirarchy in Chicago. We ran into a few problems. > >1. Can a Calabite use his resonance to tear an angel's vessel to pieces? Yes. Though the angel gets to resist with a Strength roll, which may cause problems for the Calabite! >The rules say he can only use it on another celestial while in celestial >form. Does this mean he can only use it on their celestial form if they are >both celestial, or does it mean *any* celestial, in *any* form, is immune >unless the Calabite is also celestial? He can't use it to attack another celestial's celestial form unless he is also celesitial. (Use the Celestial Song of Light for that.) >2. Why is it so easy to possess someone? Whereas a normal fight between >an angel and a demon may take several points of essence and lots of >injuries, a crafty celestial can end a fight swiftly by spending a few >points of essence on the song of Possession. Statistically, he only has to >try twice. Seems bunk to me. Hey, angels travel in packs, y'know? Possess someone, and they'll probably toast your vessel, and then you're out of luck when the Song runs out... Also remember that if the angel resists the first time, you can't try again for an hour or more. And the target can spend Essence to resist. (If your angels have wimpy Will, that's their problem.) >3. If you possess a celestial, they go to the marches. If they have two >vessels, they can come back. What >happens if you leave their body after they come back? This is in both the APG (under Kyrios) and I believe the FAQ. The vessel vanishes, just as if the owner had gone celestial normally or swapped vessels. > Can they switch between them? No. They can immediately spend 1 Essence and return to the ex-captured vessel, though, as it's gone back to their "potentiality." >What happens if they leave one of their bodies unoccupied for >15 minutes (ala the body bag rules)? Since the abandoned vessel vanishes back into the owner's "potentiality," it's not lying around to be comatose. The user of the Song of Possession has his body lying around comatose, though. It will stay in a coma until the GM gets tired of it being that way. >4. A Shedite is required to corrupt the mind. A celestial's vessel, when >empty, is nothing. You can use the song of Possession to occupy an empty >vessel. You can use your resonance (according to the Infernal Player's >Guide and the Book of Songs) as a Shedite to shift the song of Possession >into your own resonant power, thus using a song to take someone over and >then keeping them according to your resonance rules. Since there's nothing >to corrupt in an empty vessel, can you *keep* an angel's (or demon's) vessel >forever? In this case, I'd say no. Treat it like Shedim of the Game, or rule that the Shedite must corrupt ITSELF... (Though even if you say yes, the Shedite has to leave the vessel to possess anyone _else_, and when it does, the vessel vanishes, poof.) >5. A Mercurien's resonance lasts for a number of minutes. Can they >glance at several people during that time and thus gain insight into all of >their relationships, names, cultural origins, etc? No -- but he will be able to sense the person's estimation of himself, relative to those around him, for the entire duration, even if those around him change, or the target's self-esteem changes. This can let the Mercurian talk to someone and see how that person's self-esteem behaves, based on what the Mercurian is saying. It doesn't allow multiple targets in that timeframe. >6. How violent is a Mercurien using a tranquilizer dart on a human? :-) Almost certainly dissonantly so. (A Song of Sleep, on the other hand, doesn't break the skin and is probably _not_ dissonant.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:09:45 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. My answers are non-canon, but I think they're generally correct. At 14:49 -0400 9/9/99, Ben Glickler wrote: >1. Can a Calabite use his resonance to tear an angel's vessel to pieces? >The rules say he can only use it on another celestial while in celestial >form. Does this mean he can only use it on their celestial form if they are >both celestial, or does it mean *any* celestial, in *any* form, is immune >unless the Calabite is also celestial? I believe the celestial form requirement is trying to say that a Calabite can only attack a celestial currently in celestial form, if the Calabite is also celestial. I.e., you can't attack inter-realm (which is a general rule). Yeah, this isn't strictly inter-realm, since the target is still in the corporeal realm, just in celestial form, but I think that's the principle involved. As far as I remember, there's nothing that prohibits Calabim from attacking *any* corporeal target (including vessels) with the resonance while they're also corporeal. It's certainly valid in GURPS In Nomine. >2. Why is it so easy to possess someone? Whereas a normal fight between >an angel and a demon may take several points of essence and lots of >injuries, a crafty celestial can end a fight swiftly by spending a few >points of essence on the song of Possession. Statistically, he only has to >try twice. Seems bunk to me. It's not all that easy if the target also uses Essence to resist. And getting low on Essence leaves you vulnerable in other ways. And your original vessel is left right there, unconscious and vulnerable, as well. If it's more than a one-on-one fight, you're asking for Trauma, if your own vessel gets trashed while you were "out". >3. If you possess a celestial, they go to the marches. If they have two >vessels, they can come back. What >happens if you leave their body after they come back? Can they switch >between them? What happens if they leave one of their bodies unoccupied for >15 minutes (ala the body bag rules)? This one is covered in the FAQ: - --- What happens to a celestial when their vessel is possessed? The Celestial's mind is tossed into the Marches. If they have another vessel they can use, they can get back to earth with that one. A Kyriotate who has no other vessel assumes his Celestial form (p. 102). Shedim are evicted and must find a new host quickly (p. 152). When the duration of Possession is over, the mind of the Celestial is drawn back to their vessel as long as they are still in the Marches (or they can choose to let the vessel vanish). If they are elsewhere, the vessel vanishes. - --- So, if the possessor leaves the body after the owner returns in a new vessel, the original vessel vanishes (the owner is "elsewhere" than in the Marches at the time). Presumably, the owner could then switch back to his first vessel normally (costing 1 Essence and a lot of noise). And there's no way to leave a vessel untenanted here, that I can see. >4. A Shedite is required to corrupt the mind. A celestial's vessel, when >empty, is nothing. You can use the song of Possession to occupy an empty >vessel. You can use your resonance (according to the Infernal Player's >Guide and the Book of Songs) as a Shedite to shift the song of Possession >into your own resonant power, thus using a song to take someone over and >then keeping them according to your resonance rules. Since there's nothing >to corrupt in an empty vessel, can you *keep* an angel's (or demon's) vessel >forever? A Shedite can't possess a celestial's vessel normally with his resonance, therefore he can't shift to possessing it via resonance -- his resonance simply can't hold him there. So he can only possess it for the duration of the Song (which is less restrictive). >5. A Mercurien's resonance lasts for a number of minutes. Can they >glance at several people during that time and thus gain insight into all of >their relationships, names, cultural origins, etc? I *think* it only applies to one person at a time (there's a FAQ answer to a similar question for the Seraph resonance). However, if the person moves around in that time, the Mercurian would get their relationships with all the people they were near to during the interval. Or that's how I'd handle it, anyway. In GURPS In Nomine, the mechanics we chose are definitely one "primary" target per resonance roll. >6. How violent is a Mercurien using a tranquilizer dart on a human? :-) As a GM, I'd say it depends on the Mercurian's intent. If he actually doesn't intend to harm the target, and the dart doesn't do any significant damage in and of itself, then I'd let it pass without dissonance. Though any Mercurian should think twice about such an act, at least. Similar analysis would apply to other relatively non-violent "attacks" like the Songs of Charm or Harmony. Or a high-tech "stunner" weapon, if such were available in IN. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:13:51 -0400 From: "Chris Bergstresser" Subject: IN> Another rule question Speaking of rules questions: I've got a Cherub with a Strength 10, Fighting 2, and Claws/4. If I'm reading the rules correctly, with claws retracted she needs a 12 to hit and has a power of -2 (-3 for fists, +1 for superhuman strength). With claws extended, she'd have a 12 to hit and a power of +2 (-3 fists, +1 strength, +4 claws). This is only 1 power better than using a knife, right? Also, if she put 3 points into fighting she'd have a 15 to hit, and a power of +6 (!?) (-3 fists, +1 strength, +1 fighting ability, +4 claws, +3 automatic success) - -- Chris ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:39:24 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> How do people play demons? >>>Anyways, we think it's fun to roleplay rape, murder, and degradation, as demons. We also think it's fun to roleplay charity, love, compassion, and spiritual beauty, as angels. That's what roleplaying is about, n'est pas? Playing a side of yourself that you don't normally play in "real life"? We don't mind extremes at all; we're all mature, experienced gamers who are comfortable with ourselves... both the light parts and the dark parts.<<< Actually, I've never found people who like playing rape and murder for kicks were all that mature -- you get a lot of verbiage about "catharsis" and "exposing our dark sides," but just because one can *imagine* acts of rape and sado-masochism and other perversions doesn't mean it's "a part of you." I've never seen the roleplaying value, much less the maturity, in the "I rape the princess, slit her throat, and steal her jewelry" style of gaming. Inventing atrocities for your PC to commit isn't a deep thought exercise, and doesn't demonstrate any impressive grasp on human nature or your own dark side. Any adolescent can do it. Which is why I am disappointed when I hear this is how demons are played in some games. IMO, if people play angels as the "good guys" in IN, and demons are just the psycho-bloodletters for juvenile gamers who want to indulge their sado-masochistic fantasies, you're missing out on the complexity that can be portrayed in the War between Heaven's uncompromisingly selfless ideal, and Hell's more pragmatic and far more selfish model of individuality. The irony of "good" edging toward fascism, while "free thinking" spirals inevitably toward totalitarian slavery, is what allows interesting questions to be asked in-game. If one just wants to cackle "BWAHAHAHA!" and rape princesses, I imagine any game allows that sort of indulgence. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:38:53 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Malakim >> This is one of the passages I have serious problems with the In Nomine >>canon. It turns out the question "Did Hitler know he was evil?" is a [...] It's actually one of the passages I am likely to alter slightly in any revised editions. In the beginning, I'm happily willing to assume that he didn't register as "evil" to passing Malakim. After things got rolling, they would have been _forbidden_ to tamper with humanity by offing such a public figure.<<< Actually, I have *never* understood why that bit got added. I wrote the section on Malakim, and that nonsense about Hitler was stuffed in there after I was done with it. Personally, I think it's stupid to say either that a Malakite can't kill someone because he's "honorable according to his own standards" (I'm sure there are child molestors with sufficiently twisted worldviews that they believe they are educating and helping their victims, but I can't see a Malakite standing by gnashing his teeth saying "Damn it, he's a child molestor, but he thinks it's OK so I must do nothing!"), or that they would have been forbidden to take out Hitler, per se. It makes a lot more sense to say that Hitler was simply too well-guarded. Or perhaps that both sides were worried about the escalation that would occur if public figures got assassinated. ("You kill Hitler, we'll kill Churchill...") Or perhaps both Yves and Kronos saw Bad Things happening for their side if Hitler was removed by celestial intervention. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:41:10 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Another rule question At 17:13 -0400 9/9/99, Chris Bergstresser wrote: >Speaking of rules questions: > > I've got a Cherub with a Strength 10, Fighting 2, and Claws/4. If I'm >reading the rules correctly, with claws retracted she needs a 12 to hit and >has a power of -2 (-3 for fists, +1 for superhuman strength). Actually, I think you also need to add Corporeal Forces to that, but it looks otherwise OK. >With claws >extended, she'd have a 12 to hit and a power of +2 (-3 fists, +1 strength, >+4 claws). I'd read it that the Power 4 from Claws is *instead of* -3 from fists -- you don't subtract the fist-only Power from a knife attack! It's just that fists aren't very good weapons for doing damage. The only thing I might use as a modifier to the normal power of fist attacks is brass knuckles, and I'd have to refer to the book to see how those are actually handled -- they might count as a direct weapon, and not just increased fist damage. > This is only 1 power better than using a knife, right? Also, if >she put 3 points into fighting she'd have a 15 to hit, and a power of +6 >(!?) (-3 fists, +1 strength, +1 fighting ability, +4 claws, +3 automatic >success) Don't forget to add those Corp. Forces. Yeah, you can get some real combat-monsters this way. Add on one of those "extra damage" attunements, and you've got a *really* nasty character. Of couse, some of those opponents may have 144 hit points, too.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:39:56 -0400 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> How to Play Demons (and Angels) Though it's not my favorite science fiction series, I think "The Quintara Marathon" trilogy by Jack Chalker is, strangely enough, a good resource for an In Nomine GM. It presents three vastly different civilizations, each with a social structure and moral code that seems pretty evil to the other two, and then spends time portraying protagonists from each civilization. The first civilization is basically a capitalist-libertarian one, and is the one closest to modern Western civilization. Thus, initially it appears to be the most desirable society from the viewpoint of the average Westerner. However, we quickly see that it is capitalism with all the brakes removed, where your freedom is measured by your bank account, where social conscience is a negative survival trait, where the vast majority of the population is either dirt poor and living in the gutter, or barely getting by and working relentlessly under nightmarish conditions to avoid falling back into that gutter, and only an elite and lucky few hit the big time and achieve comfortable, safe standards of living. If you're one of that elite minority, civilization #1 is great -- wealth, power, freedom, you have it all. Otherwise, you live in constant fear of the day when you can't work, or where your debts exceed your ability to pay them, and you become a slave or else one of the starving masses. The second civilization is a theocracy ruled by an alien race that claims to be divine in origin. This race has mind control powers, and "reconditions" dissenters -- basically, you either buy the religious party line (which is very moralistic and conservative), or you get psychically brainwashed to conform. Naturally, this is appalling to members of the first civilization, who value freedom and individuality over safety and quality of life. If you examine the second civilization, you find that the vast majority of the population lives very happy, pleasant lives. As long as you're comfortable with the status quo, civilization #2 is idyllic. If you're a noncomformist or have higher ambitions, though, civilization #2 will mindwipe you. They think (not without good reason) that civilization #1 is brutal and inhumane. The third civilization is ruled by a different alien race which can possess other life forms. This is how they stay in control, since you never know when one of the "secret masters" is around. As with the "divine" aliens in civilization #2, the rulers of civilization #3 are rarely actually seen -- like the other two civilizations, this is a star-spanning, multi-racial empire. Civilization #3 is a brutal meritocracy. Might makes right is the only rule. You rise, fall, or are enslaved based purely on your ability to compete with those around you. If you have valuable skills or some other quality, you can barter or trade them, enlist in service with a more powerful person who will protect you, and try to move up the ladder. Cross the wrong person, and the only thing preventing anyone from killing you is your ability to kill him first, or having enough friends willing to retaliate to deter an attack. Outwardly, civilization #3 is far more brutal and inhumane than civilization #1 -- the majority of the population are slaves who can be killed at any time by their masters. But if you happen to be blessed with unusual talent, ambition, intelligence, or any other qualities, you've got a better chance of rising to the top in civilization #3. The secret masters exercise just enough control over the anarchy to ensure that there are channels for talented people to find their path. Civilization #3 regards civilization #1 as being weak, decadent and stifling, and civilization #2 as being a bunch of brainwashed religious fanatics. The key point is, every civilization is essentially correct in how it sees the other two; which one is "better" is purely a matter of your personal perspective. The series does an excellent job of making the reader look at the same situation from several different perspectives. Since I'm sure you can see many In Nomine parallels from the examples above, I recommend it for those who want to add some complexity to their Divine/Infernal politics. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:53:50 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Malakim At 5:38 PM -0400 9/9/99, David Edelstein wrote: >>> This is one of the passages I have serious problems with the In >Nomine >>>canon. It turns out the question "Did Hitler know he was evil?" is a >[...] > >It's actually one of the passages I am likely to alter slightly in any >revised editions. In the beginning, I'm happily willing to assume that he >didn't register as "evil" to passing Malakim. After things got rolling, >they would have been _forbidden_ to tamper with humanity by offing such a >public figure.<<< >[...] > Or perhaps both Yves and Kronos saw Bad Things happening for >their side if Hitler was removed by celestial intervention. Between the arguement that "God doesn't want major interventions" (to make Michael bite the bullet) and Yves mildly commenting, "I don't think it would be a good idea," I can see it handed down to the Malakim as some sort of "Don't do it," with "We're not supposed to tamper with human free will, and this is a big exercise of same" as the explanation. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 15:47:08 -0500 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. > Yes. Though the angel gets to resist with a Strength roll, which may > cause problems for the Calabite! Oh, I have no problems with this. A few Calabim in my game had been making life hell for the angels with their resonance, and then someone pointed out that rule. None of us had any problems with the way we were playing it, but we did want a second opinion for future reference. Thanks. > Hey, angels travel in packs, y'know? Possess someone, and they'll probably > toast your vessel, and then you're out of luck when the Song runs out... > Also remember that if the angel resists the first time, you can't try > again for an hour or more. And the target can spend Essence to resist. > (If your angels have wimpy Will, that's their problem.) Well, yes, but demons are mean and angels are nice. ;) It doesn't take a lot of brain-power for a demon to point a gun at his "own" head after he possesses an angel and tell the winged boys to back off or their "friend" gets it. Furthermore, even if your angel has a high will, it's the check digit that matters, right? And 50% of the time, the demon's check digit will win, if wills are 12 or less. Assuming both combatants are determined and have a high will, it's a flip of a coin, which is pretty good odds when you can win a fight before it even starts. It seemed a little unfair to me. And it's not going to be long before my players get tired of the demons doing it to them and start using it on the demons. ;) > This is in both the APG (under Kyrios) and I believe the FAQ. The vessel Thanks for the answer. I did read the FAQ but I must've suffered droopy-eye syndrome. Crazy B&R color scheme makes me see spooks. > The user of the Song of Possession > has his body lying around comatose, though. It will stay in a coma until > the GM gets tired of it being that way. Hm, he can't just suit back up into it? > >6. How violent is a Mercurien using a tranquilizer dart on a human? :-) > > Almost certainly dissonantly so. (A Song of Sleep, on the other hand, > doesn't break the skin and is probably _not_ dissonant.) I've been favoring a borderline ruling (don't overdo it or you'll be damned!) so far... How about if a Mercurien tackles a human? Is that bad? What happens if they shout at a human a whole bunch and threaten him with dire consequences? On another note, I've been having enormous problems with Malakites. Interpretation of their honor seems difficult, especially since it's hard to determine when their choices let evil escape, and what "escape" means, and so on. I've read the APG and other sources, but I can't get a handle on how to treat them at all. Any tips? Thanks. And I hope my editor doesn't bugger up the lines. ;) Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:25:05 -0400 From: "Cliff Wallis" Subject: IN> The new GURPS In Nomine I am new to In Nomine. I have several of the resource books already and understand that their is a GURPS In Nomine book coming soon. Is the GURPS IN Nomine a stand alone product or is it intended to supplement the In Nomine Rulebook, or do I need both to fully appreciate the game? thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:45:11 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. At 3:47 PM -0500 9/9/99, Ben Glickler wrote: >> Yes. Though the angel gets to resist with a Strength roll, which may >> cause problems for the Calabite! > > Oh, I have no problems with this. A few Calabim in my game had been > making life hell for the angels with their resonance, and then someone > pointed out that rule. None of us had any problems with the way we were > playing it, but we did want a second opinion for future reference. Thanks. Right, right, forgot. "Your Campaign May Vary, Have Fun." O;> >> Hey, angels travel in packs, y'know? Possess someone, and they'll probably >> toast your vessel, and then you're out of luck when the Song runs out... >> Also remember that if the angel resists the first time, you can't try >> again for an hour or more. And the target can spend Essence to resist. >> (If your angels have wimpy Will, that's their problem.) > > Well, yes, but demons are mean and angels are nice. ;) It doesn't take a >lot > of brain-power for a demon to point a gun at his "own" head after he >possesses > an angel and tell the winged boys to back off or their "friend" gets it. Hey, it's just Trauma. You pick up the demon's vessel and say, "Yeah, go ahead. He goes into Trauma -- if he's not in Heaven already yet -- and then you go into Trauma. And we know what demons do to each other in Trauma." > Furthermore, even if your angel has a high will, it's the check digit that >matters, > right? Ah, right, that mess between resist with check digit and simply "make your own Will roll." Let me see if the Canticorum is more clear on this. The Canticorum says, "If he succeeds, he is not possessed [...]." I would read that as, "Make your Will roll, and you're fine, no matter who had the better check digit." > It seemed a little unfair to me. And it's not going to be long before my >players get > tired of the demons doing it to them and start using it on the demons. ;) Ummmmm... So? O:> >> The user of the Song of Possession >> has his body lying around comatose, though. It will stay in a coma until >> the GM gets tired of it being that way. > > Hm, he can't just suit back up into it? Once the Song ends. Not before. If he finds some way to leave it behind indefinitely, then, well... Make that person reap the consequences! >> >6. How violent is a Mercurien using a tranquilizer dart on a human? >:-) >> >> Almost certainly dissonantly so. (A Song of Sleep, on the other hand, >> doesn't break the skin and is probably _not_ dissonant.) > > I've been favoring a borderline ruling (don't overdo it or you'll be >damned!) so far... Well, if gas-grenades are dissonant, as I _think_ I recall they're listed as being, in the APG (the back "Arsenal" section). > How about if a Mercurien tackles a human? Is that bad? Yes. > What happens if they shout > at a human a whole bunch and threaten him with dire consequences? That's okay. That's close enough to "diplomacy" in some circles... Of course, if you do it inappropriately, someone will notice and want to ask you some questions eventually. > On another note, I've been having enormous problems with Malakites. (Malakim.) >Interpretation > of their honor seems difficult, especially since it's hard to determine >when their choices > let evil escape, and what "escape" means, and so on. I've read the APG and >other > sources, but I can't get a handle on how to treat them at all. Any tips? Ah, lemme ramble... It's about the stage my brain is at. Malakim have a strict code of honor that _they_ follow -- and anything that they haven't sworn an oath about, or isn't part of their Archangel's mindset, well... Besides, why should they be honorable to the dishonorable? They're far more likely to keep their word to someone who _also_ has honor, in the Malakite's opinion, for instance, whether or not the Malakite has an oath to that effect or not. Letting evil escape -- letting it go free to do evil again someday. Sending a demon back to Hell isn't the _best_ solution, but you're generally assured that they're not going to be back on Earth too soon, so it's an acceptable way to deal with demons. A laid back Malakite, such as Creation or Destiny might spawn, might be fine if they were following around a demon and keeping it from doing evil (and working on psyching it into redemption!), but they might well get dissonant if their guardianship failed and the demon actually succeeded in doing something the Malakite considered evil. If a Malakite, for instance, _has_ to let a little Servitor demon go while he's locked in mortal combat with a Duke of Hell, then it's not dissonant -- he'd rather kill the greater evil than divide his attention and probably get killed himself. If a Malakite encounters a demon who is honorable and redeemable, then the bad thing to do would be to send it back to Hell! Because that would leave it a demon, while redemption will either destroy it utterly or make an angel out of it, destroying the _evil_ in its soul utterly. Um. Does that help? >Thanks. And I hope my editor doesn't bugger up the lines. ;) It did. O:> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:54:21 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The new GURPS In Nomine At 6:25 PM -0400 9/9/99, Cliff Wallis wrote: >I am new to In Nomine. I have several of the resource books already and >understand that their is a GURPS In Nomine book coming soon. Relatively soon. It's in production. (Possibly undergoing Chainsaw Editing; it was over-budget on the word-count.) > Is the GURPS >IN Nomine a stand alone product or is it intended to supplement the In >Nomine Rulebook, or do I need both to fully appreciate the game? If you have the GURPS Basic Set, all you really need for IN is the GURPS In Nomine book. GURPS IN does not, however, cover all the Songs in the Liber Canticorum (just the ones in the main In Nomine book, and a small selection of Really Useful ones from LCant), or all the relics in the Liber Reliquarum, or all the Cool Tether Details in the Liber Castellorum... We tried to fit in stuff from the Corporeal Player's Guide, but it was, by necessity, the bare minimums. (The Sorcery rules, for instance, got boiled down to a sidebar of equivalent GURPS spells from GURPS Magic and GURPS Grimoire.) However, there are conversion guidelines (both to and from GURPS!), including suggestions on converting attunements and Songs which aren't covered in GURPS IN. You shouldn't _need_ the main In Nomine rulebook to appreciate GURPS In Nomine. (And if all you want are the conversions from GURPS to In Nomine, you don't need the GURPS Basic Set, though GURPS Lite might come in very handy (and it's free on the net, yaddayadda).) But the main In Nomine book has very pretty full-color art, and different vignettes, and all that cool stuff! O;> Oh, yeah, and I'm one of the co-authors... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:38:25 -0400 From: "Chris Bergstresser" Subject: RE: IN> Another rule question > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > [mailto:owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com]On Behalf Of Walter Milliken > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 5:41 PM > To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > Subject: Re: IN> Another rule question > > > At 17:13 -0400 9/9/99, Chris Bergstresser wrote: > >Speaking of rules questions: > > > > I've got a Cherub with a Strength 10, Fighting 2, and Claws/4. If I'm > >reading the rules correctly, with claws retracted she needs a 12 > to hit and > >has a power of -2 (-3 for fists, +1 for superhuman strength). > > Actually, I think you also need to add Corporeal Forces to that, but it > looks otherwise OK. Whoa, whoa, wait a minute: the Fighting skill is based on Fighting + Strength + Corporeal Forces? That seems *really* ripe for abuse. > >With claws > >extended, she'd have a 12 to hit and a power of +2 (-3 fists, +1 > strength, > >+4 claws). > > I'd read it that the Power 4 from Claws is *instead of* -3 from fists -- > you don't subtract the fist-only Power from a knife attack! It's just > that fists aren't very good weapons for doing damage. Oh, OK. That makes more sense. > Don't forget to add those Corp. Forces. Yeah, you can get some real > combat-monsters this way. Add on one of those "extra damage" attunements, > and you've got a *really* nasty character. Of couse, some of those > opponents may have 144 hit points, too.... Which is why I insisted one of the characters take this sort of character. The others wanted to be a sneak thief Ofanite of Janus (who's better at swiping stuff and running away) and a high-ranking Seraphim of Jean with virtually no Earthly experience (Vessel level 2, Corporeal Forces 1, Strength 1, for a grand total of 3 body hits). They *needed* muscle. It's shaping up well. Two of Jean's servitors died (and are now stuck in Trauma) researching a Vapulan development lab in Jersey City (named "Lighting Bug Technologies", much to Jean's annoyance) and Jean had to shuffle his servitors around, causing him to yank the Seraphim and send him down to see what was up. The Seraphim landed at the Edison tether in NYC, wandered over to the local Foo.Bar.Com to introduce himself, and then went to check out the safehouse in the Wall Street area (shared with Marc) where the two angels were staying. He was creeping down the hallway and tried to check out the bedroom when he was smashed by something hiding behind the door which broke his neck. Jean's called in a favor with Janus to borrow the aforementioned Ofanite, and so the two of them and the Cherub (of Eli in service to Jean) are going to go down and try it again. - -- Chris ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 09:12:46 +0000 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: RE: IN> Malakim Beth wrote: > It's actually one of the passages I am likely to alter slightly in any revised > editions. In the beginning, I'm happily willing to assume that he didn't > register as "evil" to passing Malakim. After things got rolling, they would > have been _forbidden_ to tamper with humanity by offing such a public figure. > They'd have had to content themselves with picking off the demons who flocked > to the banner... if said demons didn't have too strong a Role to get at them > without exposing themselves to mundanes. Ever consider all those failed assassination attempts against Hitler? Perhaps they were conducted by angels trying to 'buck the system' and remove this human. However, Kronos was loving this human working diligently toward his Fate, and inspiring hundreds (thousands?) of others to do the same. Hitler probably had some rather powerful demonic protectors watching his back. Just a few IN thoughts. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 09:12:46 +0000 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. Beth wrote: > >4. A Shedite is required to corrupt the mind. A celestial's vessel, when > >empty, is nothing. You can use the song of Possession to occupy an empty > >vessel. You can use your resonance (according to the Infernal Player's > >Guide and the Book of Songs) as a Shedite to shift the song of Possession > >into your own resonant power, thus using a song to take someone over and > >then keeping them according to your resonance rules. Since there's nothing > >to corrupt in an empty vessel, can you *keep* an angel's (or demon's) vessel > >forever? > > In this case, I'd say no. Treat it like Shedim of the Game, or rule that > the Shedite must corrupt ITSELF... (Though even if you say yes, the > Shedite has to leave the vessel to possess anyone _else_, and when it does, > the vessel vanishes, poof.) I've been wondering about this one for a while. Since the Song of Possession doesn't use the celestial's resonance, and allows them to do things that are otherwise forbidden, I'm inclined to rule that their Dissonance conditions don't apply. Therefore Shedim don't have to corrupt a person/vessel taken over by the Song, and Kyriotates don't have to leave the host in as good a condition as they foun it. Both may be instinctively loathe to not follwo their normal natures, but they don't garner Dissonance. And who knows, they may *like* not havign to Corrupt, or not having to Care, and that could lead them to the path of Redemption/Falling. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:34:28 -0500 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> Rules Questions. My editor is possessed by a cynical Kyriotate of Networks, methinks. > Hey, it's just Trauma. You pick up the demon's vessel and say, "Yeah, > go ahead. He goes into Trauma -- if he's not in Heaven already yet -- > and then you go into Trauma. And we know what demons do to each other > in Trauma." Yes, it's just Trauma, but when the meaty Malakite stands to lose 15 character points worth of body, he might not be so noble, even if he doesn't suffer Trauma. =) > Ah, right, that mess between resist with check digit and simply "make > your own Will roll." Let me see if the Canticorum is more clear on this. > The Canticorum says, "If he succeeds, he is not possessed [...]." I > would read that as, "Make your Will roll, and you're fine, no matter > who had the better check digit." This is what I thought, but then it seems like many abilities that whap others are effectively useless except against others who are already weak. You could succeed with a 6 check digit, but who cares? They made their will roll. In the very first section of the rules regarding resisting things, I am fairly sure it said you should use the check digit to decide who wins. Alas, I am at work, and cannot quote such things. > (Malakim.) Argh! And I've even been retyping "Shedites" every time I write it just to stop myself! One day I'll cure my Itimitis. > acceptable way to deal with demons. A laid back Malakite, such as Creation > or Destiny might spawn, might be fine if they were following around a demon > and keeping it from doing evil (and working on psyching it into redemption!), I *like* this. I *really* like this. You rule. :) Another problem I have is the definition of evil the Malakim go by. The words "evil" and "demon" seem interchangeable in their mind-set, but a demon is not necessarily evil -- they are defined as selfish. So Malakim needn't thwap every demon they find, and if they do, they'd get into trouble. > Um. Does that help? Greatly. My own personal choice was to go with the spirit of their code of honor -- if they seemed to be honoring the spirit of the rules, the letter of the law wouldn't bite 'em in the butt with disonnance later. > It did. O:> Curses! How can I excorcise it? Ben ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1325 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.