From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Dec 14 15:20:31 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03632 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:20:30 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id PAA28920 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:19:21 -0600 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:19:21 -0600 Message-Id: <200012142119.PAA28920@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 #1971 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, December 14 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1971 In this digest: IN> Re: Personae Re: IN> Some of the most powerful Ethereals... Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine Re: IN> Grey Celestials Re: IN> Someone's done this right? Re:IN> Yes, I'm afraid so. Re: IN> Re: Dark Bright Re: IN> Some of the most powerful Ethereals... Re: IN> Sock Hop (with occasional gunplay) IN> Kyriotate w/Howl Re: IN> Oh, no, not another Minor Band Re: IN> Minor Choir of Yves??? Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl Re: IN> Someone's done this right? Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl Re: IN> Someone's done this right? Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl Re: IN> Someone's done this right? Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine Re: New adventure seed (WAS: Re: Lilith Tangent (Re: IN> Weirdquestion)) Re: IN> brief questions Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine Re: IN> Someone's done this right? Re: IN> Someone's done this right? IN> Breaking Dominic's Brain Re: IN> Re: Angelic Check Digit Tables? IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl IN> Questions Re: IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. Re:IN> Questions Re: IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. Re: IN> Questions Re: IN> Yes, I'm afraid so. Re: IN> Sun-Cross ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:36:28 -0500 From: Jonathan Walton Subject: IN> Re: Personae > Personae ("The Imposters") Beautiful job there, Mike. And an interesting concept to boot. The resonance for temperary roles was sheer genius. Now . . . how to transport this to the Steampunk setting that I'm currently playing with . . . ? Anarchistic, anti-establishment, temperary-role-making servitors of Nybbas? I don't see why not :) They're not only everywhere, they're everyone :) Later. Jonathan ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 05:03:42 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Some of the most powerful Ethereals... On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 17:36 Michael Walton wrote: >--- -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > you haven't been watching many Bruce Willis films, have >> you? i wouldn't necessarily include Bonfire of the Vanities, >> Striking Distance, or The Sixth Sense (though the last is debatable), >> but that still leaves all three Die Hard flicks, Last Man Standing, >> and Unbreakable, as well as The Last Boy Scout. i think Willis gets >> a kick out of playing this genre-type, and i for one love seeing him >> do it :) > Agreed. Willis has done more for the image of true heroes than any >other actor in recent times. Stuff like that is why the One Good Man >isn't dead yet. > But Nybbas is working on that... ah, good that you've seen Unbreakable, then. it is true that Willis seems alone lately in the sort of One Good Man genre, though Mel Gibson likes to play along its darker edges (or has in times past--witness Mad Max). i think you're forgetting all the work Harrison Ford has put into the role (Blade Runner, the Indiana Jones films, Air Force One, the Tom Clancy adaptations). Nybbas is working the OGM down, but Michael is funneling OGM support, i suspect. -=|horsefly|=- "Yes, stupidity causes aggravated damage." --Kris Green ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:20:49 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine > >There are a lot of numbers. And they are very crunchy. And when I conked > >out last night, ze spouse was up to about Asmodeus in reviewing the text, > >and remarking that the later entries ought to go faster since he'd gotten > >a better feel for how he was structuring entries by that time. > >And you know, he _finished_ it whilst I slept! > >http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/in-nomine/mechanics/ is now up and >running. Excellent . . . nice . . . I notice the conversion of Master of the Grantie Hand is cool, not merely a damage bonus. :) I assume "Symphonic Knowledge" to be a new power in and of itself in GURPS In Nomine. Hrm . . . I assume the high power cost of some of these powers reflect that fact that their duration is until the user terminates the effects of the power. I like the renaming of Gabriel's highest Distinction, though I dunno if it'd all ready been errata-ed. I like the additional ability granted to all angels of Jordi, and the one granted to all angels of Micheal, and Novalis, and Andrealphus, especially Belial. Very cool. :) - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "And that's the hardest thing for a human being to do - be wrong. Do you know that people would rather die than be wrong?" - --from A Matter For Men by David Gerrold _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:30:20 From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Grey Celestials > > There are rumored to exist celestial beings who are not bound by a > > choir or > > band, who exist outside of heaven and hell. Who are they? What are > > they capable of? Do they exist except as a rumor? > > There are many such beings. They're called Ethereals. If you're saying that Ethereals are Celestial beings, well, I'd have to say that you're wrong. I'm talking about beings native to the /celestial/ plane and who are capable of actually competing with Angels and Demons, as opposed to Ethereals, who (correct my if I'm wrong) can *never* destroy a Celestial because they can't engage in Celestial combat because they do not possess a Celestial form. Thus there's an obvious power imbalance here. Ethereals may be destroyed by Ethereal combat, reducing their Mind hits to zero such that when they snap out of their equivalent of Trauma they may have lost a force or two in the process . . . - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com pl312993@oak.cats.ohiou.edu http://www.geocities.com/llloyd.geo "And that's the hardest thing for a human being to do - be wrong. Do you know that people would rather die than be wrong?" - --from A Matter For Men by David Gerrold _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 02:57:18 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? At 3:11 AM -0500 12/14/00, Daniel Gallagher wrote: >It being the season and all I was wondering has anyone done a write >up for Clarance, the angel from it's a wonderful life. Mercurian of >Destany right? Why not a Mercurian of Fire? Or more to the point, a Reliever of Fire, who seeks to fledge (earn his wings) but has earned the Mercurian of Fire attunement. To my mind, George Bailey had already achieved his Destiny -- be it rescuing his brother so his brother could save a flattop full of sailors, or stopping Mister Gower from poisoning that person, or bringing the panic of the run on the bank down and restoring communal feeling to his town, or merely forswearing his selfish ambitions to leave town and see the world for selflessly serving others. I doubt a mere suicide after all that would hit him up for Fate. But, it's a textbook perfect intercession to prevent someone from inflicting self-cruelty. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 08:44:14 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> Yes, I'm afraid so. Tue, 12 Dec 2000 18:49:50 Maurice Lane wrote: [snip] >No, the worst problem is the alligators: the goddamned >sewer albino alligators. > >They're up to their mandibles in the critters. Moe, it really isn't nice to make someone with bronchitis like i have laugh so hard he coughs up a lung--like i feel i have... still, thanks anyway, you rat bastard :) "Next to hydrogen, stupidity is the most common element in the universe." --Harlan Ellison ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 09:22:14 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Dark Bright On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:54:41 -0500 Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 10:12 PM -0800 12/12/00, N O wrote: [snip] >>I wonder how you would do Malilim? > Hrm? presumably, a Lilim who thinks and acts like a Malakite, focused on obedience and honor, but with her Resonance for Needs still in place (further presumably used to detect whether someone would side with Heaven or Hell based on Needs detected). oh, and point to ponder about Dark Bright (first, yes, i finished and liked it): i think Laurence very much does not single out trainees for spectacular performance, or even good performance, or even good effort--publicly. Michael does that for Servitors who've earned it, and as per Superiors 1, it's a hefty reward. Laurence as i think of him (and it may be my impression of canon or it may be i'm giving him too much benefit of the doubt) is canny enough to know his soldiers--his swords, as he thinks of them--need to be polished with praise in private for the effort of training and fighting against Hell just as they need to be honed in practice and in battle. so yes, i liked it, but i just wouldn't run a game that way :) "Next to hydrogen, stupidity is the most common element in the universe." --Harlan Ellison ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:43:06 +1100 From: "Azrael/Demigouge" Subject: Re: IN> Some of the most powerful Ethereals... Subject: Re: IN> Some of the most powerful Ethereals... > From: Azrael/Demigouge > > > > > > (Say, IS there a Demon of Punnery? No, worse yet... is > > > an *ANGEL* of Punnery possible?) > > > > Same guy. He's a bit of a yo-yo. [...] > > < > I don't get it.>> > > >From the Infernal Player's Guide. > > Down and Up and Down again. A demon who Redeems and then Falls. > > They don't generally get a chance to do it again. Sorry I shoulda put a ~_^ or a ;) on the end of that, I do get it, I was pointing out the dual-meaning...(i.e. pun; yo-yo as in celestial side changer guy and crazy, bonker, nuts funny, silly person) of that statement...in case it wasnt intentional, and if it was intentional expressing my pain. Azrael ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:28:14 -0500 From: "Malachai Davidson" Subject: Re: IN> Sock Hop (with occasional gunplay) >But that's not the really funny part. Unfortunately, >nobody's considered the fact that, since the events of >the False Trumpet, LA isn't quite a demon-only city >anymore. The angel slated to host the next gathering >at the Eighth Virtue wants to demonstrate this, fairly >clearly. He's already got the bar chosen... six >blocks from Becky Sue's party. > >Guess what night all the Malakim are flying in? > >Moe You sir are a sick twisted man. Why do I get the feeling that every time the Eighth Virtue is in L.A. that the turnout is, well let's just say that a backroom probably won't cut it. Malachai Malakim of I Was Just Out For a Drink With My Choirmates _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:56:08 -0500 From: "Jim Lester" Subject: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl I have a question about this scenario. There is a Kyriotate of War with the Howl attunement in 2 bodies, fighting one other person. With one body, the Kyriotate howls, while the other body fights with the Demon. Next round, the demon is stunned. Now the Kyriotate howls again with one body, and fights with the other. On every round from now on this is repeated, with the Demon unable to do anything but dodge, and the Kyriotate stunning on every round until the Demon is dead. Am I missing something that would prevent this insta-kill scenario? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:01:19 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Oh, no, not another Minor Band At 07:56 PM 12/13/00, you wrote: Very nice! But... >Personae ("The Imposters") >... The level of the Role is equal to the Check Digit. What's the Status of the Role? Or can a Persona adopt a Role of any status? - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:27:00 -0800 From: Charles E Smith Subject: Re: IN> Minor Choir of Yves??? Please let me know what you think. Other than my introduction thingy this is the secound thing i've ever written for IN.<<< Terrific debut Cassandra! Encore, encore! ^_^ ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:11:12 -0500 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl At 10:56 AM 12/14/00, you wrote: >Am I missing something that would prevent this insta-kill scenario? The off-the-cuff answer is that no, you're not; Michael's angels fight dirty. (This tactic actually resembles how packs of wolves sometimes behave when they're hunting.) Making a snap judgment here, though, I'd say that any single angel (or single vessel) must wait a number of rounds equal to the victim's Ethereal Forces before Howl is effective against that victim again. In other words, if one enemy had 6 EthF, and another only had 3, the angel of War could Howl during the first round and get both of them. On the fourth round, the lesser enemy (3 EthF) could be affected again, and not until the seventh round could the stronger enemy be affected (as well as the weaker, again). The angel could use Howl all he wanted in the interim, but it wouldn't /do/ anything. - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:18:41 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl At 10:56 AM -0500 12/14/00, Jim Lester wrote: >I have a question about this scenario. > >There is a Kyriotate of War with the Howl attunement in 2 bodies, >fighting one other person. With one body, the Kyriotate howls, >while the other body fights with the Demon. Next round, the demon >is stunned. Now the Kyriotate howls again with one body, and fights >with the other. On every round from now on this is repeated, with >the Demon unable to do anything but dodge, and the Kyriotate >stunning on every round until the Demon is dead. > >Am I missing something that would prevent this insta-kill scenario? Not that I can see. Boom. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:31:11 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? From: "Whistling in the Dark" > > But, it's a textbook perfect intercession to prevent someone from > inflicting self-cruelty. Especially when the vision granted him shows him how much cruelty would have taken place if he had not been there. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:59:24 From: "Charles Glasgow" Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl >The off-the-cuff answer is that no, you're not; Michael's angels fight >dirty. (This tactic actually resembles how packs of wolves sometimes behave >when they're hunting.) Yes, and it makes equally as much sense but is less twinkish when instead of one Kyriotate with Howl, you simply have two or more of Michael's servitors of *any* choir with Howl. And now you know why (in addition to their general outlook towards all things demonic, which is bad enough) why a hunter-killer pack of War servitors showing up is generally regarded as a *really* bad day for demons, even worse than having a squad of Swordies land on your roof. (Although the Swordies are generally considered to be royally bad news as well... especially the ones with that damned Hunt attunement. Even if you run, you just can't rid of them.) Hrm... mixed-Superior specialized hunter-killer wolfpacks... mmmmmm... - -- Chuckg _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:27:21 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? At 10:31 AM -0600 12/14/00, Prodigal wrote: >From: "Whistling in the Dark" >> >> But, it's a textbook perfect intercession to prevent someone from >> inflicting self-cruelty. > >Especially when the vision granted him shows him how much cruelty would have >taken place if he had not been there. Amazing what you can do with the Corporeal and Celestial Songs of Dreams, isn't it? Clearly, George Bailey passed out after dragging Clarence out of that river, and Clarence took advantage to sculpt George's dreamscape pretty thoroughly. (Not that it was the most *subtle* job we'd seen....) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:25:55 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl At 4:59 PM -0500 12/14/00, Charles Glasgow wrote: > >Hrm... mixed-Superior specialized hunter-killer wolfpacks... mmmmmm... Add some Malakim of Revelation into the mix. You can't kill them. You can't stop them. They *will* find you. They *will* kill you. James Cameron has nothing on these guys. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:49:41 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? From: "Whistling in the Dark" > At 10:31 AM -0600 12/14/00, Prodigal wrote: > > > >Especially when the vision granted him shows him how much cruelty would have > >taken place if he had not been there. > > Amazing what you can do with the Corporeal and Celestial Songs of > Dreams, isn't it? Clearly, George Bailey passed out after dragging > Clarence out of that river, and Clarence took advantage to sculpt > George's dreamscape pretty thoroughly. Omigod. What if Clarence is actually one of the few unFallen Mercurians of Fear? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:50:59 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine At 7:20 -0500 12/14/00, Perry Lloyd wrote: >nice . . . I notice the conversion of Master of the Grantie Hand is cool, >not merely a damage bonus. :) It seemed reasonable to explain *why* they get a damage bonus, and GURPS already had some neat mechanics in the martial arts stuff. >I assume "Symphonic Knowledge" to be a new power in and of itself in GURPS >In Nomine. So what are you doing digging around in the GURPS mechanics for GURPS IN if you don't have the book, hmmmm....? There are actually 4 new core celestial powers in GIN: Symphonic Knowledge (basically anything that's Perception-based that taps the Symphony), Symphonic Influence (basically all the demonic "force your Symphony on others" powers, plus some angelic attunements), Symphonic Link (mostly Cherub/Djinn resonance), and Body-Hopping (core of Kyrio/Shedite resonance). And then there's a lot of number-fudging with those. To tell the truth, mostly we just figured out what the attunements *ought* to cost, and then fudged the numbers around that. The core power costs correspond roughly to about the 90th percentile of the attunement costs derived from them (though I did nothing this formal to work it out). >Hrm . . . I assume the high power cost of some of these powers reflect that >fact that their duration is until the user terminates the effects of the >power. Mostly it reflects that powerful supernatural abilities shouldn't be cheap in GURPS, GURPS Supers aside. >I like the renaming of Gabriel's highest Distinction, though I dunno if it'd >all ready been errata-ed. Should have been, and it should be consistent between GIN and the new IN hardcover. There's also some changes to mechanics in GIN and IN for one of the others. All that stuff is supposed to have been put in the IN errata. >I like the additional ability granted to all angels of Jordi, and the one >granted to all angels of Micheal, and Novalis, and Andrealphus, especially >Belial. They generally seemed to fit the theme of those Superior's Servitors, and don't really contradict anything in the IN mechanics. In Andre's case, it isn't really an additional ability, but some mechanics-munging required by how I implemented Andre's dissonance condition. It seemed unreasonable that Lust Servitors should be *penalized* for Sex Appeal and Erotic Art due to their dissonance condition. >Very cool. Thanks. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 18:05:46 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: New adventure seed (WAS: Re: Lilith Tangent (Re: IN> Weirdquestion)) On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:34:08 -0600 Prodigal wrote: >From: "Charles Glasgow" >> From: "Prodigal" >> > My god, what was I channeling when I wrote that name down!?! >> You mean you *don't remember*? >I'm oblivious to the whole process of writing it... *"oblivious"*, he says! if it didn't come from his own mouth, i'd say that was an intentional pun, but he's proved such a savante so far as to prove that... implausible.... ;) Prodigal, you're really on a roll of those dice. can someone say: Invocation attempt, Infernal Intervention? ;) "Next to hydrogen, stupidity is the most common element in the universe." --Harlan Ellison ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:10:05 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> brief questions At 15:41 +1300 12/14/00, Alex Liddell wrote: >>1- what is the hebrew or latin word for _epiphany_ > >Well epiphany is a greek word anyway. The Latin language adapted a great >deal of Greek words and so it wouldn't be uncommon to hear some Greek >phrases in Latin. > >I happen to know that there is a word for epiphany in Latin I just don't >have it to hand. It will be traceable to an English word for "sudden >thought" or "revelation" for sure! Not as such, at least in the Lewis & Short Latin dictionary online at the Perseus site (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/enggreek?lang=la). For "revelation" it gives: - ---- Total for 6 words whose definitions contain "revelation" apocalypsis manifesto phanerosis revelatio revelatorius sacramentum - ---- Not all of those would be suitable, you'd need to look at the individual entries. The Perseus site at Tufts is a good source for anything to do with Greek and Latin; besides the dictionaries and grammars, it has a huge collection of ancient texts online. And there's a lot of other historical stuff there as well. I've used it several times in fiddling with IN book titles, primarily the Latin dictionary and Latin grammar. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:38:29 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> GURPS In-Nomine At 12:50 PM -0500 12/14/00, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 7:20 -0500 12/14/00, Perry Lloyd wrote: >>I like the renaming of Gabriel's highest Distinction, though I dunno if it'd >>all ready been errata-ed. > >Should have been, and it should be consistent between GIN and the new IN >hardcover. It was changed in S3, errata for IN 1st printing, and I think it's okay in IN 2nd printing. (IN Blue?) The mechanics for her Vassal Distinction also got cleared up, in S3 and GIN and IN Blue. I don't know if the Habbalite of Death attunement change has propegated to IN Blue... (Walter is checking right now.) ...or the errata for 1st printing.. Ah, it is in IN Blue. Good. If someone with IN and IN Blue can check the errata and submit it if need be...? - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "I'm nursing a TROUT! With legs!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:11:42 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? I like Clarence best as a slow-to-fledge reliever of Fire, preventing George from being cruel to himself and thus fledging as a Mercurian of Fire. However, the script makes it clear that Clarence is a deceased mortal -- he shows up in the nightshirt he was buried in -- so you might also take him as a Saint in service to Fire or Destiny (except Saints don't become angels). Hm. Maybe the decease was that of his previous vessel... Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:37:38 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Someone's done this right? At 2:11 PM -0500 12/14/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >However, the script makes it clear that Clarence is a >deceased mortal -- he shows up in the nightshirt he was >buried in -- so you might also take him as a Saint in >service to Fire or Destiny (except Saints don't become >angels). Hm. Maybe the decease was that of his previous >vessel... Or he lied. IMC, Gabrielites are known to do that every now and again. But let's extend the discussion a bit. Let's assume that Clarence *did* reveal himself as an Angel to George, who himself was a remarkable man throughout his career. Remarkable in ways Uncle Billy, who for my money fell into Fate as he delivered the means of destroying this good man into the hands of Potter (who himself would make a good Soldier of Greed, or at least an unwitting participant in it) could never pull off. Perhaps George *could* lasso the moon... or at least had some potential Forces beyond his five.... I have to imagine that after Clarence left, fully fledged in the eyes of his fiery lady, he made casual mention of George Bailey to a Servitor of Marc. George has potential Soldier of Trade written *all* over him.... ...then again, his old friend *did* wire him $25,000. Maybe Trade was already stepping in to prevent George from being destroyed -- which is why Potter sowed the seed about being 'worth more alive than dead' before they could get there. And Trade nearly let the whole thing slide, leading to Heaven intoning "George Bailey is in trouble!" in hushed tones until Gabriel appeared to Clarence and gave him the mission. Look, it's snowing. It's finally *Christmas.* I can be goofy. It's legal. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 19:47:05 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: IN> Breaking Dominic's Brain the following are bits of backstory interspersed with thought-nuggets of how i'd like things to go in game-play for a Seraph of Judgment i've crafted as a prospective PC. i'm dying to play her. a distinguished Servitor of Dominic, fights off three demons in celestial combat, killing soul-killing two, and is reduced from 15 Forces to 6, becoming almost a celestial remnant if not for flight into her vessal and then being vessal slain, by a remaining demon. she enters Trauma, awakens later with the Smite Attunement (Gabriel showed up while Suriel was in Trauma, laid a hand on the Seraph's Heart, and walked out smiling) and is debriefed by the Most Just--it turns out she saved a favored Gabrielite from those several demons. what does Dominic do? Superiors can't generally strip Attunements from other Superiors from their Servitors, can they? besides, in this case that would be unjust, a punishment for acting as a fellow angel, yes? so bottom line, he's got a good, devoted Servitor, she's got a useful Attunement, but virtually no memories or skills now. so he sends her off to earth as a law student--re-learn what she's lost, and stay sharp on those corporeal nuances,! all that. Suriel falls in with local angels of Stone. not a bad thing right? only these are Snakeskin Gang members, and the talk of the gang is that she soul-slew a Balseraph in that fight to save Gabriel's angel (he wound up vessal killed anyway, but he was a Malakite--he testified immediately and directly to his Superior and then wound up testifying before Dominic on Suriel's behalf later on). the Gang razzes her about not having finished the job. She contends she was busy at the time, wasn't interested in taking trophies of her kills, but they're not having any of it. oh, did i mention they're the only other local angels? so Suriel goes to law classes, studies, and hangs out with the Snakeskin Gang, from her point of view to keep tabs on their heretical behavior, but also because she's lonely for celestial company. the razzing gets to her, and she decides, "Why not? I did it before," intending to call out another Liar and make herself a suit from his skin... negle! cting to remember she was a lot bigger when she took on three of those demons. she's smart enough to find a solitary Bal, and convincing herself this is more for the good of Heaven that she rid the world of one of Hell's worst, she goes up against him... manages to vanquish the poor Liar and take his skin, weaving it into a relic suit of clothes--boots, pants, and jacket (emblazoned with the name of the Gang on the back, naturally!). how does Dominic feel about his faithful Servitor practicing in behavior that helped bring Michael to trial? she did just soul-kill another Balseraph, yes? anyway, enough rambling. hope it provokes discussion and amusement :) oh, i almost forgot to mention: at the time of her celestial combat, Suriel had in her possession two relic Holy Revolvers (she called them the Scales of Justice). since her battle, they've not been seen, and Suriel herself completely forgot Dominic ever gave them to her a century ago. what she doesn't know is that she lost the Scales in that soul-combat. Dominic hasn't remarked on it yet, but what happens when one of her old friends comes to visit, and remarks upon the absense of Suriel's treasured relics? what happens when she asks Dominic about them at his next meeting with her? how can a 9-Force Seraph reclaim what was given to a 15 Force version of herself she has very few (all second-hand) recollections of? is she even worthy of them? regardless, they belong in Heaven's arsenal, should the Most Just deem her unworthy of them now. still, he ordered her to study, and regain a feeling of earthly existence. hmm, quests are good for earthly experience, right? okay, that's really it now :) -=|horsefly|=- "It was a different time: a time of blood and guns and killings.... It was a time when killers needed saints, for so much of God's good work was being done." --SAINT OF KILLERS #4, Garth Ennis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:14:34 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: Angelic Check Digit Tables? At 9:08 PM -0500 12/13/00, Jonathan Walton wrote: > Y'know, for a minute there I was getting ready to ask where the Demonic >one was, then I realised that Demons don't use Check Digit Tables. My next >thought went like this: > What the Hell?! > What's Asmodeus there for, anyway?! > Somebody kick him and tell him to do his job! Everyone should have >Check Digit tables! You should have seen the IPG before I went on a rampage. > Seriously though, thanks Beth (or whoever was involved). (No clue. Keith probably was the one who uploaded it!) >Much better than >my standard little notes sheet. Any chance of ever seeing more useful >little bits like this? Well, I hope so, but I really don't know what's liable to show up. This one seems to have been intended for the GURPS IN one, weirdly. Serendipity. > Say, like an errataed version of the stuff on the >back of the GM Screen (or will that not happen until it goes out of print)? Nooooooo clue. You can certainly mention that would be cool to the sjgames general address... >I'll be making good use of this and the little campaign-planning sheet >(which I just discovered on the website, when did that appear?). Ummm.... A while after the GMG, I think? It was going to be in the GMG, but the page count couldna take it, Keptain! - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "I'm nursing a TROUT! With legs!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:15:25 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. >Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:21:48 -0600 >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\bsubscribe\b/i at line 2 >Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:21:45 -0800 (PST) >From: Maurice Lane >Subject: Brain teaser. Sorta. > >I dropped this one off on the Pyramid boards, but not >all of you s u b scribe, so... > >Difficult concept #23/a4: > >Angel of Conformity. > >Easy to stick into Stone's crowd, or maybe even the >Sword (Judgement, despite first impressions, wouldn't >be that good a call, IMHO - or maybe just >IMHypotheticalC). That's not the question. > >The question is, how to make such an angel >sympathetic? Sure, making him/her/it a righteous >bast**d would be child's play, but that's too easy. > >What's the answer? > >I dunno. > >:) > >Moe > >===== >In Nomine stuff: >http://www.stormloader.com/users/moelane/innomine.html > >Last updated 11/25/00 (this is usually way out of date) > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. >http://shopping.yahoo.com/ > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:24:32 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Kyriotate w/Howl At 11:11 AM -0500 12/14/00, EDG wrote: >At 10:56 AM 12/14/00, you wrote: > >>Am I missing something that would prevent this insta-kill scenario? > >The off-the-cuff answer is that no, you're not; Michael's angels fight >dirty. (This tactic actually resembles how packs of wolves sometimes behave >when they're hunting.) Short range of Howl does put the host(s) close to the demon, mind, and a GM could do something like give the target a Will roll (If there isn't one already there -- I have a whinign TROUT lying cross my arms). But as has been pointed out, a pair of War with Howl are just as dangerous and don't risk dissonance. Sucks to be a single demon, don't it? (Now, think of a Kyrio of Flowers with the Seraph of Flowers attunement) - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "I'm nursing a TROUT! With legs!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:45:55 -0500 From: "zlindsey" Subject: IN> Questions I was looking at the timeline in the GM's Guide, and a few thoughts struck me. If anyone can answer these questions, it would be greatly appreciated. First, did Asmodeus have a Word when he Fell? I realize he wasn't an Archangel, but that doesn't mean he wasn't Word-bound. If so, what was it? Second, what happened to Ophis, the angel who tainted the Eden experiment? That's all. Clear Skies Zach The real problem with stories is if you keep them going long enough, they always end in death ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:52:50 -0500 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. > Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:21:45 -0800 (PST) > From: Maurice Lane > Subject: Brain teaser. Sorta. > > Difficult concept #23/a4: > > Angel of Conformity. > > Easy to stick into Stone's crowd, or maybe even the > Sword (Judgement, despite first impressions, wouldn't > be that good a call, IMHO - or maybe just > IMHypotheticalC). That's not the question. > > The question is, how to make such an angel > sympathetic? Sure, making him/her/it a righteous > bast**d would be child's play, but that's too easy. > > What's the answer? > > I dunno. > An *angel* of comformity? An angel of Tattvamasi or Gemeinschaftsgefuhl I can see, but conformity has so many negative connotations beyond its definition that I can't see where it'd be more celestial than infernal. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("Ride the Snake.") ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2000 20:55:08 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> Questions On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:45:55 -0500 zlindsey wrote: >I was looking at the timeline in the GM's Guide, and a few thoughts struck >me. If anyone can answer these questions, it would be greatly appreciated. >First, did Asmodeus have a Word when he Fell? I realize he wasn't an >Archangel, but that doesn't mean he wasn't Word-bound. If so, what was it? i don't believe Canon addresses the issue of Asmodeus' prior Word if he had one. from what i recall of his write-up in Heaven and Hell, he had not been given a Word; he was only (?!) Dominic's most trusted Cherub, and the celestial responsible for Dominic's not trusting ANYONE SAVE GOD (or Yves, 90% of the time...), so despite never having been given a Word, pre-Fall, i'd say Asmodeus was still significant back then, if only for the traumatic effect he's had on his former Archangel. >Second, what happened to Ophis, the angel who tainted the Eden experiment? considering there's a Servitor Attunement of The War named after it/him/her, i'd say Ophis Fell, at a guess ;) since then, no idea. -=|horsefly|=- "Yes, stupidity causes aggravated damage." --Kris Green ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:58:49 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: Brain teaser. Sorta. Marc Bowden wrote: > An *angel* of comformity? An angel of Tattvamasi or > Gemeinschaftsgefuhl I can see, but conformity has so many negative > connotations beyond its definition that I can't see where it'd be more > celestial than infernal. Could you translate "tattvamasi" and "gemeinschaftsgefuhl"? Other than by "conformity." Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:01:22 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Questions At 3:45 PM -0500 12/14/00, zlindsey wrote: >I was looking at the timeline in the GM's Guide, and a few thoughts struck >me. If anyone can answer these questions, it would be greatly appreciated. >First, did Asmodeus have a Word when he Fell? Not as far as we know. Many powerful Angels didn't, including Michael (at least, he didn't have 'War' before then). (Insert 'Valor' grumble here.) >Second, what happened to Ophis, the angel who tainted the Eden experiment? No canon answer. I know where he is in IMC, and he might show up in QoH, but then again he might have died with the Word-bound (assuming he has a Word.) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:36:46 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Yes, I'm afraid so. Moe, you're twisted. Now write up the alligators. - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "I'm nursing a TROUT! With legs!" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:36:50 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Sun-Cross At 10:37 PM -0500 12/12/00, William J. Keith wrote: >>What, no "Restricted" notations? Or did I miss it on the Kyriotates? > >Err. Completely forgot about restrictions. In fact, I added them in on >all the Choirs except Ofanite, Malakite, and Grigori, since most of them >are resonance enhancements. >>The Seraphim is weird. Beliefs don't necessarily _have_ a Truth. Either >>the belief they sense is the one that the person held, or it's not... > >Not sure how to clarify this. Basically, a Seraph gets what the person >believes to be a true answer to the question "Why did you say that?" and >then they can resonate it if they choose. >Ex.1: >Seraph: "Have you seen a gathering of men with guns in the vicinity?" >Joe: "Nope." >*Seraph resonance* He's lying. >*Seraph of Redemption attunement* ...because he thinks you're a cop. So they automatically have the success by 5-6/CD 3 result? O:/ >Ex.2: >Jill: "I'm hopeless at baseball." >*Seraph of Redemption Attunement* ...which she says because she thinks >girls aren't supposed to be good at sports. >*Seraph resonance on attunement* ...but she's lying to herself about that, >and deep down she knows it. Ehhhhhhhhhhh -- the Seraph resonance ought to pick that up anyway, at the success by 5-6 level -- she's saying it because she believes that's what society expects of her. If she said she _believed_ girls aren't supposed to be good at sports, then it would be an untrue statment about her beliefs, and a Seraph could get at the truth; normally, a Seraph will just go straight to the truth and bypass the rationalizations and justifications. >The point of the Attunement was to offer the Seraph a direction of attack >to lead someone to a Truth they might be ready to accept. Better to let them have a "resonance rider" along the lines of "...and they automatically know if the belief is one that can be successfully challenged or if it is so strong as to be a lynchpin of the speaker's existance." >>The Cherub one is _awfully_ powerful for only 10 Gpoints. O:> > >Upped to 20. I was trying to find a sensible approximation among spells or >the like, but the only ones I could find were things like Telecontrol with >No Roll Required yet restricted to one tiny purpose, which I had no idea >how to estimate. There might be a spell somewhere (Restrain Person sounds >reasonable) but I don't have a Grimoire on hand. Check out Daze, I'd suggest. What's that as a Knack? >>Malakim are _only_ 25 Gpoints?? When they're wandering around with >>quasi-Cherub perceptions for _all_ their fellow Servitors? AND something >>akin to the Malakim of Creation? EEEE! > >Hm. Quasi-Cherub? Yup -- Cherubim whose attuned are in immediate life-threatening danger KNOW it. > That's not good. Stripped, and left to the NLW bonus alone. Heh. >>The Kyriotate one is a little unclear -- the Kyrio can send a dreamlike >>impression of what it's doing in the host's body? > >Yeah. It's like the memory a Shedim leaves, only clearer, and with no >impression that the host himself wanted to do these things, at least at the >time. Any behavior change is purely upon post-possession analysis(possibly >prodded a bit by the Kyrio close by). Hrm. That's clearer later on, but pretty murky in the desc. >>Why is the Mercurian one time-limited? Do they _get_ the skill in >>question for the duration? I think it would be simple enough to say >>they get a "snapshot" which may or may not be accurate over time. > >They actually get the skill, and the time-limitation was added in to keep >the Mercurians from quickly acquiring a vast array of skills. (They have >the usual chance afterward to remember why they did what they did.) Also, >I've added that the knowledge is at the group's average level of expertise. Okay -- though if a group needs someone who's a master sniper _because_ none of them are... >*tonguebite* These all seem to need clarification... maybe I should give >them a good long look and rewrite them. Fortunately, the concepts seem to >have passed muster. You asked for comments and you invoked my name... >>If Dominic catches her adopting Grigori, he's going to start a trial rolling. >>They're Outcast for a _reason_... O:> > >Hm. Does just handing out an attunement count as adoption? Yes, it would, pretty much. Angels in good standing are NOT supposed to be having ANYTHING to do with the Grigori. The Grigori are Outcast, not just not invited to tea anymore. > How far do you think she could push it, in canon? She could probably have, safely, a standing petition in the Council to reconsider the Grigori matter, perhaps offering to head an inquiry into the current status of the lost Choir. I mean, she could be trying to go behind Dominic's back and help out the Grig if she _wants_ to, but if she gets caught, there's going to be heck to pay. > (Especially considering that >she's already been in one trial; see "Dealings with Judgment" at the bottom >of the page. It's why I asked about Dominic and defenses or mitigation >earlier on the list.) Ahhhh. (Note, BTW, that it's "triad of Judgment." The captial-T Triads are the ones who want protection money and have Oriental roots.) Dominic, while undoubtedly annoyed by her, would have to be fair. The outcome, indeed, the very _fact_ of the previous trial would not impinge. She was declared not guilty of behaving selfishly to obstruct Judgment, and that's that. >>Silver Lining is an almost direct version from the Captain of the Third >>Choice Freedom Distinction in FotM, did you know? > >No, I didn't, and it's interesting. *ponder* I may change it. OTOH, >Leila definitely has History with Lilith, so it may be appropriate. I want >there to hints of Freedom and Fire here and there; in fact, the "Purifier" >alternate persona plays on the latter. Pity there's no real suggestion that she _got_ that Distinction. >>>Chance of Invocation: 10(40 points, GURPS), 6(IN) >> >>That's a majorly high IN Invocation target number. [...] >I chose these deliberately to provide some of the flavor of working in a >small organization. On the one hand, you're low on resources like Tethers. >On the other hand, you rate some personal attention from the Boss(which is >*usually* a good thing... ;^) ). True. It would be interesting to see in actino. >>>Beth, you may want to take a look particularly at the Sample Servitors; [...] >>Sam converts out to 25 points, and would normally get 36, but you've >>forgotten to convert his Roles. (Roles convert directly -- they come in 6 >>levels.) Is he using the same vessel for each Role? That would probably >>get him closer. > >In G:IN terms, he has no Role whatsoever, as he's not likely to be doing >much violence or destruction in his line of work. That doesn't matter -- a Role is essential for someone dealing out violence, but a Role as a businessman is also perfectly valid. Check the Liber Servitorum for the Role data, and why it's valuable even if you aren't a Cop. (In IN, Roles indicate that the paperwork isn't likely to have holes in it, and people will even remember you; that Sam has a reputation with co-workers indicates that his Alternate Identity has been "played" enough to develop into a Role. If his Florist identity is _only_ papers, and he actually has no florist shop behind him, then it's not a Role, it's just a few business cards and knowing enough of the lingo and skill to be convincing. If he actually maintains a business, that's a Role too.) Roles are, from memory (someone check my numbers!), the average of the costs for Role level and Status level. And they're not one-for-one, which I can't check because my spouse walked off with the IN book and put it down over on the scanner and I have 16.25 pounds of sleeping baby across my arms and firmly attached to the diner. AH, he came back and I mde him give me the book. It's Status level _times_ Role level, divided by 2. Levels range from 1 to 6. >>Dissonance Conditions are sort of associated with the state change of >>Superiors, in IN. I mean, you can tack one onto a Word, especially a >>powerful one, but it's generally a royal pain in the tuchas to figure >>out yet MORE "New Stuff" for Word-bound... > >Okay, it's ditched. I want Sun-Cross to be as compatible with canon as >possible. Hey, you can keep it as optional if you like! >>>If I have everything right, a Servitor of Redemption would add >>>points to the 100 before customizing? >> >>Urrrrr.... I'd look at the stuff in GIN, but I have an awake baby on my lap >>right now... Walter's the more mechanics-minded of us, anyway. > >Oh... wait. Sign confusion. I think I get it now. #7 on the character >creation checklist on p.17 of G:IN says to "add" your Superior Cost, but >this is gamer-speak, and what it means is to subtract it -- a negative >Superior Cost is essentially a disadvantage which adds points for >customization, whereas, say a Superior with an easy Dissonance Condition >who's readily available, and thus a positive Superior Cost, will cause >fewer points for customization. Yes, that sounds right. >Heh. Sam's 30 points over budget, then. Tsk, tsk. O:> - --Beth, typing w/a uncoopertive baby (iolanthe) causing typos. "I'm nursing a TROUT! With legs!" ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1971 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.