From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Apr 5 18:28:13 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 SAA17357 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:28:12 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id SAA12240 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:25:57 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:25:57 -0500 Message-Id: <200004052325.SAA12240@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 #1574 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 Wednesday, April 5 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1574 In this digest: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. RE: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like th at) Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Re: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 17:12:45 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 4:17 AM +0000 4/4/00, -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > 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!). _ ^ o_O - Yer nutz. Now, I might broker (when we get settled in the new house) a suggestion that a future GM pack might include a copy of such things, since they _are_ cool. But they ain't going in any core book. Way too many pages taken up. - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _and_ running back and forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 17:25:12 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Superiors Stripping Attunements and Distinctions. At 1:37 PM +0000 4/4/00, Erich S. Arendall wrote: >Is it possible for a Superior to strip the Attunments and Distinctions from >a servitor? Yes, if he holds that Servitor's Heart. (Not necessarily literally -- but if the Servitor is serving _him_, rather than being In Service To. I'm not sure that "ist" allows that without the Servitor's permission. Of course, for a Prince, it's a case of: "Give permission or die.") >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? I'd say so, sure. I think this is at least implicit in the GMG stuff. (As for the _benefits_ of doing that, see what Edelstein said. I mean, I'm sure that there might be _some_ contorted logic which would do that (probably relating to PC idiocy), but generally it's to the Prince's advantage to be able to tap those relatively rare abilities in his own minions' ranks.) - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _and_ running back and forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 17:25:09 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: RE: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like th at) At 3:31 PM -0400 4/4/00, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 12:49 -0400 4/4/00, Steven Feldon wrote: >>Quoth Walter Milliken: >>>I think this is errata'ed somewhere, or should be. I think it >>>may have been adjusted to be "they *used* to do that, back before >>>the Fall". >> >>I thought so, too, but fifteen minutes of reading the errata site didn't >>turn it up. It could be right in front of my face, but. . . . > >It may be on Elizabeth's list of things that need to be fixed, but haven't. >One of the problems of living with the LE is that I'm sometimes unsure about >whether some bit of canon has been published or not. Well, I coulda sworn I saw that in the H&H errata, but in case it fell off somewhere, I resubmitted it just now. The Archangels have not been in the Higher Heavens since the Fall. - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _and_ running back and forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 17:26:59 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 2:53 PM -0700 4/4/00, David Barr wrote: >--- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >> --Beth, catching up as she can, [...] >> >good grief! have you been possessed by a Shedite (is that the right >singular term?) in service to the Demon Prince of Stress? Well, if she hadn't been two months preemie, we would have been in the new house for about 2 weeks before she'd have been due. If I find the Windy who arranged this, yer gonna see a celestial in orbit... - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _and_ running back and forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 18:23:49 -0400 From: "Galen G. Silversmith" Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) > Return-Path: emccoy@nh.ultranet.com > >(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), > > Were they even mortal? Lilith isn't... Just because Lilith isn't mortal now (or is she? What if Free Will was utimately disproven?) doesn't mean she was created that way. Admittely, I'm not certain if there is canon on this). Maybe being word bound made her immortal. Maybe she is mortal, just very long lived (biblical references have pre-flood humans living for hundreds of years. being created by God, and at 15Forces makes one significantly break from the norm). Maybe she's died already (and she's hell's only existing 'saint'). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 18:58:42 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) "Galen G. Silversmith" wrote: > Just because Lilith isn't mortal now (or is she? What if Free Will > was utimately disproven?) doesn't mean she was created that way. > Admittely, I'm not certain if there is canon on this). Lilith was created as a mortal. Adam and Lilith (and later Eve) were deliberately created to be "test humans." While vastly superior (i.e. 15-Force) specimens, they were still basically mortal humans. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 01:02:19 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 5:12 PM -0500 04/04/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [. . . Horsefly's admiration snipped. . .] >Yer nutz. Now, I might broker (when we get settled in the new house) >a suggestion that a future GM pack might include a copy of such things, >since they _are_ cool. *bows* Thanks. (And now that I have Superiors 1 & 2*, you can expect 8 new sheets too. . .) (As to why I dissapear, and suddenly resurfaced after a couple of months, we don't wanna stress the LE out more with off topic chatter, now do we? I didn't think so. . .) (* GMG, must get GMG. . . And GURPS: IOU. So I can become a more evil GM too!) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 03:28:07 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 1:02 AM -0500 4/5/00, Tafka J. wrote: >At 5:12 PM -0500 04/04/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > > (And now that I have Superiors 1 & 2*, you can expect 8 new sheets too. >. .) Oh very cool. Very very cool. Is the plan to do one for every Superior? > (As to why I dissapear, and suddenly resurfaced after a couple of >months, we don't wanna stress the LE out more with off topic chatter, now >do we? I didn't think so. . .) Well, we're glad to have you back. And me back, for that matter. You know, the Demon Prince of Minutia's been having a field day with some of us... > (* GMG, must get GMG. . . And GURPS: IOU. So I can become a more evil >GM too!) Especially the latter. Oh yes. Very yes. - -- 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: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 10:19:15 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) I got most of the other acronyms, but I can't figure out what "CDaU" means. Help anybody?? Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 12:05:41 GMT From: "Erich S. Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) >I got most of the other acronyms, but I can't figure out what "CDaU" means. >Help >anybody?? > >Laurent. > Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. When I first saw the term I thought it was some IOU thing, I kept looking through my GURPS: IOU book to no avail! :) - -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: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:31:39 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 3:28 AM -0400 04/05/00, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Oh very cool. Very very cool. Is the plan to do one for every Superior? Yes. (But _not_ for every Choir & Band of Superior. Are you _that_ insane! Remind me to finish my humorous Splatbook covers and post the URL (some of you already know what I'm talking about. . .)) >Well, we're glad to have you back. And me back, for that matter. You >know, the Demon Prince of Minutia's been having a field day with some >of us... I blame Lilith (I quit my job 2 days before Lilith Faire). };;;> >Especially the latter. Oh yes. Very yes. *grin* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 10:05:02 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Laurent wrote: > I got most of the other acronyms, but I can't figure out what > "CDaU" means. Help anybody?? As already explained, it's list jargon for "Canon Doubt and Uncertainty." Of course, you might want to know what THAT means. It means that SJ Games has decided to not decide about this issue. This Space Deliberately Left Blank. It leaves maneuvering room for GMs who still wish to be canonical. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 15:06:38 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 > But _not_ for every Choir & Band of Superior. Are you _that_ insane! I designed my own character sheets using the main book choir/band and Superior illustrations as backgrounds. Not that I don't like the official character sheets, but my players love to put all kinds of details on their sheets (that don't fit on the official template): weapons, equipment, armor, contacts, etc. I use the official character sheets for my NPCs though, since they don't usually need all that stuff. Anyway, here's how I do it: the front page uses the choir/band background with the *main details* foreground, and the backpage uses the Superior background with the foreground. That way, all that is required is one version of the backpage for each Superior (using the same foreground everytime), and one version of the frontpage for each choir/band (here again with the same (foreground). That gives each of my players a personalized character sheet. Now I don't know how good it would be for you, since the official character sheets use only one page... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 10:11:56 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) David Edelstein wrote: > Lilith was created as a mortal. Adam and Lilith (and later Eve) > were deliberately created to be "test humans." While vastly > superior (i.e. 15-Force) specimens, they were still basically > mortal humans. Um. They were "mortal" in the sense of "clearly native to the Corporeal Plane and not celestial." But the Biblical account has it that they weren't strictly mortal (subject to aging and death as part of their natures) until they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Now, it IS interesting that, if you factor in the (non-biblical) tale of Lilith, she stomped out of the Garden before the whole Tree business and thus can be assumed to be immortal still. Adam's age at death is recorded in the Bible -- 900-something. Of course, this doesn't preclude reincarnation, or a lively career as a dreamshade, or returning as a Saint, resurrection, etc. And maybe IN canon has overruled this bit of the Bible, but I don't recall it. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 15:24:21 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) > it's list jargon for "Canon Doubt and Uncertainty." Ok, thanks everybody for the explanations. Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 10:27:11 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) Laurent wrote: > > I got most of the other acronyms, but I can't figure out what "CDaU" means. Help > anybody?? It's a phrase with a long and glorious past. Well, not very long, and only semi-glorious. The very original phrase came from Douglas Adams's Hitchhikers' books. In there it was given as Rigidly Defined Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty. Well this tickled me and I suggested that's what we call the parts of In Nomine that would be 'hands off' for official SJGames IN products to allow GMs the comfort of making their own Canon without stepping on the official canon. The phrase was quickly shorted to Canon(ical) Doubt and Uncertainty by someone (Beth, I think) and there it has remained ever since. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 10:45:27 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) At 10:11 AM -0500 4/5/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >David Edelstein wrote: > > > Lilith was created as a mortal. Adam and Lilith (and later Eve) > > were deliberately created to be "test humans." While vastly > > superior (i.e. 15-Force) specimens, they were still basically > > mortal humans. > >Um. They were "mortal" in the sense of "clearly native to the >Corporeal Plane and not celestial." But the Biblical account has >it that they weren't strictly mortal (subject to aging and death >as part of their natures) until they ate from the Tree of the >Knowledge of Good and Evil. You know... it occurs to me there may be more to Adam and Eve than meets the eye. Oh, on the surface the experiment went exactly as has been listed in Canon, but not long after it was invalidated, Lucifer had his talk with the Metatron and fomented the Revolt, then Fell. The Archangels and the Demon Princes were set against one another, with the souls of humanity in the balance. Ethereals appeared. Humanity flourished. Words became battlefields. And the Upper Heavens became someplace wholly apart. What if the Eden experiment is still going on? What if God actually created the Symphony in Microcosm, and the *real* experiment is "what if the Celestials could run amuck among Humanity, culled along Selfless and Selfish lines." If this *is* the case, then Uriel's recall and Laurence's appointment take on new significance. It becomes the equivilent of the Celestial tainting of the Eden experiment. Just a thought.... - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:55:35 EDT From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) In a message dated 4/5/00 9:28:50 AM Central Daylight Time, jkarakash@dg-rtp.dg.com writes: << It's a phrase with a long and glorious past. Well, not very long, and only semi-glorious. The very original phrase came from Douglas Adams's Hitchhikers' books. In there it was given as Rigidly Defined Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty. Well this tickled me and I suggested that's what we call the parts of In Nomine that would be 'hands off' for official SJGames IN products to allow GMs the comfort of making their own Canon without stepping on the official canon. The phrase was quickly shorted to Canon(ical) Doubt and Uncertainty by someone (Beth, I think) and there it has remained ever since. >> I actually recognized the phrase, and knew where you had gotten it, and was quite amused. I was even a little mad at the fact that it became shorted, but I accept that it's more convenient and easy to write. Reverend Brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 13:56:08 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something like that) At 6:23 PM -0400 4/4/00, Galen G. Silversmith wrote: >> Return-Path: emccoy@nh.ultranet.com >> Were [Adam & Eve] even mortal? Lilith isn't... > >Just because Lilith isn't mortal now (or is she? Well, p. 149 of the main book says, "Long before the Fall, Lilith walked the Earth, beautiful and immortal." So either Lucifer recruited her a _long_ time ago, or she was created that way. > Maybe she's died already (and she's hell's only existing 'saint'). I have wondered if she's ever experienced vessel-death when she only had one manifestation (see the GMG) extant... And what would happen if she did. I've a few pet theories, but nothing I'd want to see canon. - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _&_ running back & forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. *&* as of 2pm 4/5/00, still no phone connection for the new house! Yay Limbo. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 15:19:48 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) At 12:05 PM +0000 4/5/00, Erich S. Arendall wrote: >>I got most of the other acronyms, but I can't figure out what "CDaU" means. >Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. When I first saw the term I thought it was >some IOU thing, I kept looking through my GURPS: IOU book to no avail! :) CDaU is also listed, as "CDaU," in the index of the GMG. Fnord. - --Beth, catching up as she can, while taking care of her little preemie, the Impudite Princess of Cute, aka Iolanthe, _&_ running back & forth between the condo and the new house. Augh. Moving. *&* as of 2pm 4/5/00, still no phone connection for the new house! Yay Limbo. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 16:05:25 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Real weird speculation (Was: Newbie, or something likethat) At 8:05 -0400 4/5/00, Erich S. Arendall wrote: >Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. When I first saw the term I thought it was >some IOU thing, I kept looking through my GURPS: IOU book to no avail! :) You should have been looking through your HHGttG instead. The original phrase I coined was "Rigidly-Defined Areas of Canon Doubt and Uncertainty", but people immediately shortened it for some strange reason.... - ---Walter [Oh, yeah: HHGttG = Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, for those who don't know that important acronym....] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:30:45 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: Re:IN> G:IN Release date & Funky Mushrooms 3 At 3:06 PM +0100 04/05/00, Laurent wrote: >I designed my own character sheets using the main book choir/band and Superior >illustrations as backgrounds. Oooh, nice idea! >Not that I don't like the official character sheets, *coughs!* Uhmn, my Character Sheets are _far_ from official. They're just something I put together 'cause I'm an art fiend. The only reason they are on the SJGames Website, is 'cause they use more 'official' art than I would normally be alotted under the In Nomine Online Policy. With Elizabeth's help (and gracious blessing), Steve Jackson was convinced to host the sheets to protect the copyright. (Also, the design's were based on a set of sheets that were originally available on the net, but have long since vanished. Mind, I was able to cram more into my sheets than any previous such beasts.) >but my players love to put all kinds of details on their sheets (that >don't fit on the official template): weapons, equipment, armor, contacts, etc. I'd rather (and often do) put Choir/Band resonance, dissonance, attunements and Song mechanics on the back of mine. It's a pain in the neck to be flipping through three or four books to get the details on selected 'game' goodies. Unfortunately, since most of that stuff is Copyrighted material, I cannot legally provide that info outside of a gaming group. >I use the official character sheets for my NPCs though, since they don't >usually need all that stuff. My NPC's look more like characters taken from the books. Though I admit that system doesn't always have an advantage when you're trying to keep track of Essence, dissonance and are forced to look up the details of the various songs, attunents and resonance of said NPC's. [. . . Character Sheet Descriptive Snipped. . .] Ooooh, pretty. >Now I don't know how good it would be for you, since the official character >sheets use only one page... By design, because I like to put the -Cheat Info- on the backs of said sheets. . . Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1574 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.