From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Feb 8 21:49:24 2000 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 VAA07410 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:49:23 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id VAA16209 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:25:33 -0600 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:25:33 -0600 Message-Id: <200002090325.VAA16209@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 #1525 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 8 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1525 In this digest: Re: IN> Angels and Languages. Re: IN> Angels and Languages. Re: IN> Angels and Languages. IN> The Guns of Lightning Re: IN> Angels and Languages. Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning IN> Slightly off topic? IN> spam check Re: IN> spam check Re: IN> spam check Re: IN> spam check and Word-smiting IN> Fwd: 'low-level' Plot Ideas Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 18:25:01 -0500 From: neelk@cswcasa.com Subject: Re: IN> Angels and Languages. Ben Glickler wrote: > > Do celestials have to take the language skill to simulate their age? > If you're playing a celestial who was on Earth a thousand years ago, > the languages they started off with would differ radically from the > languages they currently know. I ruled that angels could speak every language fluently. The way I figure it is like this. The most interesting thing you can do in an RPG is talk to the NPCs -- even villains and rivals become more interesting after the PCs talk to them. So why on earth should I make it hard for the PCs to talk to the locals? How does it benefit my game? I decided it didn't, and that it made more thematic sense for angels to understand everybody, and that was that. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 16:46:24 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> Angels and Languages. > I ruled that angels could speak every language fluently. I am leaning towards allowing celestials to speak every language fluently. This raises other questions -- do they know sign language? ;) I'd almost say no, here, because THAT is a huge advantage. A silent method of communication... They can't read the languages without buying them. This provides use for the Song of Tongues, outside its normal ability to communicate in every language at once. Anyway, I could see this easily being part of the standard benefit of being celestial -- being able to verbally communicate with any being that can verbally communicate. It'd be just as celestial as not needing to eat or having no defined gender. > Neel Krishnaswami Ben ------------------------------ Date: 7 Feb 2000 23:45:41 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> Angels and Languages. On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 17:37:57 -0500 Whistling in the Dark wrote: >At 1:37 PM -0800 2/6/00, Perry Lloyd wrote: >>> >How do you folks handle it? One suggestion from a >>> >player was that angels should be able to speak every >>> >earthly language, just because of what they are. [snip] >>No. >>(If only for the sake of playability.) >Mm -- I disagree. As I listed elsewhere, I prefer to >assume that Angels and Demons were not inflicted with the >confusion of tongues after the Babel incident. An Angel >can understand and speak to anyone. What they *can't* do >is translate. [snip] i like the direction of this, but i'd put a different limitation on things. i just finished _Casca the Eternal Mercenary_; in it the protagonist speaks with Jesus on the cross. the character hears Latin and responds in kind. later, two of his friends confront him--one asking him where he learned Hebrew while the other contends Jesus spoke Arimaic. from that, i contend that all celestials know the Corporeal Song of Tongues at level 6, but spend no Essence in its use. were i to run an In Nomine game, this would be an innate characteristic of celestials. the downside is that it attracts a lot of attention from observant humans who confer on what the celestial said and which language it used to say it. after all the hastle this causes, Superiors simply insist that their Servitors learn at least one human language, and if they have to fall back on celestial abilities to get the job done, they're to insure as few witnesses as possible. -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ________________________________________________________________ For the best in comics, collectibles, original art and shopping, visit the Dark Horse Network @ . ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 18:43:25 -0600 From: "Trent" Subject: IN> The Guns of Lightning The Guns of Lightning For the last century these "laser guns" have been popular among angels of Jean, especially those who enjoy science fiction. The first one was made in 1927 by Kirk, a Malakim of Creation in service to Jean. Soon the craze was on and every black-wing in the Halls of Progress wanted one. Each gun is a work of art and no two are exactly alike. The following is Kirks gun which the rest are biased on. Relic & Relequary/6 (Celestial song of Light)+30 Double Essence Capacity +6 Self Powered +0 Double Essence Regeneration +5 Must be plugged in to the wall to recharge -1 Total: 36 points This gun looks a lot like a traditional "Buck Rogers" style of laser gun and many mistake it for a simple toy - which is just the way Kirk wants it. This is my first attempt at artifact creation so please point out any mistakes in tabulating the point cost. Thanks, Trent Ofanite of Doubt Computer Geek Rule #1: Microsoft is just evil. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 00:30:16 -0500 (EST) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Angels and Languages. On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Richard Gant wrote: > > How do you folks handle it? One suggestion from a player was that angels > > should be able to speak every earthly language, just because of what they > > are. My stingy GM instincts tell me that if you want to simulate an older > > angel, take the skills necessary to make the simulation work, but then you > > end up with an older angel who is weaker than his modern counterparts > > because he had to toss half a dozen points into language skills. Is there > > an adequate middle road, or is one of us correct? > > I assume that angels are "programmed" with the primary language of the > area they are assigned to. If they want to speak more than that, they > need to cough up points. The way I handle it is to make high levels of skill unnecessary. Here's my chart for language skill levels: 1... You speak the language almost fluently, with a slight accent. 2... You speak the language perfectly, as if you'd been a native all your life. 3... As 2. 4... As 2. 5... As 2. 6... As 2. You want 8 more languages, you spend 8 points. You want four of those to be PERFECT, you spend 12 points. No complaints from my players yet, no problem with playability yet. - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! ::: Conspiracy religions CONvert, the Subgenius SUBverts! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 04:29:41 -0500 (EST) From: anthoch@earlham.edu Subject: Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning "Trent" wrote: >1927 by Kirk, a Malakim of Creation in service to Jean. Soon the craze was Kirk is a Malakite. >Relic & Relequary/6 (Celestial song of Light)+30 >Double Essence Capacity +6 >Self Powered +0 >Double Essence Regeneration +5 >Must be plugged in to the wall to recharge -1 >Total: 36 points Relic/6 @ 3/level = 18 {Reliq/6 @ 2/level = 12* Reliq/6 @ 3/level = 18*} 2xEssenceC @ +6 = +6 2xEssenceR @ +5 = +5 Restrict @ -1 = -1 ---- 40 (46) * I can't remember if Reliquary is 2 or 3 per level, and I don't have LR with me. Gotta love the Final Fantasy-style listing, eh? EssenceC, really. Try this: The Stormtrooper Rifle (aka Vapula's Benighted Blaster) Fortunately for the demonic troops, the recent proliferation of science-fiction movies has provided Vapula with fodder enough to keep him busy for years. Many of the devices he produces mimic those his minions see on Nybbas's endless walls of televisions, and the Producer is starting to get miffed that he doesn't even get a "Based on the movie by" in the credits. Unfortunately for the demonic troops, Vapula's inventions don't work, more often than not. The Stormtrooper Rifle is proof enough of this. It, along with its companion the Stormtrooper Armor, is possibly the single worst-designed piece of weaponry in Creation. Its aim is the only perfect thing about it; sadly, that aim is marred by poor production values and flawed plans. Vapula's Benighted Blaster fires "bolts of plasma", actually a modified Celestial Song of Light. When they hit, they cause the standard damage from the Song (call it X), plus (X - the number of rounds since the bolt hit) every round thereafter. This is taken in the form of eating through whatever the bolt encounters. The damage it does is vastly outweighed by the problems it causes. The first is that the guns are telepathic, Vapula's idea of a targeting computer. While this would not normally be a problem, the guns are also hideously malicious - toward /everything/ - and thus misaim as much as they possibly can. The second is their shoddy construction; the guns break and misfire almost as much as they misaim, and this only adds to their malice. The third, and perhaps most devastating, disadvantage to the Rifles is that their bolts are doubly effective against Vapula's Armor of the Gods (of Snot). Nobody knows why this is, but as the people wearing the Armor are generally also the people firing the Rifles, it's theorized that the attribute is plausibly a self-defense mechanism. Relic/3: Celestial Light : 9 Reliq/3: : 6/9 Relic/3: Ethereal Tongues: 9 - -5 to aim: : -5 Malicious to user : -3 ---- 16/19 Vapula's Armor of the Gods (of Snot) is forthcoming. - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 09:40:08 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning Given the vintage of the gun, and given that "Kirk" is a servant of Lightning, maybe it would be more appropriate if the Song of Light attack manifested -- or at least was spoken of -- as a "blaster bolt" -- a big, fat spark -- rather than a "laser beam." Just a stylistic suggestion. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 11:00:37 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning At 4:29 AM -0500 2/8/00, anthoch@earlham.edu wrote: >"Trent" wrote: > [...] >{Reliq/6 @ 2/level = 12* > Reliq/6 @ 3/level = 18*} [...] >* I can't remember if Reliquary is 2 or 3 per level, and I don't have LR >with me. Reliquaries are 3 per level. (That's in the main book, too!) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 11:02:53 -0800 (PST) From: Jennifer Campbell Subject: IN> Slightly off topic? I've been reading sites and lurking on the list, and I think I'm ready to play. . . Do y'all know any good online groups? I applied to the one on the ORC page, but the lady must be backloged because I haven't heard back from her. . . I love this game and would love to get in the mix somewhere. . . __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 12:50:50 -0800 (PST) From: David Barr Subject: IN> spam check Just want to confirm... With our Beloved List Admins new Aproved Poster List attunement, (or is it a rite? a right?) I am guessing that pretty much any spam I get from here on in will be my own problem, and not list related in any way. Is that the case? Thanks!! - -Daiv ===== reply to my home address -> daiv@cruzio.com she said to sit down soon you will be a father be very afraid - -Daiv __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 17:12:27 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> spam check At 12:50 PM -0800 2/8/00, David Barr wrote: >Just want to confirm... With our Beloved List Admins new Aproved >Poster List attunement, (or is it a rite? a right?) Attunement, or maybe Song or relic. >I am guessing >that pretty much any spam I get from here on in will be my own >problem, and not list related in any way. Is that the case? Thanks!! Bingo. Among other hints, anything that comes from the list will have "IN>" in the Subject header. If spam comes in with that, then tell me, for I will be most wroth. (And at least three spams were caught over the weekend. Bouncy, bouncy spams, in my bouncebox, and not thy in-box.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:32:23 -0800 (PST) From: David Barr Subject: Re: IN> spam check All hail to the beloved list admin! {And so they sing...} Bing! Bong! the spam is dead! Boing! Boing! it Dies unread! Etc. Hmm....anti-spam haiku? oh yeah, Topic... (time to switch hats to player rather than poster (room her e for a line about poster boy?)) Would widely used kill methods like this be the kind of thing to weaken a celestial Word (like spam?) Or would killing a Word require changing the meaning of the word, in the hearts and minds of humanity at large. How does one kill a word? Not the word bound, so much as the word itself. Note, I am not asking how to kill a superior level Word, like Fire. Though if I were going to run an Epic level, multi-year, over the top capmaign, killing Belial and restoring Gabriel to sanity (in theory) would be a lot of fun. - --- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >I am guessing > >that pretty much any spam I get from here on in will be my own > >problem, and not list related in any way. Is that the case? > Thanks!! > > Bingo. Among other hints, anything that comes from the list will > have "IN>" in the Subject header. If spam comes in with that, then > tell me, for I will be most wroth. > > > (And at least three spams were caught over the weekend. Bouncy, > bouncy > spams, in my bouncebox, and not thy in-box.) > > > --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor > GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: > http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ > > > > > ===== reply to my home address -> daiv@cruzio.com she said to sit down soon you will be a father be very afraid - -Daiv __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 18:01:08 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> spam check and Word-smiting At 2:32 PM -0800 2/8/00, David Barr wrote: >Hmm....anti-spam haiku? That's scary... >oh yeah, Topic... >Would widely used kill methods like this be the kind of thing to >weaken a celestial Word (like spam?) Making the Word less powerful, have less impact on humans (or the rest of the world), etc., will weaken a Word. The Demon of Buggy Whips, for instance, wasn't doing all that well... Changing the meaning of a word _can_ influence the Word, but not always. It's a very subtle thing, very ineffable, and up to the GM in Very Major Ways. (This is all in the GMG, BTW. Which I hope I am summarizing from memory correctly... 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, 8 Feb 2000 18:08:16 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: 'low-level' Plot Ideas Remember, all, if you want to post, you have to be s u b s c r i b e d to one of the three lists. To be on the approved poster's list, send mail to with the following command in the body of your email message: s*bscribe in_nomine_posters-l your@address.here Wait 30 minutes if you're doing this from the address given, or for me to get to it otherwise. >From: "trashcan" >Subject: 'low-level' Plot Ideas >Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 19:34:46 +0100 > >I recently bought the IN game and am going to start running a game in a >couple of weeks time. I am new to the game and find it hard to come up with >plot ideas that do not seem to grand or epic in proportions. I.e. i don't >want my players to start off by being involved in a plot centered around a >major superior or so. Basically what I would like is some plot ideas for >'low-level' plots, or smaller sub-plots in a campaign. >I've searched the web for plot-ideas >(most of the good stuff i found was at www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles) >however mostly the plots were what I call 'high-level'. > >A lot of you guys sound like you have been GM'ing IN for a while, why don't >you give a brief summary of your most recent campaign and/or plot ideas? > >I think many of us could be inspired by such posts, I know I could! > > >- Tobias Bindslet, >eagerly waiting to start playing this brilliant game :o) > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 22:22:59 -0500 (EST) From: anthoch@earlham.edu Subject: Re: IN> The Guns of Lightning Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Reliquaries are 3 per level. (That's in the main book, too!) That's what happens when you send email from work. ;) - -EDG ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1525 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.