From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Mar 18 07:16:28 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 HAA25996 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2000 07:16:28 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id HAA04266 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 18 Mar 2000 07:14:46 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 07:14:46 -0600 Message-Id: <200003181314.HAA04266@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 #1556 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 Saturday, March 18 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1556 In this digest: Re: IN> 'Hi There!', and a first question Re: IN> What books to get? Re: IN> Dark God and low contrast Re: IN> The Odor of Sanctity Re: IN> Eli as Eris? Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> Dark God and low contrast Re: IN> trauma & outcasts/renegades (was GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children...) RE: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... RE: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> Eli as Eris? Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Re: IN> 'Hi There!', and a first question Re: IN> Pyrates of the Marches! Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 05:12:59 -0500 From: "Aaron Medwin" Subject: Re: IN> 'Hi There!', and a first question > At 2:19 AM -0500 3/16/00, Aaron Medwin wrote: > >So, here's my question. > > First answer -- you want to buy the GMG. This has just about all you > need to know... O;> Well, on that matter, at least. There's just so much going on in IN, and I've got a lot of questions on it all. I've got all the books so far, up through Superiors 2, coming to me sometime next week-ish, so I'll hold off on further questions until I know they're not already answered. Lesson learned. :) > >In 'The Final Trumpet', Gabriel hands out a 5 point(IIRC) Rite to anyone to > >kill Magog's Servitors. However, it's later noted that it weakened her a > >lot. So I assume that Rites don't actually create Essence, but just transfer > >from Superior to Servitor. > > Correct. > > >On the other hand, Orc has his own Rites of Networks. > > This comes from his own Essence. (There is a suggestion kicking > around, IIRC at 1am after being braindeadtired, that a Superior > may let a Wordbound tap _his_ store for an instant refill. Maybe.) That would certainly give the Word-bound more incentive to hand out his Rite - people furthering his word without him paying Essence. That seems kind of counter to the point of all the tests and trials, though. You *earn* your word, and it's not easy. It becomes who you are, and there's got to be some sort of trade-off. Things can't be that easy. Well, not IMO. > --Beth - -Aaron Medwin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 05:07:00 -0500 From: "Aaron Medwin" Subject: Re: IN> What books to get? > >Fall of the Malakim, however, is horse doody. Bad, bad, BAD book. > > (Well, bad adventure, certainly. Surely the Geas clarifications > weren't bad? (And, as you'll hear me say many a time, I wasn't > LE at the time most of that was written. It's not my > fault! ) Bad adventure? I actually liked the Revelations Cycle plot(except the circus thing in The Marches). Then again, I tend to like big sweeping Things of Biblical Proportions, and it was nice to see a little bit of everything. Certainly nice to see Magog and the Norse ethereals, and I find Furfur endlessly amusing. Does that put me in the minority? > > --Beth, catching up as she can, while running back and forth to the > hospital to visit her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, > aka Iolanthe Lynn Cayce McCoy, aka Io-chan, aka the little reliever. > (Don't believe it -- she's already Charming the nursing staff!) Wait until she starts draining the life force and Essence from you. That's loads of fun. :) - -Aaron Medwin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 09:25:14 -0500 From: neelk@cswcasa.com Subject: Re: IN> Dark God and low contrast Laurent wrote: > > Precisely why I like it. I like the picture of a dark God who > manipulates everybody at will... If I wanted to use IN as a horror game, I would try to *up* the contrast between angels and demons. The reason I do this is because (IMO, as usual) the angelic and the demonic offer different possibilities for horror. The three basic types of cosmic horror are like this. o First, there's Mythos-style existential horror. The Cthulhu mythos is just utterly alien to mankind, and far more powerful than it. The Elder Gods could accidentally destroy mankind and not even realize it, anymore than a man might notice driving over an ant colony. Even cultists are irrelevant; their actions are as helpful as ants dragging sugar crystals in front of the car's tire as a bribe. o Second, there's diabolical horror. The distinguishing feature of this style of horror is intelligent, directed malice. Unlike Cthulhu, the demons knows exactly who you are, what you care about, what your weaknesses are, and would like nothing better than to exploit you and bring you to ruin. It's a personal and intimate violation, rather than the wholesale destruction of reality. In the movie _The Prophecy_, at one point Satan talks to the human protagonist, and tells him something like: "You remember how when you were a kid, you were convinced that I was hiding under your bed, and how you prayed so desperately to God to keep me from jumping out and killing you? Guess what -- you were right! I WAS hiding under your bed!" (That scene was just inspired, IMO.) o Finally, there's divine horror. What makes God scary is justice. Think about it -- there's an omniscient, omnipotent being who looks at the entire world and makes sure that everyone /gets what they deserve/. So every private vice, every secret instant of sin is seen and recorded by a being that predates humanity and is fundamentally beyond the human. The angels may see us with sympathy and even with compassion, but ultimately their eyes see with a clarity and honesty that makes it impossible for men to hide any weakness. A quote by G. K. Chesterton (from an essay about the book of Job) nails this: "[There is] the sense not merely that God is stronger than man, not merely that God is more secret than man, but that He means more, that He knows better what He is doing, that compared with Him we have something of the vagueness, the unreason, and the vagrancy of the beasts that perish." Making God evil effectively just turns him into a devil, IMO. At that point I'd argue that having Hell in game is mostly redundant. I do want to qualify this and note that this only applies to horror games. If your main interest is in a political game, dark gangster-style action-adventure, or comedy, then having equally (a)moral angels and demons can work really well. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 10:08:35 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> The Odor of Sanctity Kiara S. Legner wrote: > Nice. Consider it swiped, modified, and adopted. Thank you. What modifications are you going to make? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 10:14:39 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Eli as Eris? The thrust of Discordianism strikes me as more closely related to Janus than to Eli, though I admit it has a strong component of creativity in it. But I could readily see "Eris" as the Role of an Elohite of Wind. (I pick Elohite because Discordianism represents shaking things up on the intellectual plane, where I tend to see the Elohim as most active.) Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 10:51:26 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Whistling in the Dark wrote: > Mm. That doesn't appeal to me (like it has to ), mostly because > Isafral as Angel of Music has a Word above it, yet she's not yet an > Archangel. If there's a Grigori Archangel, I'd prefer to see David > Edelstein's Archangel of Death get the nod instead. The Word of Music doesn't necessarily superset the Word of Song in IN, since "Songs" are not just musical pronouncements, but, well, spells, in IN. Of course, Israfel now handles those as well, but this may have been expanding her Word into the gap left by the Outcast Archangel. Only... Isn't that Word still "active," assuming the Archangel of Song is still alive and unfallen? If Israfel got her Word *after* the AA of Song was cast out, this may be because the Seraphim Council is "grooming" her to be a replacement Archangel, and deliberately wanted to give her a Word that would trump that of the Archangel she's replacing. (Only, as I recall the Liber Canticorum, she doesn't *want* to be an Archangel; too much administrative duty. Ah, well.) Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:08:58 -0500 From: neelk@cswcasa.com Subject: Re: IN> Dark God and low contrast Tim Groth wrote: > > Demons, when In-Nomine is played forward, are selfish and don't > like humanity. In short, they act a lot like humans do. This was actually a conscious feature in my game -- demons tended to be a lot more comprehensible to human beings than angels did, because demons acted out of greed, spite, vanity, self interest, and boredom. Hell was familiar to humans, no worse and no better than some of the nastier kleptocracies that exist in the real world. (The difference is mainly that there's no hope of anything better in Hell.) Heaven was extremely weird, because you could expect everyone to act out of the highest motives and maintain the highest standards all the time. There were some truly marvelous bits of roleplaying, when the PCs (all angels) got together and worked out how to remain open and love one another, even though their different choirs and words demanded opposed courses of action. It reminded me why I like GMing -- I get to see people do stuff like that. :) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:16:08 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> trauma & outcasts/renegades (was GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children...) - -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > > this thread has made me wonder: what happens to an Outcast or Renegade who winds up toast on the corporeal plane? there's no heart, so they don't go back to their respective side of the celestial plane. i'm guessing they land straight in Limbo, generating a new body over the next couple thousand years, but once they have one, how to descend to earth once more? they're cut off from tethers unless they're *really* sneaky. and isn't Limbo somehow connected to both Heaven and Hell? how do they get out of Limbo without facing major opposition from their former superiors? i guess the bottom line is, if you go renegade or outcast, _don't get vessel-killed._ Getting out of Limbo via vessel regeneration puts you back on earth automatically. It's getting to Heaven/Hell that's the difficult part. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 08:52:12 -0800 From: Steven Feldon Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... I most sincerely agree. There is no way in my mind or in my campaign that the Angel of Song could be above the Angel of Music. If Israfel won't take Archangelic status, the poor Angel of Song would be stuck, unable to be promoted. steve - -----Original Message----- From: Whistling in the Dark [mailto:in-sabre@annotations.com] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 6:28 PM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 2:05 PM -0500 3/15/00, Walter Milliken wrote: > >One other tidbit that's in the GIN writeup (and may be referenced somewhere >in IN canon, though I don't recall for certain): there was at least one >Grigori Superior, the Archangel of Song. Mm. That doesn't appeal to me (like it has to ), mostly because Isafral as Angel of Music has a Word above it, yet she's not yet an Archangel. If there's a Grigori Archangel, I'd prefer to see David Edelstein's Archangel of Death get the nod instead. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 09:53:08 -0800 From: "Robert Veneman-Hughes" Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... > > I most sincerely agree. There is no way in my mind or in my > campaign that > the Angel of Song could be above the Angel of Music. If > Israfel won't take > Archangelic status, the poor Angel of Song would be stuck, > unable to be > promoted. I dunno... Israfel is certainly an old angel, but she may not have had the Word of Music for that entire time. Also, there is good support for Song being semi-independent of Music; not only do Songs, with the capital, change the Symphony, but singing itself is certainly different than playing the violin. Singing, first off, is more communal, something that can be done by groups of people. (Yes, you can play an instrument in groups as well, but during the time the Grigori were wandering around, instrumental music was a bare art at best.) Indeed, I could see a reversal of prominence between Song and Music in the last 12,000 years - At one time, Song was more important, since all music of any sort was Song. So the Word of Music, back in the day, was really just about singing, and it was just about singing for a musical end. So, Israfel might have been a lieutenant of the Archangel of Song; other lieutentants would be, say, the Angel of Choirs, who emphasized singing as an activity that built community, the Angel of Sagas, (I don't like the Word, but a better one doesn't come to mind) who would be all about songs as a living history and a medium for oral culture being passed down through generations, and finally the Angel of the Music of the Spheres, or some such title, who would have in their province the sorts of Songs celestials sing to change the world. Or perhaps the nameless Archangel of Song would handle the duties of that last word himself... In any case, my point is that Song is about more than just music, and in a time when there wasn't any other sort of music besides singing, a Word that encompassed all of the things that have to do with Song would be more powerful than a Word just about the fledgling and very junior art of music. - -Robert ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:48:31 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 19:14 -0500 3/16/00, David Barr wrote: >> I'm not sure if it would be all *that* different. In fact, Eli, >> who would >> have been most likely to be on the Grigori's side originally, is >> now a >> non-player in the Council. About the only champions I could see >> for them >> now would be Novalis, and maybe Janus (mostly just to change the >> status >> quo). >I was think specifically of Jordi (his perspective is pretty >radically different from the other AA's, as a rule) True, but the Grigori were specifically designed to interact with *humans*; I can't see Jordi caring much about them, and his concerns would most likely put him in the anti-Grig faction, since he wouldn't favor anything that made humans more organized/powerful/etc. > and Gabriel >(espcially if she was feeling prophetic, or thought that outcasting >was Cruel). Although, I am not sure off hand she is part of the >council at the moment, with that self imposed exile. I don't think she's an active participant in the Council, though she's entitled to be there, and I suspect she may show up from time to time, as her whims (or currents of prophecy) dictate. > Uhm... Yves, >since he tends to be concerned with the destiny of individuals, might >object to outcasting the whole of the choir. But that should have happened at the first, and Yves swings enough weight in the council that I don't think they would have outcast the Grigori over his objections. In my own game, Yves is very illuminated -- he'd have no compunction about using the entire Choir in any way, as long as it promoted the Destiny of the Symphony. He'd regret it, but it would be necessary. And angels are there to serve God's Will, right? Even if they don't know how they're doing that.... >so why are you talking to me? Go write the book (in your Copious >Spare Time...)! *I'm* not likely to do much with the Grigori -- that's work for an author who's much better at background material than I. I'm mostly a rules- and world-mechanic. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:51:29 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 20:01 -0500 3/16/00, Liam Astley wrote: >aaargh, please no. i'm very excited at the idea of grigori stuff, but "The >Skulkers" sounds like a b-grade punk band So do many of the other secondary Choir and Band names, at least to me. I think that says something about how such bands are named, more than anything else. Actually, "The " sounds like a band name, though maybe not a *punk* band. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:54:17 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Eli as Eris? At 20:04 -0500 3/16/00, Matthew W. wrote: >What exactly does Eli's female vessel look like? :) Whatever he wants it to... remember his Kyrio attunement. > I've always thought >the Principia was an Creationer kind of thing. Pure rambling creative >philosophy in a nice eye-candy format. Definitely an interesting notion. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:07:45 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 10:51 -0500 3/17/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >> Mm. That doesn't appeal to me (like it has to ), mostly because >> Isafral as Angel of Music has a Word above it, yet she's not yet an >> Archangel. If there's a Grigori Archangel, I'd prefer to see David >> Edelstein's Archangel of Death get the nod instead. > >The Word of Music doesn't necessarily superset the Word of Song >in IN, since "Songs" are not just musical pronouncements, but, >well, spells, in IN. I'm not really sure exactly what "Song" covers, but I have a vague impression from what little data I have on the Grigori proto-canon that it's more Symphonic than mundane in nature. > Of course, Israfel now handles those as >well, but this may have been expanding her Word into the gap >left by the Outcast Archangel. I strongly suspect this is the case. >Only... > >Isn't that Word still "active," assuming the Archangel of Song >is still alive and unfallen? Probably, but don't forget that angels often have overlapping Words, just not the *same* Word. Unlike demons, they're not as likely to be jealous of their "territory", so the Council doesn't have a problem with different people sharing some areas of their Words. >If Israfel got her Word *after* the AA of Song was cast out, >this may be because the Seraphim Council is "grooming" her >to be a replacement Archangel, and deliberately wanted to give >her a Word that would trump that of the Archangel she's replacing. >(Only, as I recall the Liber Canticorum, she doesn't *want* to >be an Archangel; too much administrative duty. Ah, well.) That's possible, though I don't necessarily think it's so much "trumping" as filling in a gap that would strengthen Heaven. Unlike demons, Grigori wouldn't necessarily work at cross-purposes with Heaven; they're just considered bad examples and bad risks.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:07:26 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Walter Milliken wrote: > I don't think she's an active participant in the Council, though she's entitled > to be there, and I suspect she may show up from time to time, as her whims > (or currents of prophecy) dictate. Wasn't Gabriel a lot less alienated before the Islam debacle? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:08:45 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... But surely "the Skulters" is only *one* of their names. Each choir or band has at least two names, so far -- one English, one not. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:38:55 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 14:07 -0500 3/17/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: > >> I don't think she's an active participant in the Council, though she's >entitled >> to be there, and I suspect she may show up from time to time, as her whims >> (or currents of prophecy) dictate. > >Wasn't Gabriel a lot less alienated before the Islam debacle? Yes; I was presuming we were talking about a modern re-evaluation of the Grigori situation, not the original debate. Back then I could see her maybe siding with the Grigori. But even then, she was subject to prophetic behavior, and she might have forseen some need for the Grigori to undergo what happened. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:40:30 -0500 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... At 14:08 -0500 3/17/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >But surely "the Skulters" is only *one* of their names. Each choir or >band has >at least two names, so far -- one English, one not. Right now, they're simply "Fallen Grigori", as far as I know. "Skulkers" is their "epithet name". - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:18:34 -0000 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... From: David Barr > I was think specifically of Jordi (his perspective is pretty > radically different from the other AA's, as a rule) he doesn't disagree for the dake of it, though. i don't see him as caring much about what happened to the grigori. "a choir of angels who are all obsessed with humans? we're better off without them" liam ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:35:24 -0800 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Our spies report that on 05:18 PM 11/17/99 -0000, Liam Astley said: >he doesn't disagree for the dake of it, though. i don't see him as caring >much about what happened to the grigori. "a choir of angels who are all >obsessed with humans? we're better off without them" > So he doesn't like Mercurians either? I think the role of Grigori as instructors of sorts should be considered. On one hand, were the humans educated /properly/ they might be more acceptable to Jordi. If, on the other hand, Grigori teachings just made them more insufferable... Remember that while Jordi may have had issues with the humans, he didn't go over to Lucifer's side in the Rebellion. Whether humans were so special was a big issue there, but still he held to God's side. Of course, these days, no one is sure what God's plan is anymore...but back then, he might have cared. But on the other hand, if we assume a more apathetic Jordi, he might well have felt that if all the Grigori did was mess up/with some humans, that is hardly worth caring about. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 16:44:17 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Sean McCarthy wrote: > So he doesn't like Mercurians either? Well, he's able to create and/or employ them, though of course he gives them ape vessels. (Lots of angels look humanoid in celestial form. Do Jordi's?) > I think the role of Grigori as instructors of sorts should be > considered. On one hand, were the humans educated /properly/ they > might be more acceptable to Jordi. If, on the other hand, Grigori > teachings just made them more insufferable... Interesting idea. The duty given to Adam and Eve, in Genesis, was to "have dominion" over the Earth and its creatures. That sounds like it would raise Jordi's hackles, but an old idea is that, had we not fallen, we'd have made the whole planet Eden-like. Instead of being at odds with Jordi, we might have been a whole race of "forest rangers" assisting him and Novalis. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:14:08 -0600 From: Jonathan B Lotzer Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... Earl Wajenberg wrote: > Sean McCarthy wrote: > > > So he doesn't like Mercurians either? > > Well, he's able to create and/or employ them, though of course he gives > them ape vessels. (Lots of angels look humanoid in celestial form. Do > Jordi's?) > Just going back to check on this... Seraphim: resembles a winged, many-eyed serpent Cherub: look like enormous, winged animals -lions, bears, etc. - suffused in golden halos Ofanim: giant wheels of holy fire, whirling across the sky Elohim: vaguely human shapes with smooth and idealized features Malakim: shadowy human figures, large black wings glinting with purple in the light Kyriotates: multi-colored clouds of random limbs, mouths and eyes Mercurians: Traditional Western image of an angel. So, yes, three (two?) of the major Choirs have humanoid feature. Quite a few but it wouldn't really seem to be an overwhelming majority. > > > I think the role of Grigori as instructors of sorts should be > > considered. On one hand, were the humans educated /properly/ they > > might be more acceptable to Jordi. If, on the other hand, Grigori > > teachings just made them more insufferable... > > Interesting idea. The duty given to Adam and Eve, in Genesis, > was to "have dominion" over the Earth and its creatures. That > sounds like it would raise Jordi's hackles, but an old idea is > that, had we not fallen, we'd have made the whole planet Eden-like. > Instead of being at odds with Jordi, we might have been a whole > race of "forest rangers" assisting him and Novalis. > IIRC, isn't dominion supposed to mean something more like sheparding or caretaking. Rather than being overwhelming overlords of the poor defenseless animals (like many humans have become today *growl* *snarl* *hiss* ;) being friends and companions to the world around them, (a vision possibly closer to people that live closer to the earth, preEuropean North America perhaps?) So perhaps the duty itself would have pleased Jordi, but not the way that it has come to be interpreted. > > Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:30:22 -0600 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> 'Hi There!', and a first question > > This comes from his own Essence. (There is a suggestion kicking > > around, IIRC at 1am after being braindeadtired, that a Superior > > may let a Wordbound tap _his_ store for an instant refill. Maybe.) > > That would certainly give the Word-bound more incentive to hand out his > Rite - people furthering his word without him paying Essence. That seems > kind of counter to the point of all the tests and trials, though. You *earn* > your word, and it's not easy. It becomes who you are, and there's got to be > some sort of trade-off. Things can't be that easy. Hmmm, except that peforming the rite is supposed to strengthen the Word that it is associated with. The rites are not a reward of being Word-Bound as I see it, the Word Forces and other Special abilities are. With this argument where does the Essence come from for a Word-Bound non-superior? Think of it as a ritual that a Word-Bound has discovered/created that the allows a performer to siphon energy from the Symphony as opposed to otherwise, at least for the 1 point rites. For the other 2+ (Certainly a 5pt!) rites the Essence might be more likely to come from the actual Word-Bound.. "If you do this rite that really, really serves my Word I'll match the 1 point of essence myself..." David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:41:48 -0000 From: "Genevieve Cogman" Subject: Re: IN> Pyrates of the Marches! - -----Original Message----- From: Rhodri James To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: 17 March 2000 02:09 Subject: Re: IN> Pyrates of the Marches! > >Dammit, I'm going to have to read it again to work out what sort of Swordy >Long Ben Avery is. I knew there was a reason I had a spare copy :-) Malakite of Laurence, surely! Observe that peerless sense of honour. Now Colonel Blood is a bit more awkward . . . - --- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:15:10 -0000 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN, Grigori, and their children... From: Steven Feldon > I most sincerely agree. There is no way in my mind or in my campaign that > the Angel of Song could be above the Angel of Music. If Israfel won't take > Archangelic status, the poor Angel of Song would be stuck, unable to be > promoted. why? following that logic, novalis couldn't have been made an archangel until "fred, AA of plantlife" existed liam ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1556 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.