From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Feb 1 21:06:23 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18053 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 21:06:21 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id TAA08181 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 19:34:00 -0600 Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 19:34:00 -0600 Message-Id: <200002020134.TAA08181@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 #1518 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 Tuesday, February 1 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1518 In this digest: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence RE: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Disease, radiation, pressure. Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble IN> Superiors 3 Question Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Fighting Styles IN> [ADMIN] No HTML Fwd: Re: IN> Aztec info Re: IN> Fighting Styles Re: IN> Fighting Styles (brought private) Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence Re: IN> Fighting Styles IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question Re: IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell Re: IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 00 07:31:29 -0600 From: Planewalker Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles >Seraphim: Naturally able to spot body language, and see the true intentions >of an opponents (and an allies) movements, thus being able to fight more >efficiently (knowing that the guy coming from your side is about to be >brained by a friend will allow you to ignore him and focus on someone else) >and Dodge better. I don't think body language is appropriate for the Seraphim, being so far removed from humanity. I would think thier strength would lie in knowing the truthfulness of an opponent's action, and therefore tell what he was going to do. >Shedim: ??? Shedim should be suicide attackers. Think of it: The angels could get real frustrated at a Shedim who keeps sending in wave after wave of humans strapped with dynamite vests. Just bail a second or two before detonation to avoid dissonace. Planewalker ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 07:49:15 -0800 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Azrael wrote: > Somethings are ingrained into a culture or a group of people, they do it > without thinking (frex I have heard, it may be a myth, but, If you give a > Brazilian child a ball, whether or not he has ever even heard of soccer he > will immediately drop the ball and kick it, that is how deeply that society > is cosumed by a passion for soccer. Nonsense. A cute myth, but a myth nonetheless; skills like that aren't hardwired into people's brains. However, it would make more sense for celestials. > Seraphim: Naturally able to spot body language, and see the true intentions > of an opponents (and an allies) movements, thus being able to fight more > efficiently (knowing that the guy coming from your side is about to be > brained by a friend will allow you to ignore him and focus on someone else) > and Dodge better. I'd say they can see through feints and "tricks" like a rising spin-kick. > Cherubim: They would be better suited to a fighting style that promotes > discipline and devotion. I think more like styles that involve being tough enough to stand there and get hit. > Elohim: The Elohim would no doubt be proficient at Judo (and similar > styles), using an opponents strength and motion against him to create a > Balance. Judo isn't really a martial art. Aikido would be appropriate, though, or jujutsu for the more violent Elohim. > Malakim: The Way of the Samuri, the honour and respect involved with > Samuri-ing would no doubt appeal greatly to a Malakite. So would Karate, as > it requires honour, displine, devotion, however it does have some rather > inhibiting rules, like; Respond with force only to extreme provocation (Come > on he was a demon, how much more provocation do you need....), Or Never > Strike First (No probs for Stonies) Karate's no more inherently honorable than any other martial art. And there's no rule of karate that says "Respond only to extreme provocation"; that's taught by individual senseis, and depends on the ethics of the school. > Kyriotates: Well the old Gangbashing would be a fave, but I can't think of > anything really. Experts in multiple-attacker techniques. > Mercurians: The ability to read body language may help them Dodge (But not > all Mercs. are as good at reading at a Merc of the Sword. Aikido and other "passive" styles would be good for them. >>> Which brings me to > a question ; "Can a Merc of the Sword uses his profieciency at reading Body > Language in non-combat situations, i.e. to find out how someone is > feeling?") No -- that's Elohim. > Djinn: ??? Perhaps they wouldn't care to much about damage and pain (not > really anything to do with style, more rationale for high Dodge). The legendary "sticking" maneuver. Probably make good grapplers too. > Calabim: They are good at anything and everything that involves them > hurting and killing and smashing and whacking and.... But nothing that involves subtlety or following rules -- good brawlers, lousy boxers. > Lilim: Well let's just say that they are good at the ole' sucka punch ;) . "Do you really want to hurt me?" > Shedim: ??? Whatever their host knows. ;) > Impudites: Chraming and thus good with psychological factors, and the > suprise of an Impudite whacking someone (Sure a Combat Impu....WHAT THE > *WHACK*) Impudites can beat people up no problem; they just can't kill them. - -David (hapkido 1-dan, jujutsu 2-kyu) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 07:52:14 -0800 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence "Kiara S. Legner" wrote: > I'm undecided about what to do with this sort of situation. On the one > hand, I'm considering ruling that even though they don't know *which* > ethereal they're connecting with, there's still one particular ethereal > behind each group. So one group of sun-worshippers might be sponsored by > Apollo, while another might be sponsored by Ra, and so on. On the other > hand, I'm also toying with the idea that, where no diety is specified, its a > situation where a group of, say, sun dieties, have pooled their resources > just to get their worship back up and running again. (This could lead to > some rather interesting disputes when one of them feels it to be time to > split off...) On the third hand, unspecified sun-worship could either be > channelled directly to an abstract archetype, or to the creation of a new > god... FWIW, the Ethereal Player's Guide (yes, being written As We Speak) should clarify a lot of these points. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 06:23:09 PST From: "Erich Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence >From: David Edelstein > >FWIW, the Ethereal Player's Guide (yes, being written As We Speak) >should clarify a lot of these points. > >-David I'm not sure whether to faint in sheer joy or eye you warily to make sure you're not toying with everyone's emotions. So... What care to let us know what else the collective brains up there working on? :) - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Impudite of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, servitor of Kronos - ------------------------- Foaming at the Mouth http://rpg.net/news+reviews/sprite.html Touched by an Impudite http://www.insync.net/~sprite/ - ---------------------------- ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:40:03 -0600 From: Christopher Gerkey Subject: RE: IN> Fighting Styles > Ofanim: Capoira, those who practise Capoira are in constant > motion, and do > many impressive agility thingees, what more is there to say... Capoeira. Sorry to be nitpicky, but my art doesn't get a lot of mention, so when it does I like for the mention to be accurate. Angels of Stone might also play or teach Capoeira...trust me, it can be a real endurance test. =) 'Topher ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:26:15 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Disease, radiation, pressure. At 5:57 PM +1100 2/1/00, Azrael wrote: >> >Anyway, what about fire damage? Is there any rule for that? >> >> Unfortunately, no -- you'll have to improv something. (IIRC. There >> might be _something_ in the APG or CPG.) > >What about Incendiary (Belial's attunement for those with a memory like >mine)? I had always interperated it as the ability to ignite things at will. Good catch -- looks like a generalizable sort of damage thing, yes. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:26:17 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble At 9:43 PM -0400 1/31/00, Douglas Muir wrote: >>I'd probably play it as Deathtrap City -- the Geas doesn't have to be >>used all at once, remember, and the Game will probably be trying to >>force the Seneschal to, first, put the Bright into a place where they >>can catch him, and when it gets down a ways, use the Celestial Song of >>Affinity to track the Bright down _that_ way. > >Oh, the Seneschal already has a Djinn on him. Bet _that_ thrills him. O;> >Well, he ran up to Heaven as soon as it happened; a Triad found him >whimpering and clinging to his Heart. They took him before Dominic... and >I rolled a 1,2, check digit 6 for Dom's reaction. Even with a -2 (bad >Bright, no donut) that still came out positive. Ah, yes, the 'more in sorrow than anger' Dommie. O:> >Meanwhile the player and I were discussing whether to scrap the character. >I didn't like the idea of losing a PC purely based on one bad Intervention >roll, so I decided to let the positive reaction roll prevail; Dominic >Judged that the Bright had been foolish but not wicked, [...] Yes, I'd have definitely taken that path as well, I think -- both because a bad Intervention really shouldn't _kill_ a character (just make things really, really hot for it), and because of my own conceptions of Dominic. (And yes, all those other options would mitigate the circumstances. O:> ) I might have some political fallout later, though -- a motion that the Bright be placed as "Fire in service to Judgment" since clearly Fire isn't keeping a good watch on this rare resource. (After all, one wouldn't want this poor creature to get caught by the Game -- it's unjust. Therefore, one would want the angel a bit more under observation...) >He's now got a Cherub of Judgement attuned to him, too. With a 6 check >digit. >He thinks it's for his protection. Well, it is. Partly. (6 CD? But they don't work like Djinn -- they attune automatically, and then get varying CDs each time they 'ping' resonance and roll Perception for it. Except for the auto-danger-sense aspect, where they KNOW there's BAD DANGER (though they still have to ping for direction to attuned).) I'd hope the Cherub had the Celestial Song of Tongues -- ability to call in the posse (if they aren't busy)... >>Alternately, once the Geas has been worn down a little, maybe to a Geas/3 >>or so, you could have the Bright's Archangel strip it off him > >It's Gabriel. [...] >So far, no one has gone to her with their little problems. Well, if the Bright _cooperated_, Dominic ought to be able to remove it, from the GMG rules, p. 99... Still, it would be better to see if the Geas will be used partially first, to make the process safer. (Though that's a gamble -- an _invoked_ Geas doesn't come off, generally. Well, you could ask Lilith for help...) (And I know what you mean about Gabriel and reaction rolls -- got a skin-of-teeth-positive with CD 6 reaction from her once, for my Renegade Lilim... Urk, urk.) BTW, what sort of cruelty does your Bright detect? If he's lucky, it might be one that Gamesters tend to have, which will make his life both harder and easier -- he can spot them, but then he has to _do_ something about them... >>>Does a fully redeemed demon count as a renegade? >> >>To the Game? You betcha. > >Except that a Renegade can't call on an AA for help in a pinch. Surely >that's got to make some difference. Yeah -- the Game's more likely to hit harder... And more carefully -- which may trip them up! If they're busy trying to set up a subtle trap, more things can go wrong. If they just come in with capture- relics blazing, then an Archangel might show. Poor Gamesters. But I wouldn't advise injesting anything for a while. Knockout drugs are soooooo useful... Just have the Shedite possess the bartender, and... >>>I also thought of having him steal something from Heaven... [...] >>A McGuffin from Progress or Creation, maybe? Files on other redeemed, >>from Judgment? (Sell _that_ to the Game, woo!) > >Ohhh yeah. But how to get past those annoying bureaucrats at Central Records? Hey, that's the victim's problem, right? What does Greed/the Game care about that sort of thing? O;> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 12:25:40 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble >>Oh, the Seneschal already has a Djinn on him. > >Bet _that_ thrills him. O;> At one point this character had *four* celestials attuned to him -- two Cherubs and two Djinn. Then he walked into a secret tether which (I'd previously determined) had the attribute of cutting off all attunements at the border... not eliminating them, just temporarily shutting them down (like an Ethereal Song of Shields). He didn't *know* he was in a Tether... but a few minutes later, when he walked out, he suddenly found himself the center of a LOT of attention. >I might have some political fallout later, though -- a motion that >the Bright be placed as "Fire in service to Judgment" since clearly >Fire isn't keeping a good watch on this rare resource. Ooh, I like it. Thanks. >(After all, >one wouldn't want this poor creature to get caught by the Game -- >it's unjust. Therefore, one would want the angel a bit more under >observation...) Mm hm. > (6 CD? But they don't work like Djinn -- they attune automatically, >and then get varying CDs each time they 'ping' resonance and roll Perception >for it. Except for the auto-danger-sense aspect, where they KNOW there's >BAD DANGER (though they still have to ping for direction to attuned).) Oh, this is a Judgment thingy I've worked out. Dom's got a couple of watch-Cherubs with the Cherub of Protection attunement. (Does the Protection influence modify these guys' harshly Judgmental nature? Well, a little. "I feel very, very bad about having to do this to you. But it's for your own good. Really.") (Or, "If he'd have lived through it, I know he would have thanked me.") >I'd hope the Cherub had the Celestial Song of Tongues -- ability to >call in the posse (if they aren't busy)... Mm hm. >BTW, what sort of cruelty does your Bright detect? Yet to be determined. We left that open; the character is still taking form. Though he's managed to get into an amazing lot of trouble rather quickly... >If he's lucky, it >might be one that Gamesters tend to have, which will make his life both >harder and easier -- he can spot them, but then he has to _do_ something >about them... Ah. Good. Thanks. >>Ohhh yeah. But how to get past those annoying bureaucrats at Central >>Records? > >Hey, that's the victim's problem, right? Well, actually it's _mine_. There has to be some way, or I can't make him try to do it. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:41:28 -0700 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence >FWIW, the Ethereal Player's Guide (yes, being written As We Speak) >should clarify a lot of these points. > >-David Now I really need to get a pyramid subscription. Timothy, Angel of Rambling If you have a hankering for waffles or chicken i know the place for you: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 14:15:16 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Bright Lil in big trouble At 12:25 PM -0400 2/1/00, Douglas Muir wrote: >At one point this character had *four* celestials attuned to him -- two >Cherubsim >He didn't *know* he was in a Tether... but a few minutes later, when he >walked out, he suddenly found himself the center of a LOT of attention. I _liiiiiike_... >>I might have some political fallout later, though [...] >Ooh, I like it. Thanks. Quite welcome! I hope the PC appreciates it... O:> >> (6 CD? [...] >Oh, this is a Judgment thingy I've worked out. Dom's got a couple of >watch-Cherubs with the Cherub of Protection attunement. Ahhhhhhh. Okay. >(Does the Protection influence modify these guys' harshly Judgmental >nature? Well, a little. "I feel very, very bad about having to do this to >you. But it's for your own good. Really.") >(Or, "If he'd have lived through it, I know he would have thanked me.") That sounds about right... >>BTW, what sort of cruelty does your Bright detect? > >Yet to be determined. We left that open; the character is still taking >form. Though he's managed to get into an amazing lot of trouble rather >quickly... Apparently! Hm. Maybe Cruelty Through Bad Luck... (Or maybe I'm starting to ramble.) >>>Ohhh yeah. But how to get past those annoying bureaucrats at Central >>>Records? >> >>Hey, that's the victim's problem, right? > >Well, actually it's _mine_. There has to be some way, or I can't make him >try to do it. Oh, well, true. Hm. Recruit Windys? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: 1 Feb 2000 20:44:18 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: IN> Superiors 3 Question what's the subtitle for Superiors 3, or has it yet been determined? i'm hoping y'all can keep the catchy titles. -=|horsefly|=- ________________________________________________________________ For the best in comics, collectibles, original art and shopping, visit the Dark Horse Network @ . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 12:56:23 PST From: "Erich Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question >From: "-=|horsefly|=-" >what's the subtitle for Superiors 3, or has it yet been determined? i'm >hoping y'all can keep the catchy titles. > -=|horsefly|=- Hope & Prophecy, was the Subtitle last I checked. - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Impudite of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, servitor of Kronos - ------------------------- Foaming at the Mouth http://rpg.net/news+reviews/sprite.html Touched by an Impudite http://www.insync.net/~sprite/ - ---------------------------- "Did you ever notice how in the Bible, when ever God needed to punish someone, or make an example, or whenever God needed a killing, he sent an angel? Did you ever wonder what a creature like that must be like? A whole existence spent praising your God, but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?" Thomas Daggett, The Prophecy ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:13:55 -0500 From: "Caias Brian Ward" Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles - ----- Original Message ----- From: David Edelstein To: Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 10:49 AM Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles > > Cherubim: They would be better suited to a fighting style that promotes > > discipline and devotion. > > I think more like styles that involve being tough enough to stand there > and get hit. That would be a stupid martial art, that expects you to get hit. Most arts (with the exception of boxing) teach attack avoidance and redirection. > > Elohim: The Elohim would no doubt be proficient at Judo (and similar > > styles), using an opponents strength and motion against him to create a > > Balance. > > Judo isn't really a martial art. Aikido would be appropriate, though, or > jujutsu for the more violent Elohim. It's isn't? Last I checked, it was. It's a sport form, but I call it more a martial art than, say, TKD. > > Malakim: The Way of the Samuri, the honour and respect involved with > > Samuri-ing would no doubt appeal greatly to a Malakite. So would Karate, as > > it requires honour, displine, devotion, however it does have some rather > > inhibiting rules, like; Respond with force only to extreme provocation (Come > > on he was a demon, how much more provocation do you need....), Or Never > > Strike First (No probs for Stonies) > > Karate's no more inherently honorable than any other martial art. And > there's no rule of karate that says "Respond only to extreme > provocation"; that's taught by individual senseis, and depends on the > ethics of the school. Hapkido might be appropriate. In turns, very offensive and very defensive, with weapon choices being practical and diverse. > > Mercurians: The ability to read body language may help them Dodge (But not > > all Mercs. are as good at reading at a Merc of the Sword. > > Aikido and other "passive" styles would be good for them. Judo? > -David (hapkido 1-dan, jujutsu 2-kyu) Ah, I see why you said Judo was not a martial art... :) Hapkido is my favorite style, and the one I studied the longest, so I'm somewhat a purist regarding it. Shame the school closed. Caias Brian Ward ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:13:53 -0800 (PST) From: Jennifer Campbell Subject: Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question - --0-719885386-949439633=:18104 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii And which of the big guys was this for? Erich Arendall wrote: Hope & Prophecy, was the Subtitle last I checked. - --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. - --0-719885386-949439633=:18104 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

And which of the big guys was this for?

Erich Arendall <witkiller@hotmail.com> wrote:



Hope & Prophecy, was the Subtitle last I checked.


Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. - --0-719885386-949439633=:18104-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 15:51:12 -0800 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Christopher Gerkey wrote: > Angels of Stone might also play or teach Capoeira...trust me, it can be a> real endurance test. =) I'll nominate gumdo (aka kendo) as a martial arts style to compare with the most grueling of them. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 13:55:27 PST From: "Erich Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question >From: Jennifer Campbell >And which of the big guys was this for? > Yves, Gabriel, Blandine and Khalid (yep, Khalid). - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Impudite of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, servitor of Kronos - ------------------------- Foaming at the Mouth http://rpg.net/news+reviews/sprite.html Touched by an Impudite http://www.insync.net/~sprite/ - ---------------------------- "Did you ever notice how in the Bible, when ever God needed to punish someone, or make an example, or whenever God needed a killing, he sent an angel? Did you ever wonder what a creature like that must be like? A whole existence spent praising your God, but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?" Thomas Daggett, The Prophecy ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 16:04:43 -0800 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Caias Brian Ward wrote: > That would be a stupid martial art, that expects you to get hit. Most arts > (with the exception of boxing) teach attack avoidance and redirection. I was being somewhat facetious -- but some training regimens do try to impart toughness on the practitioner. No, I don't know of any martial art that actually teaches you to "get hit," but some put more emphasis on blocking and counterattacking (or preemptively attacking) than on avoidance and redirection. > It's isn't? Last I checked, it was. It's a sport form, but I call it more > a martial art than, say, TKD. I don't know where you get that. Tae Kwon Do is an actual combat martial art; it's standard training for the Korean military. (Granted, schools that put an emphasis on tournament-style fighting tend to teach a more sport-like form). Judo, on the other hand, is officialy designated as a *sport* -- based on jujutsu, which is a martial art. Judo is no more a true martial art than sport-wrestling. (Yes, I know there are "combat judo" schools, but those are really schools that teach a mixture of judo and something else, usually karate or jujutsu.) > Hapkido might be appropriate. In turns, very offensive and very defensive, > with weapon choices being practical and diverse. Don't know about practical; umpteen Bruce Lee movies notwithstanding, nunchuks are about the most *impractical* weapons imaginable, and my hapkido teacher tried to train me in their use. (Trust me, anyone who plays with nunchuks and hasn't had a LOT of practice is an idiot, probably an idiot destined for the emergency room.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 16:04:43 -0800 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Caias Brian Ward wrote: > That would be a stupid martial art, that expects you to get hit. Most arts > (with the exception of boxing) teach attack avoidance and redirection. I was being somewhat facetious -- but some training regimens do try to impart toughness on the practitioner. No, I don't know of any martial art that actually teaches you to "get hit," but some put more emphasis on blocking and counterattacking (or preemptively attacking) than on avoidance and redirection. > It's isn't? Last I checked, it was. It's a sport form, but I call it more > a martial art than, say, TKD. I don't know where you get that. Tae Kwon Do is an actual combat martial art; it's standard training for the Korean military. (Granted, schools that put an emphasis on tournament-style fighting tend to teach a more sport-like form). Judo, on the other hand, is officialy designated as a *sport* -- based on jujutsu, which is a martial art. Judo is no more a true martial art than sport-wrestling. (Yes, I know there are "combat judo" schools, but those are really schools that teach a mixture of judo and something else, usually karate or jujutsu.) > Hapkido might be appropriate. In turns, very offensive and very defensive, > with weapon choices being practical and diverse. Don't know about practical; umpteen Bruce Lee movies notwithstanding, nunchuks are about the most *impractical* weapons imaginable, and my hapkido teacher tried to train me in their use. (Trust me, anyone who plays with nunchuks and hasn't had a LOT of practice is an idiot, probably an idiot destined for the emergency room.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 17:20:40 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] No HTML Everyone check your emailers to make sure that they're set to send only 7bit, non-HTML, non-MIME, plain ASCII text. With no attachments. - --Beth, Princess of List Admin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 17:22:15 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> Aztec info (Remember, everyone, check to make sure you're s u b scribed _somewhere_!) (--Beth) >From: bichwa@telstra.easymail.com.au >Subject: Re: IN> Aztec info >Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 07:17:46 +1100 > >>Has anybody out there done anything with the Aztec pantheon? >>I'd be interested in taking a look. > >I stuck some (completely factual so far as I know) stuff up on a webpage a while ago. Don't know if that would help, but I'll give you the address anyway. Just go to > >www.angelfire.com/az/Calabim/aztec.html > >sorry I didn't post to this earlier, but I've been in Hong Kong. No, really. > >Kris >Servitor of Malphas, Demon of Really Crappy Excuses > >I was dammit. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 15:48:03 -0600 From: "Dennis Groome" Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles there's a Pyramid article (PLUG!!) on Celestial Martial Arts...I found it to be quite...hmm...not enlightening...perhaps amusing and very useful. - -Dennis H. Groome V "Amo Nympham" http://evm-gamers.freeservers.com ICQ: 11430261 "I think I woke up screaming, 'cause I had a dream that you still love me." -Stabbing Westward, ACF ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 17:30:49 -0500 From: "Caias Brian Ward" Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles (brought private) (I brought this private to avoid ADMIN wrath) Most TKD schools around here are sport forms, and big on tournaments. I'm still looking for a new martial arts school after a year because everyone around me is tournament-crazy. In my hapkido school, we had three main weapons: sword, staff, and cane. We don't use nuchaku as a standard weapon. As well, our toughness training consisted of having techinques practiced on us, such as throws, twists, joint locks. I'm used to a long of pain now :) Who did you study Hapkido under, anyway? Just trying to see what variations of Hapkido are out there (outside of TKD schools claiming to teach Hapkido), and comparing notes. My instructor was Hugh Cole, who was taught by Chong Min Lee. Caias Brian Ward - ----- Original Message ----- From: David Edelstein To: Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 7:04 PM Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles > Caias Brian Ward wrote: > > That would be a stupid martial art, that expects you to get hit. Most arts > > (with the exception of boxing) teach attack avoidance and redirection. > > I was being somewhat facetious -- but some training regimens do try to > impart toughness on the practitioner. No, I don't know of any martial > art that actually teaches you to "get hit," but some put more emphasis > on blocking and counterattacking (or preemptively attacking) than on > avoidance and redirection. > > > It's isn't? Last I checked, it was. It's a sport form, but I call it more > > a martial art than, say, TKD. > > I don't know where you get that. Tae Kwon Do is an actual combat martial > art; it's standard training for the Korean military. (Granted, schools > that put an emphasis on tournament-style fighting tend to teach a more > sport-like form). Judo, on the other hand, is officialy designated as a > *sport* -- based on jujutsu, which is a martial art. Judo is no more a > true martial art than sport-wrestling. (Yes, I know there are "combat > judo" schools, but those are really schools that teach a mixture of judo > and something else, usually karate or jujutsu.) > > > Hapkido might be appropriate. In turns, very offensive and very defensive, > > with weapon choices being practical and diverse. > > Don't know about practical; umpteen Bruce Lee movies notwithstanding, > nunchuks are about the most *impractical* weapons imaginable, and my > hapkido teacher tried to train me in their use. (Trust me, anyone who > plays with nunchuks and hasn't had a LOT of practice is an idiot, > probably an idiot destined for the emergency room.) > > -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 15:14:11 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen M Gingell Subject: Re: IN> Ethereals and Essence >...the Ethereal Player's Guide (yes, being written As We Speak)... > -David Whoo Hoo! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 18:23:10 -0500 From: "Caias Brian Ward" Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles Sorry about that, my email sent this to the list... my apologies... to bring back on topic: With a cinematic system like IN uses, different combat styles are just descriptives. Mind you, it makes fighting more than a dice-rolling exercise, and I encourage it in my games (live action or tabletop) Also, are what we consider Chi maneuvers in martial arts possibly Song use by Soldiers? Not stunts, mind you, but "classic" stuff we see in movies but might be considered 'real' in the In Nomine world? Caias - ----- Original Message ----- From: Caias Brian Ward To: Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 5:30 PM Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles (brought private) > (I brought this private to avoid ADMIN wrath) > > Most TKD schools around here are sport forms, and big on tournaments. I'm > still looking for a new martial arts school after a year because everyone > around me is tournament-crazy. > > In my hapkido school, we had three main weapons: sword, staff, and cane. We > don't use nuchaku as a standard weapon. As well, our toughness training > consisted of having techinques practiced on us, such as throws, twists, > joint locks. I'm used to a long of pain now :) > > Who did you study Hapkido under, anyway? Just trying to see what variations > of Hapkido are out there (outside of TKD schools claiming to teach Hapkido), > and comparing notes. My instructor was Hugh Cole, who was taught by Chong > Min Lee. > > Caias Brian Ward > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Edelstein > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 7:04 PM > Subject: Re: IN> Fighting Styles > > > > Caias Brian Ward wrote: > > > That would be a stupid martial art, that expects you to get hit. Most > arts > > > (with the exception of boxing) teach attack avoidance and redirection. > > > > I was being somewhat facetious -- but some training regimens do try to > > impart toughness on the practitioner. No, I don't know of any martial > > art that actually teaches you to "get hit," but some put more emphasis > > on blocking and counterattacking (or preemptively attacking) than on > > avoidance and redirection. > > > > > It's isn't? Last I checked, it was. It's a sport form, but I call it > more > > > a martial art than, say, TKD. > > > > I don't know where you get that. Tae Kwon Do is an actual combat martial > > art; it's standard training for the Korean military. (Granted, schools > > that put an emphasis on tournament-style fighting tend to teach a more > > sport-like form). Judo, on the other hand, is officialy designated as a > > *sport* -- based on jujutsu, which is a martial art. Judo is no more a > > true martial art than sport-wrestling. (Yes, I know there are "combat > > judo" schools, but those are really schools that teach a mixture of judo > > and something else, usually karate or jujutsu.) > > > > > Hapkido might be appropriate. In turns, very offensive and very > defensive, > > > with weapon choices being practical and diverse. > > > > Don't know about practical; umpteen Bruce Lee movies notwithstanding, > > nunchuks are about the most *impractical* weapons imaginable, and my > > hapkido teacher tried to train me in their use. (Trust me, anyone who > > plays with nunchuks and hasn't had a LOT of practice is an idiot, > > probably an idiot destined for the emergency room.) > > > > -David > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 15:32:38 PST From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell I know that Malakim can't let demons live, except under really limited circumstances such as Superior's orders, but what about Soldiers of Hell? Can a Malakite choose to leave a Soldier of Hell alive if he has a really good reason (after all, it would have to be a really good reason for him to *want* to leave one alive), or do they come under the blanket prohibition of his oath? What I mean by "really good reason" would be things like the following: 1) He could, by agreeing to leave the Soldier alive, destroy a demon or other greater evil by getting information, scaring the Soldier into cooperation, etc. Or he could, instead of killing the Soldier, follow him, feed him false information, or otherwise learn something useful. 2) The Soldier's death would endanger other people whose welfare was important, such as innocent civilians, hostages, a Cherub's attuned, etc. 3) There is a reasonable chance that the Soldier might change sides. 4) Not killing the Soldier would help keep the peace among other angels the Malakite works with, for the reasons given above or because of the preferences of individual angels (Mercurians, Servitors of Flowers or Destiny). Note that I realize that no Malakite would accept these as reasons not to kill *demons* (except maybe #1, as a temporary situation). But what about human Soldiers of Hell? I think my character may need to know this some time soon, so I would really appreciate as canonical an answer as I can get. Janet Anderson ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: 2 Feb 2000 00:38:10 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Superiors 3 Question On Tue, 01 Feb 2000 12:56:23 PST Erich Arendall wrote: >>From: "-=|horsefly|=-" >>what's the subtitle for Superiors 3, or has it yet been >>determined? i'm hoping y'all can keep the catchy titles. >Hope & Prophecy, was the Subtitle last I checked. so for AA's, the sequence is 'noun & noun' where for DP's it's 'plural noun of the noun'? sounds fine. -=|horsefly|=- ________________________________________________________________ For the best in comics, collectibles, original art and shopping, visit the Dark Horse Network @ . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:04:43 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen M Gingell Subject: Re: IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Janet Anderson wrote: > I know that Malakim can't let demons live, except under really limited Some Malakim may make a distinction between not leting an "evil" live and the demon or hellsworn involved. A sort of "love the sinner hate the sin" approach. A Malakite of Flowers for instance takes dissonance for the use of violence as a first option. They could IMHO satisfy their vow and their archangel by halting the demon's scheme and bringing him to redemption, no "evil" remains, even though no one ever got killed. Not an easy job by any means, but possible. Is this in line with cannon? - -Stephen Gingell ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 18:08:07 -0600 From: Kris Overstreet Subject: Re: IN> Malakim and Soldiers of Hell At 03:32 PM 2/1/00 PST, you wrote: >I know that Malakim can't let demons live, except under really limited >circumstances such as Superior's orders, but what about Soldiers of Hell? >Can a Malakite choose to leave a Soldier of Hell alive if he has a really >good reason (after all, it would have to be a really good reason for him to >*want* to leave one alive), or do they come under the blanket prohibition of >his oath? Simply put: (1) The Malak may have specific orders against killing a particular Soldier, or causing disturbance by killing anyone. (2) The Soldier may not, in the Malak's judgement, be truly evil. (Redeemability is usually not something a Malak judges; the question is, is the target Hell-bound right now?) (3) The Soldier may, with observation, be an opening into a situation where a whole grop of Hellbound, or even some demons, may be waxed, thereby serving a greater good. In this case the death is not chosen against, only deferred. (4) The Malak may be relying on another agency to cause the Soldier's death. (A servant, another Malak, or maybe even a servant of the Game.) If none of these applies, then IMHO if the Malak does not make an immediate attempt to kill any Soldier they are aware of, they get dissonance IMC. Redneck ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1518 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.