From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Apr 4 10:53:42 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 KAA12535 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:53:40 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id KAA14648 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:47:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:47:50 -0500 Message-Id: <200004041547.KAA14648@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 #1572 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, April 4 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1572 In this digest: Re: IN> Looking for Lucifer... RE: IN> Looking for Lucifer... Re: IN> Looking for Lucifer... Re: IN> Yet another question! Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Format Fwd: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph IN> Fwd: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\bsubscribe\b/i at line 7 IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: IN> Yet another question! Re: Fwd: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: IN> Newbie! Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Newbie! IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) Re: Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) Re: IN> Newbie! Re: IN> Newbie! Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 RE: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> DPs and their cars... Re:IN> Real weird speculation Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: IN> Human Perception Rolls IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re: IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 11:27:51 -0400 From: "Galen G. Silversmith" Subject: Re: IN> Looking for Lucifer... > Return-Path: tillek@ix.netcom.com > Does anyone know of a write-up for Lucifer as Archangel of Light? I am > looking specifically for rites and attunements. I know already of the > admirable write-up in Dark Victory; I am looking for others. I do believe there is a senchal of a tether of light in the book of tethers (Assuming my memory isn't failing me). Not a full canon writeup, but it may be sufficient ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 09:11:35 -0700 From: "Robert Veneman-Hughes" Subject: RE: IN> Looking for Lucifer... > I do believe there is a senchal of a tether of light in the > book of tethers > (Assuming my memory isn't failing me). Not a full canon > writeup, but it > may be sufficient > Shenim is described, but no statistics are given for any of his powers. We're told that he is powerful, but not anything concrete about him or about Lucy. - -Robert ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 12:32:04 -0400 From: "Gregory Gietzen" Subject: Re: IN> Looking for Lucifer... From: "Robert Veneman-Hughes" >We're told [nothing] about Lucy. Well, of course not! Why would they describe an australopithicine in a game about angels and demons? Greg "To sit in solemn silence in a dull, dark dock, In a pestilential prison, with a life-long lock, Awaiting the sensation of a short, sharp shock, From a cheap and chippy chopper on a big black block!" -- W. S. Gilbert, "The Mikado" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 13:25:11 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Yet another question! At 19:12 -0400 4/2/00, Sean McCarthy wrote: >Our spies report that on 01:36 PM 4/2/00 -0700, EDG said: >>AFAIK, Kyriotate of the Wind is not restricted (though GURPS In Nomine* does >>list it as being more expensive for other choirs). Correct -- GURPS In Nomine has it as unrestricted. > >The point difference comes from something purely GURPS-related. And, in fact, the point costs of attunements in GURPS In Nomine have nothing really to do with the point costs in In Nomine -- they're computed independently from GURPS mechanics, while In Nomine's attunement costs were set to a single value, essentially by fiat, to simplify the game mechanics. (For the rabidly curious, the reason it's more expensive for other Choirs in GURPS is that using the Kyrio of Wind attunement prohibits multitasking. I.e., it's cheaper for Kyrios because they're *disadvantaged* by using the attunement, and the other Choirs don't suffer similar resonance-use restrictions.) > If other >choirs can buy it there, that's a pretty good indication of the current >thinking about it. Correct. The GURPS In Nomine draft uses the Line Editor's opinions of restrictions. This doesn't mean they'll totally match the ones in future Superiors books -- it's always possible playtest discussion of the Superiors books will change the LE's mind on one of them. (Any such changes would become errata for GURPS In Nomine.) I doubt many will change, though. Most cases are pretty obvious; I think there were about a dozen that were really questionable. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:09:26 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 3:31 -0400 4/3/00, Tafka J. wrote: > According to the SJGames website, we can expect G:IN _around_ June Quite possible... it's definitely in the editorial process and out of my hands. (For those people -- if any -- who've been waiting for it, I have to say "mea culpa"... unfortunately, Real Life intruded on my ability to finish GURPS IN in a timely fashion.) > And though I mourn the passing of the Flaming Feather, We did suggest that, a la GURPS Traveller, which kept the original Trav cover design, I think. But SJ wanted something new here. > the cover of G:IN >rocks. . . The authors are always the last to know.... (This is the first I knew of it, though I've seen a couple covers that *didn't* make it.) I have to agree -- that's a *really* nice cover. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:11:04 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Format At 0:35 -0400 4/1/00, Jonathan B Lotzer wrote: >I know that there is both a regular and a digest version of this list, >and was wondering about the differences. I believe the only difference is that the digest comes as a single message once a day (usually) containing *all* the day's messages. If I recall right, the archive is done using the digests, so if you want to see one, try the archive link. > There are several threads that >have passed through lately that haven't interested me in the least. On >the other hand, there are other threads that I watch like a hawk. Does >the digest cover that better? No. > Also, something that I've been seeing >alot of lately that might work well on here and in the other SJ >discussion groups. I've seen several website that you can hit buttons >and it'll add their newsgroup server to your (in my case) Netscape >list. This isn't a newsgroup, but a mailing list; I don't know if this can be done as easily with a mailing list. I suspect not, but I don't know what you can and can't do via Javascript. > Heck, is there even an interest in that or am >I the only one? I doubt it's really very useful -- the instructions for sending a message to majordomo on the IN web page don't really take much more work, since you can click the mailto: link for majordomo to do half the work. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:06:03 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph >From: Matt Lyon >Subject: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph > >Walter Milliken wrote: > >> I think this whole notion started as a semi-joke, based on the question, >> "Why is Dominic never seen without his cloak?", and also on the rather >> dark picture of him painted in the main book. I believe at least one >> person's campaign actually used this notion, but I don't think it's >> widely held by the IN list population here. But it's fun to discuss. >> >> If you s*bscribe to this idea, you have to postulate that Dominic's >> cloak protects him from the light of Heaven, as well as the scrutiny of >> his fellow Archangels. >> >> ---Walter > >I'd have to agree that's it's not an idea I'll actually use, but I do so >love having fodder for the Heavenly rumor mill. Any other divine gossip >would be of help as I have all new players and I'm an evil GM who's just >trying to confuse my players... > >Matt > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:06:05 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Admin request of type /\bsubscribe\b/i at line 7 >From: "Kiara S. Legner" >Subject: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph >Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 07:25:19 -0600 > >> >I've heard some mention of the theory that Dominic is actually a >> >Balseraph. I'd be interested in hearing details about this (how a >> >Balseraph hangs out in Heaven, for one) from anyone who holds this >> >particular view. >> >> >> If you s*bscribe to this idea, you have to postulate that Dominic's >> cloak protects him from the light of Heaven, as well as the scrutiny of >> his fellow Archangels. >> > >In my campaign, Dominic has emerged as not a Balseraph, but as having gotten >so paranoid about the possibility of more angels falling that he's spending >more time worrying about the Host than about the Other Side. I haven't >quite decided if he's carrying a load of dissonance or not yet - the jury's >still out on that one. (At the moment, I'm leaning more towards fanaticism >than towards dissonance, but there's a fine line between the world of a >fanatic and the world of a demon. Both involve listening only to your own >version of the Symphony) I'll have to make up my mind soon, however, as I'm >running a story arc involving the creation of a new band of angels by Eli >(the prototype was created as a child of Eli and a Bright) that has >basically fed Dominic's suspicions about Eli to the point of exploding. > >Ultimately, my intent is to shake up the Hyena of Heaven to the point where >he either has to realize how far over the deep end he's gone (as will the >rest of the Archangels) and straighten out, or Jump. What actually happens, >well, stories tend to write themselves. We'll see. > >I don't think that Dominic's cloak can protect him from the light of >Heaven - so I can't subscribe to the Balseraph notion. Although I'd thought >about it for awhile... > >Kiara > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:07:32 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from ["Steven E. Ehrbar" ] >From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" >Subject: DPs and their cars... >Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 05:11:04 -0400 > >Here's another one of those blasted lists: DPs and their cars. > >Andrealphus -- a Lamboughini Countach. > >Asmodeus -- a black, 1975 sedan of uncertain make or model. > >Baal -- a Hummer, of course. > >Beleth -- a 1941 Lincoln Zephyr with a 1939 Lincoln V-12 engine and a 1930 >Ford Model A coupe body painted Datsun Z-car red. > >Belial -- a Ford Pinto. > >Haagenti -- a Good Humor ice-cream truck. > >Kobal -- a Ford Edsel. > >Kronos -- a slightly modified Delorean DMC-12. > >Malphas -- a new Ford Excursion. > >Nybbas -- a new Cadillac limousine, with driver. > >Saminga -- a 1973 Corvair. > >Valefor -- it changes every week, but is always a very expensive >high-perfomance sportscar. > >Vapula -- an Aston Martin DB-V, with minor modifications. > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 20:02:23 +0100 From: Becky Subject: Re: IN> Yet another question! Thanks guys! you've been a big help again :) and yes, sorry, I did mean ofanites of lightening :) Becca. Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, For you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 14:15:03 -0500 From: Matt Trent Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph > >I'd have to agree that's it's not an idea I'll actually use, but I do so > >love having fodder for the Heavenly rumor mill. Any other divine gossip > >would be of help as I have all new players and I'm an evil GM who's just > >trying to confuse my players... > > > >Matt If it's gossip you want check out the superiors books... Every superior covered so have as a section devoted to rumors (IIRC). Lots of awesome stuff there. And of course there is always the INC (even if it hasn't been updated for six months it's still got some cool stuff stored there. www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/ Trent ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:15:57 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... > >From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" > > > >Here's another one of those blasted lists: DPs and their cars. > > > >Andrealphus -- a Lamboughini Countach. Or a van, with a mattress where the rear seats would ordinarily go. > >Belial -- a Ford Pinto. Still laughing about this one... > >Haagenti -- a Good Humor ice-cream truck. I think he'd have one of those lunch wagon trucks, the kind that has a lot of different kinds of food. > >Kobal -- a Ford Edsel. No, he'd drive a Tucker. The Edsel didn't completely kill the Ford Motor Corporation, after all. > >Saminga -- a 1973 Corvair. When he can't borrow Belial's Pinto, anyway. ;;;) > >Valefor -- it changes every week, but is always a very expensive > >high-perfomance sportscar. And it always seems to wind up in Jean's hands, for that matter... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:19:51 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Newbie! At 11:18 -0400 4/3/00, Galen G. Silversmith wrote: >> >So it *is* possible to be half angel half mortal? >> Nope. Angels, demons, and humans are all distinct types, you can't be >> part one and part another. Angels can change into demons and vice-versa, >> but neither can become human, nor can humans become celestials. (Lilith >> is a special case; Lilith is *always* a special case, and she likes it >> that way....) ... >You can get a superior to attach a force of a specified band/choir, for a >mortal (human?) to get access to that choir/band's attunements. > >Its like a 90/10 split, but its there. But the result is still a human, just one with a funky attunement (and humans *can* get other attunements, so it's not all that different). The human will still not disturb the Symphony, and will die like a human. >(and you can strip the ethereal forces from a being and bind them into >another being. The poor man's version of a mortal becoming celestial, Also true, but the result is a celestial with access to the human's memories, not a true hybrid. The celestial will still have all the usual attributes of a celestial, though he might have a little better insight into the human condition than usual. > and >in fact one of the long term goals of a character in my campaign (He thinks >Lilith will help him. I am going to have so much fun with this. => ).) That's *evil*.... >> The result of a celestial/human mating is (I recall) always human, though >> the human may be exceptional in some way. > >There are the Nephilim (sp?) (and the Gorgon's for Ethereal/Human >matings). They are "human" in the IN classification scheme, but not your >typical joe. And those are some of the "exceptional" cases. But the Symphony still treats the result as a human, not as a celestial. There is no entity in In Nomine that truly partakes of both natures -- IN is very binary that way. Ethereals seem to be mostly equivalent to celestials in IN, though with some minor differences. (If they were truly distinct, that would pretty much kill the theory of "God as hyped-up etheral" that the pagan gods support.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 15:36:21 -0400 From: Mason Kramer Subject: Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 > From: Walter Milliken > At 3:31 -0400 4/3/00, Tafka J. wrote: >> According to the SJGames website, we can expect G:IN _around_ June > Quite possible... it's definitely in the editorial process and out of my > hands. (For those people -- if any -- who've been waiting for it, I have > to say "mea culpa"... unfortunately, Real Life intruded on my ability > to finish GURPS IN in a timely fashion.) > Right. You had a baby with your co-author. We're *really* going to hold that against you. ;) >> the cover of G:IN rocks. . . > I have to agree -- that's a *really* nice cover. And thirding the sentiment. The burning feather is a *wonderfully* simple cover and probably gets people to pick up the book, but doesn't give *much* of an idea what the game's about. This cover is busier, but pretty and more easily conveys the message that angels and demons are involved. You gots your tradeoffs. Maybe SJG should make a run of GIN with *both* covers, so people can take their pick, or even collect them all! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 16:46:35 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 15:36 -0400 4/3/00, Mason Kramer wrote: >> From: Walter Milliken >> (For those people -- if any -- who've been waiting for it, I have >> to say "mea culpa"... unfortunately, Real Life intruded on my ability >> to finish GURPS IN in a timely fashion.) >> >Right. You had a baby with your co-author. We're *really* going to hold that >against you. ;) That was only one of the excuses.... > Maybe SJG should make a run of GIN with *both* covers, so people can >take their pick, or even collect them all! I'm kind of hoping they'll use the burning feather on the back cover, but I don't really know what will happen there. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:48:41 -0600 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: IN> Newbie! A question just occured to me. It says that to get a Choir/Band attunement a mortal need a Force from the member of the Choir/Band. Now its in the context of getting the Force/attunement from some Superior or another. Is it required that the Force come from a celestial that is bound to the Word or is just having a Cherub Force enough to get Cherub attunements from any Archangel. On a related note a defector from heaven's service with Choir attunements could also start getting Band attunements (along with Force grafts). So even if they can't become celestials they can become bloated on Forces, loaded with attunements and have the oh so nice feature of being easily smiten and not really being a threat to the DP (a lowly human could never usurp a demon princes power...). Just a few thoughts. Timothy, Angel of Rambling Ofanite of Creation My international broadcastingagency: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 16:23:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) > Return-Path: milliken@io.com> At 16:37 -0500 3/31/00, Becky wrote: > Nope. Angels, demons, and humans are all distinct types, you can't be > part one and part another. Angels can change into demons and vice-versa, > but neither can become human, nor can humans become celestials. (Lilith > is a special case; Lilith is *always* a special case, and she likes it > that way....)Well... Hmmm... gives me an idea. If you presume that one of the reasons that Lilith was able to take a Word was because she was created as a 15 Force human (or so it is believed*), then theoretically _another_ created 15 Force human could also handle a Word. Now, it's believed that Adam and Eve were 15 Forces. Where they are currently has been never stated (after all, it's an open question whether eating the Apple was their mutual Fate, seeing as the experiment was corrupted by celestial interference. Still, their Destiny was _probably_ to resist temptation, so they might still be playing the reincarnation game), but I doubt that they're in Hell. The Infernals would have made much propaganda out of that. So, they could very well be in Heaven or the Upper Heavens. Suppose that God gave them a shiny new Word one day? Lots of lovely chaos would erupt. It'd be a gas. As far as I know, A&E's Destiny/Fate isn't CDaU, so there's not even a canonical issue (true, the nature of the Higher Heaven _is_ CDaU, but H&H (page 65)states that Archangels very occasionally go there and come back, so presumedly there's some cross-town traffic going on). Amusing (and confusing to both sides). And as for what this Word would be, and why God would bother: well, why should I have all the fun of working this stuff out**? Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of Idle-A** Speculation *I shudder at the Geas you'd have to take to get _that_ kind of personal information... **Translation: da**ed if I know. :) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 16:55:42 -0700 From: "Sean McCarthy" Subject: Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) With all the recent talk of mortals and attunements, a scary plotline just came to me. Suppose a sorcerer or group of them appeared to have found a way to steal Forces from Celestials. They start with very small demons, perhaps. Some arcane ritual with scary relic-looking-things appears to allow them to wrench a force off of the Celestial and add it to one of them. The key elements of panic: Messing with Forces normally requires a superior level of power. Sorcerers getting more Celestial forces become extremely dangerous. Those demonlings weren't theirs to eat! If they were taking instead Ethereal forces, they might learn Things Man Was Not Meant To Know. Now...many options exist. It could all just be a hoax. Nothing more. Or.. They really can do it. The rituals are near-impossible, but it really works. They can cause massive celestial damage. Directing the drained soul hits into themselves is providing a short-term infusion of power that could be interpreted the wrong way... They can indeed rip off Forces, but it is very lossy. Only after mauling a great many minor demons can even one Force be acquired. As above, but even destroying an entire demonling only rarely yields anything of substantive value. Still, What If occasionally a large enough piece of Celestial sticks to a sorcerer's Forces that something innate to that Celestial (Attunement, Rite..) is conveyed. This might be sensed by the Superior issuing such, which could be why the whole adventure started... If it works, why? God moving in mysterious ways again. (Unlikely.) K-rad hax0r Sorcerers find reality loophole, exploit it obviously and frequently until it gets patched. (Silly.) There IS a Superior behind the scenes of it all. Maybe trying to figure out a one-up to Saminga's undead trick. The essence of Genubeth's or perhaps just his Word is in some relic they've gotten a hold on. Maybe they have the relic (Whathisname) the old Prince of Secrets is trapped in and are being used by him...or are exploiting him. Anyway, just a range of story ideas that rained down upon me. Any seem more or less workable to anyone's eyes? And yes, I'm aware that this whole section, except the deception part, falls away outside the rules. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 19:07:39 -0600 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) I use sorcery rules that allow a sorcerer to attain a near Superior level of power (if celestial PCs can aspire towards it why not sorcerer ones?). The basic system is that the Symphony is built to respond to humans. Sorcerers learn how to make their requests and get them answered. Lots of individuals stay around the lower levels of sorcerery, doing things by rote, and if they make new rituals their more so adaptions of older ones. However sorcerers that really get it can manage to manipulate Forces and stuff. What writing on it I have is scrawled on loose pieces of paper, but it provides a way for sorcerers to do the force stealing without requiring anything more than being sorcerers. Timothy, Angel of Rambling Ofanite of Creation My international broadcastingagency: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 21:22:13 -0400 From: "Aaron Medwin" Subject: Re: IN> Newbie! From: Galen G. Silversmith > > Return-Path: milliken@io.com > > At 16:37 -0500 3/31/00, Becky wrote: > > >Thanks guys! You helped a lot! > > > > > >So it *is* possible to be half angel half mortal? > > Nope. Angels, demons, and humans are all distinct types, you can't be > > part one and part another. Angels can change into demons and vice-versa, > > but neither can become human, nor can humans become celestials. (Lilith > > is a special case; Lilith is *always* a special case, and she likes it > > that way....) > > Well... > > You can get a superior to attach a force of a specified band/choir, for a > mortal (human?) to get access to that choir/band's attunements. > > Its like a 90/10 split, but its there. I've heard this idea a few times now, what book is it in, or is it non-canon? And suddenly, I'm reminded of just why it is "Canon" or "Non-canon" is important to label. Amusing, too, since people were just going on about it. > (and you can strip the ethereal forces from a being and bind them into > another being. The poor man's version of a mortal becoming celestial, and > in fact one of the long term goals of a character in my campaign (He thinks > Lilith will help him. I am going to have so much fun with this. => ).) > > > The result of a celestial/human mating is (I recall) always human, though > > the human may be exceptional in some way. > > There are the Nephilim (sp?) (and the Gorgon's for Ethereal/Human > matings). They are "human" in the IN classification scheme, but not your > typical joe. The APG goes into a fair amount of detail on this, I know. - -Aaron Medwin Malakite of Creation ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 21:57:49 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Newbie! Aaron Medwin wrote: > > Its like a 90/10 split, but its there. > > I've heard this idea a few times now, what book is it in, or is it > non-canon? The CPG. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 23:13:01 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... In a message dated 4/3/00 1:56:54 PM Central Daylight Time, emccoy@nh.ultranet.com writes: << >Baal -- a Hummer, of course. >> Naw, I see him in one of those sleek cars that generals get carried around in, with some corporal driving. Michael, on the other hand, would have a Hummer. Rev. Brian ------------------------------ Date: 4 Apr 2000 04:17:46 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 02:31:46 -0500 "Tafka J." wrote: > According to the SJGames website, we can expect G:IN _around_ June >(Short of an Intervention, of course). great! before i saw the cover, i was middling to ambivelent, with waffling feelings of "that sounds neat." now i'm eagerly awaiting it. > And though I mourn the passing of the Flaming Feather, the cover of G:IN >rocks. . . [snip url] heartily agreed. man, that's incredible! i hope the interal artwork is as good or better. G:IN might be the first GURPS book i buy! yes, i'm one of those folks for whom artwork and a keen sense of the aesthetic matters. no wonder i'd wind up serving Andre or Eli! or Freedom... i'll quit rambling now. btw, Tafka, i just wanted to say an enthusiastic THANK-YOU for creating those Choir and Band character sheets, as well as the rest. my favorites are the C/B specific ones, though =) it's probably too much to ask that we get each and every one of those included in an In Nomine 2nd Ed., but if we could get full-pagers at the end of the book, that would be fabulous (hint, hint, Beth!). -=|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: 4 Apr 2000 04:21:47 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: RE: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 addenda to my last post: G:IN is 192 pages for $23.95. i'm assuming it's softcover. my copy of IN cost $29.95 (i got the black hardcover). however, i'm wondering if there's a page count difference between the two systems, and if so, which one is longer? if/when we get IN2, will it be longer than the current edition (hope, hope)? -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 23:34:57 -0700 From: "Matthew W." Subject: Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Tafka J. Said > And though I mourn the passing of the Flaming Feather, the cover of G:IN > rocks. . . I really have to withhold Judgement on this one. Though it seems beautifully reminiscent of the stunning cover art of the Revelations Cycle (one of the greatest saviors of those books, I might add), I really do need to see it "in the flesh" first. = Mathus = = Demon of Rants = = ArchRival of Timothy = ------------------------------ Date: 4 Apr 2000 04:54:42 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re: IN> DPs and their cars... On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:15:57 -0500 Prodigal wrote: [snip] >> >From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" >> >Valefor -- it changes every week, but is always a very expensive >> >high-perfomance sportscar. >And it always seems to wind up in Jean's hands, for that matter... you mean Vapula's car, don't you? Valefor and Janus probably trade cars all the time, but Lightning is Technology's nemesis. for the record, i don't think Vapula uses a car. too primative. instead, he's working on Disturbance-free, site-to-site teleport pads. that cause cancer after half a dozen uses. and spontaneous congenital birth defects in whatever children you have after using said teleport pad. if Vapula ever does use a car, it's probably a Checkered Cab--common for Asmodeus, too, for the anonymity factor--for reasons of ubiquity and the gas-guzzling, price-gouging nature of those beasts. -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ------------------------------ Date: 4 Apr 2000 05:02:55 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> Real weird speculation On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 16:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Maurice Lane wrote: [snip lots of stuff before and after this] >Now, it's believed that Adam and Eve were 15 Forces. quite possibly. IMO, the first thing that happened when they ate the apple was that their extra ten Forces were summarily *scattered,* and the awareness of that translated into us measly, normal human types as "oh no, we're naked!" but then, i'm goofy that way. -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 01:04:58 -0400 From: "Gregory Gietzen" Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... From: > << >Baal -- a Hummer, of course. >> > > Naw, I see him in one of those sleek cars that generals get carried around > in, with some corporal driving. Michael, on the other hand, would have a > Hummer. A Mercedes-Benz, as made by Daimler-Benz (the official parade vehicle of Hitler). Now a part of Chrysler as it happens. Fnord. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:08:21 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Human Perception Rolls At 16:45 -0400 4/2/00, Perry Lloyd wrote: >Hmmm... I may have just answered my own question, at least for NPCs. How >have others dealt with this? I generally go with giving humans some extra stats that don't bring them up to a full additional Force. Most of my human NPCs are 2/2/1 or 1/2/2, with the 1 Force being typically a 3-3 or 2-4 split. For 2 Forces, I assume the stats average about 5. Skimping on Ethereal Forces doesn't seem to suit quite as well, unless the human is Int 4/Pre 3 or Int 3/Pre 4, which feels too much like min-maxing to me. If you want to justify the above, assume that humans "grow" their Forces naturally through attribute increases, while celestials have Forces grafted on in units, deriving their attributes from Forces. Thus, the average human attribute is a little higher than Forces would indicate, while the average celestial attribute tracks Forces more closely. When all is said and done, though, IN is too "grainy" when representing humans. I prefer a system that has a bit more flexibility. If I were going to do a mixed humans/celestials game now, I'd probably use the GURPS version of IN. (But then, I'm a GURPS fanatic, so take that as you will....) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 13:37:20 GMT From: "Erich S. Arendall" Subject: IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. Here's a question that been on my mind for the past few days. I checked the books, but couldn't seem to find an answer. Is it possible for a Superior to strip the Attunments and Distinctions from a servitor? For example a demon who once served Saminga and became a Captain now serves Kronos. Could Kronos remove all the attunements and Distinctions the demon gained under the DP of Death? - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Demon of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, Impudite of Kronos - ------------------------- Touched by an Impudite http://www.impudite.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 09:54:10 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Maurice Lane wrote: > Suppose that God gave them [Adam & Eve] a shiny new Word one day? > And as for what this Word would be, and why God would > bother: well, why should I have all the fun of > working this stuff out**? I believe that, in the original French version of In Nomine, Eve is Archangel of Humanity. That would still be a good Word for either or both of them. There was, by the way, a period in the Middle Ages when it was a really hot topic of debate, whether Adam and Eve were in Heaven or Hell. I think the Heavenly option prevailed. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 09:06:38 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. "Erich S. Arendall" wrote: > Is it possible for a Superior to strip the Attunments and Distinctions from> a servitor? For example a demon who once served Saminga and became a> Captain now serves Kronos. Could Kronos remove all the attunements and> Distinctions the demon gained under the DP of Death? Yes, but why would he? Usually it's the gifting Superior who removes Distinctions from a transferring Servitor. If Kronos has a (presumably) loyal Servitor who happens to have some of Saminga's attunements, it would be to Kronos' advantage to let him keep them and use them in his service. You can bet that Asmodeus LOVES acquiring former Servitors of other Princes with their old attunements still intact... - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:25:08 +1000 From: Brent McCartney Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... > >Haagenti -- a Good Humor ice-cream truck. > > > >Kobal -- a Ford Edsel. Wouldn't Kobal drive a Dark Humour ice-cream truck? Brent ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:52:55 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... > > >Andrealphus -- a Lamboughini Countach. > Or a van, with a mattress where the rear seats would ordinarily go. Thought about it, decided that it didn't have enough style for Andre to go for it. Also considered giving him the Aston Martin, given the history of James Bond... > > >Kobal -- a Ford Edsel. > > No, he'd drive a Tucker. The Edsel didn't completely kill the Ford Motor > Corporation, after all. Well, Henry Ford II intended the Edsel as a tribute to his father, and instead it became a joke, which wounded HF II very deeply. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:01:12 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: Sorcery and Forces (was Re: IN> Newbie!) From: "Sean McCarthy" > As above, but even destroying an entire demonling only rarely yields > anything of substantive value. Still, What If occasionally a large enough > piece of Celestial sticks to a sorcerer's Forces that something innate to > that Celestial (Attunement, Rite..) is conveyed. > > If it works, why? > > K-rad hax0r Sorcerers find reality loophole, exploit it obviously and > frequently until it gets patched. (Silly.) > There IS a Superior behind the scenes of it all. Maybe trying to figure out > a one-up to Saminga's undead trick. Let's add those three bits up, and spin a theory... *Janus* found the reality loophole and revealed it to the sorcerers. Now a bunch of Hellsworn are destroying masses of demons, and are themselves occassionally going through radical personal changes, upsetting both sides of the War, etc... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:19:53 -0400 From: "Steven E. Ehrbar" Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: DPs and their cars... From: "Gregory Gietzen" > Now a part of Chrysler as it happens. Actually the other way around; DaimlerChrysler AG is legally a German company incorporated and headquartered in Germany, the CEO is Stremp, the former CEO of Daimler-Benz, most of the union-held seats on the Board are held by German unions, and the majority of the stock of the combined corporation went to holders of Daimler-Benz stock. ObIN: Novalis -- VW minibus, electric car, or lifetime bus pass? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:46:17 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Dominic as Balseraph >>From: "Kiara S. Legner" >>In my campaign, Dominic has emerged as not a Balseraph, but as having gotten >>so paranoid about the possibility of more angels falling that he's spending >>more time worrying about the Host than about the Other Side. That's roughly how I view him, though I don't make him *quite* as fanatical as some people seem to. >> I haven't >>quite decided if he's carrying a load of dissonance or not yet - the jury's >>still out on that one. (At the moment, I'm leaning more towards fanaticism >>than towards dissonance, I go with the fanaticism, myself. The way I view it, he takes every Fall as a personal failure, and tries harder. Being a Seraph, and therefore sometimes a bit removed from realities about people, I have him not understand that his fanaticism is sometimes psychologically the wrong move. Yes, people *tell* him this sometimes, and he can hear Truth in that, but there's also Truth in the notion that if he relaxes a bit, things will also get worse. Poor Dominic's stuck in a situation where he simply *can't* achieve his goal (no angels Falling), and it's frustrating him. >>I don't think that Dominic's cloak can protect him from the light of >>Heaven - so I can't subscribe to the Balseraph notion. Certainly not the canon one, but it's pretty much a necessary property if you want to make him a Bal. - ---Walter ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1572 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.