From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon May 8 09:23:59 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 JAA08320 for ; Mon, 8 May 2000 09:23:59 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id JAA06673 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 8 May 2000 09:21:21 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 09:21:21 -0500 Message-Id: <200005081421.JAA06673@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 #1615 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 Monday, May 8 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1615 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans IN> Re: Demon of Some Assembly Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> What happened? Re: IN> New supplements Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> chico latino Re: IN> Re: Demon of Some Assembly Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) IN> Bigger & Better IPG/APG (WAS: What happened?) IN> APG?IPG/Art/Stuff (Re: What happened?) Re: IN> Bigger & Better IPG/APG (WAS: What happened?) Re: IN> APG?IPG/Art/Stuff (Re: What happened?) Re: IN> What happened? IN> Bad Day Re: IN> What happened? Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Re: Best Choir for Angel of Comedy RE: IN> Re: Best Choir for Angel of Comedy RE: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) RE: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 09:22:52 -0500 (EST) From: Neel Krishnaswami Subject: Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans Nicola McBlane wrote: > > On Sat, 6 May 2000, Galen G. Silversmith wrote: > >> Miracles are Miracles. They *should* be rarefied and usually unnecessary. > > Hmm, not quite sure I'd agree with that on the whole. It certainly woudl > how I envisage the style of IN. Depends on the scale of the miracle too. > You get small miracles. Yes. While seeing an obvious miracle might be rare for J. Random Human, IMO it shouldn't be for celestials -- they are an intrusion of the heavenly (or infernal) into the physical world, and their entire *nature* is magical. >>> Basically, they wanted celestials to be able to outdo humans, but >>> they wanted them to do it with miracles rather than carrying on >>> like Batman. Beefing up humans' Forces, but giving celestials a >>> lot of extra points on magical abilities seems like a reasonable >>> way of achieving that goal. > > I see your point about Batman yes. And I agree with your players on > that point. That said I'm a little wary about giving them lots of > funky stuff (kewl powerz). How much do they use their Resonances? Depends on the character type -- most use it fairly frequently, except for Cherubim, who tend to save it for when it's really important. I suspect that Songs aren't going to be too unbalancing since the Essence cost makes them self-limiting. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 10:41:33 EDT From: Daedalus3D@aol.com Subject: IN> Re: Demon of Some Assembly Okay, I already feel like a jerk for nitpicking like this, but who in the world would bother to learn native Taiwanese? Everybody in Taiwan speaks Chinese anyway. Hey, look at it this way. If that's the only thing I can find to complain about, I think Zactartol is pretty solid. Man, I need some sleep. Later, Daedalus ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 15:52:40 +0100 (BST) From: Warsinger Subject: Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans On Sun, 7 May 2000, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > Yes. While seeing an obvious miracle might be rare for J. Random > Human, IMO it shouldn't be for celestials -- they are an intrusion of > the heavenly (or infernal) into the physical world, and their entire > *nature* is magical. Perhaps miraculous rather than magical as a word would get the point across better here... > > I see your point about Batman yes. And I agree with your players on > > that point. That said I'm a little wary about giving them lots of > > funky stuff (kewl powerz). How much do they use their Resonances? > > Depends on the character type -- most use it fairly frequently, except > for Cherubim, who tend to save it for when it's really important. I > suspect that Songs aren't going to be too unbalancing since the > Essence cost makes them self-limiting. I was referring here to the PCs in the game being run, as opposed to chars in general. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. And I've seen what can be done with Songs when you try, can start breaking things fairly quickly. Particularly if they go Rite hunting. Warsinger Cute and fluffy....(with claws) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 12:06:55 +0100 From: "Christopher Lee" Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) but when they proceed to get >>worked up about this, they tend to lose sight of the fact that their >>opinion is not objective fact. > >*That* I agree with. But a sense of perspective is the rarest thing >in the universe. Just for the record I never had any intention of stating 'fact'. I have no doubt that many people enjoy the stories in the books. I just thought I would air my own personal objections, and voice my own perspective. David is, of course, correct that my views bear no more weight than anyone else's, I never thought they did! I was just making a point for discussion, please don't bite me! Christopher Lee ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 2000 09:23:20 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> What happened? On Sun, 07 May 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >thought the APG was very art light but I've not read it in a while I > >admit. That said the art in it was not the IN line's best to put it > >nicely. > > How about "a lot of it sucked"? (There were some nice pieces, I think, > but some really awful, useless ones.) What I want to know is why the Smif-drawn Malakite and Mercurian pictures were in the APG and not in the core rules where they belonged. This is something I would dearly love to see rectified in a second edition or reorg. - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 10:13:31 -0700 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> New supplements Our spies report that on 01:47 AM 5/7/00 +0100, Christopher Lee said: >Purity Crusade in Latin? I think Crusade is French (?). It has distinct >Christian connotations so a more neutral idea might be the Purity Campaign >or War. I'm not certain removing those connotations is desirable. As opposed to Dominic, who merely feels Catholicism is the best religion, Uriel and many of his followers (Laurence being the most relevant in the modern day) actually hold Christian beliefs. S1 even states that followers of Laurence who don't hold those beliefs in the modern day usually keep quiet about it to avoid negative social consequences. Crusade, like Jihad, is a very emotionally charged word.(Words? Hmm... Angel/Demon of...) A lot of beings believe Uriel's Crusade was horrifying...much like some of the real Crusades of elder days. So it is my feeling that to get the proper emotional framing, the struggle between Heaven and Hell is a War...Uriel's thing was a Crusade. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 10:19:23 -0700 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Our spies report that on 09:40 PM 5/6/00 -0500, David Edelstein said: >Christopher Lee wrote: > > Am I the only person who thinks the stories are the worst thing about > the game? > >You may not be the only one, but once again -- some people love 'em, >some people hate 'em. What's the maximally beneficial thing to do? At >least half the people on this list who complain about "X" seem to assume >that whatever THEY like or dislike is representative of everyone, which >makes their opinions essentially worthless. I do not see where a person's misconception about the support their opinion enjoys does anything to lower the value of their opinion on matters that do not involve judging the popularity of their own opinion. I suspect that attitude arises from knowing the majority opinion of gamers in their area to be in agreement with them. And, usually, the more vocal components of this list. Still, the ability of a person to judge the opinions of others doesn't make their opinion of In Nomine itself necessarily any more or less valuable, in my opinion. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 18:25:32 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> chico latino From: Christopher Lee > > > There is a slight problem with this. Only ONE of these is correct. Sol Invictus means the Unconquered or Undefeated Sun. It does not mean the Conqueror. It is probably best translated as Invincible as this is the sense. Sun the Conqueror would be Sol Victor. > well, i realised that it couldn't actually mean both, but i was prepared to flip a coin and hope none of my players knew latin :) anyway, invincible is good. > If you are still after stuff on Sol Invictus I can lay hands to it simply enough. I am a Roman historian type (not professionally but I have an MA) and I have a large pile of books! > any info would be much appreciated, if you can be bothered digging through your books > > In terms of this development Mithraism is a hero or saviour cult, such as Christianity. Mithra was the saviour fiigure, whose salvation powers were symbolised by his overcoming a bull. Sol Invictus was a solar cult with the sun as the supreme object of worship. No doubt there were links and similarities, it is as much a matter of emphasis as anything else. > sounds a bit like a stopgap between the older "classical" religions and mystery cults, and the "modern" monotheistic religions? > 'Stipendium Castimoniae' (Campaign of Purity) > 'Bellum Castimoniae' (War of Purity) > 'Bellum Sinceri' (the Pure War) > 'Bellum Emendatum' (the War in Order to Purify) > 'Bellum Emendatu' (the War for Purification) > 'Bellum Purgatum' (the War in Order to Purify) > 'Bellum Purgatu' > My personal favourite: > 'Bellum de Purgata' - the War of Pureness don't know if i'd use any of them in In Nomine, but any of the above could come in useful for Nobilis :) > Nope sorry, > I am not the same person, nor am I the actor. I have spent my whole life being asked what I am doing out in the daylight, do I only bite virgins, etc, etc, ad infinitum. > I am a historian, however, just not famous enough to write my own series! heh. i realised it was something of a long shot, though i also wondered how many british historians called christopher lee there could be kicking around. they don't clone you guys or something? liam ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 14:36:24 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Demon of Some Assembly At 10:41 AM -0400 5/7/00, Daedalus3D@aol.com wrote: >Okay, I already feel like a jerk for nitpicking like this, but who in the >world would bother to learn native Taiwanese? Everybody in Taiwan speaks >Chinese anyway. Well, the languages aren't so much for being spoken as for writing instructions in. Taiwanese is there both as a nod to the "made in Taiwan" product lines, and because it's going to be essentially worthless to anyone trying to put together some shelves. Including most people in Taiwan. Especially if the Taiwanese version of the instructions are the only one that actually has the crucial middle step explained in them. "Gosh, Mister Seraph, all the instructions are right in the booklet." "Hm. He *is* telling the truth..." >Hey, look at it this way. If that's the only thing I can find to complain >about, I think Zactartol is pretty solid. Thanks. - -- 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: Sun, 7 May 2000 19:56:56 +0100 From: "Christopher Lee" Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) > I do not see where a person's misconception about the support >their opinion enjoys does anything to lower the value of their opinion on >matters that do not involve judging the popularity of their own opinion. > Hang on a minute! I have simply posted an idea and I'm getting crucified. First my opinion is worthless and now I have a misconception about the amount of support I enjoy. I happen to believe that everyone's opinion is valid. Whilst the writers have more direct bearing on what is printed (for obvious reasons) that does not make their own opinions more valid than anyone else's. I also suffer from no misconception of this sort - I don't claim to have ANY support, indeed I would not be surprised if noone agreed with me. I would appreciate it if my views would be treated seriously and not denigrated as if I was some sort of demagogue or something. I don't see other equally contentious ideas getting this sort of pasting. Frankly the tone of these posts is pretty insulting and I did not expect such thoughtless and insensitive behaviour from other people. I did not sign up to this list to be insulted. I have never been treated in this fashion on any other list and I am surprised that the list moderator allows it to continue. I will unsubscribe if I do not recieve some sort of apology. Christopher Lee ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 12:03:13 -0700 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Our spies report that on 07:56 PM 5/7/00 +0100, Christopher Lee said: > > I do not see where a person's misconception about the support > >their opinion enjoys does anything to lower the value of their opinion on > >matters that do not involve judging the popularity of their own opinion. > > > >Hang on a minute! Hey, I was sticking up for you. (Honest! I know what I said was kind of intricate, but...) Let me rephrase what I said. I do not see where someone thinking their opinion is more popular than it is acts to make their opinion itself worth any less. In other words, I was disputing what David Edelstein had said about opinions being near to valueless when the person expression the opinion thought they represented the majority. I don't think the two have any relationship to each other. I can of course apologize for getting involved on your side...if you want that, please let me know! Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 15:03:29 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) At 7:56 PM +0100 5/7/00, Christopher Lee wrote: > > I do not see where a person's misconception about the support > >their opinion enjoys does anything to lower the value of their opinion on > >matters that do not involve judging the popularity of their own opinion. > > > >Hang on a minute! I can't speak for David, but in my discussions on this topic, I've been speaking in general, and not in specific, Christopher. You've been perfectly polite throughout and if the impression you've gotten from the debate that's resulted is otherwise, I for one think that perception is in error. In other words, I think your (innocent) post led to some folks sounding off on long-term disgruntled positions, and that's caught you in the crossfire. And for that I *am* sorry. - -- 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: Sun, 7 May 2000 13:04:37 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required Yes! A truly inspiring write-up. I had drawn a faded blank on my In Nomine game and we haven't played in a couple of weeks, and this is just the shot of adrenalin it needed. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 12:13:05 -0700 From: Sean McCarthy Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Our spies report that on 03:03 PM 5/7/00 -0400, Whistling in the Dark said: >In other words, I think your (innocent) post led to some folks sounding >off on long-term disgruntled positions, and that's caught you in the >crossfire. And for that I *am* sorry. OH! Yes, now I understand. My apologies, Mr. Lee. Just because I was concentrating on disputing the logic in question doesn't meant I agreed with any implied criticisms of you personally. I definitely agree with what was stated previously: People expressing an opinion shouldn't always have to clarify if with "This is just my opinion." Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 14:35:17 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) Christopher Lee wrote: > I have simply posted an idea and I'm getting crucified. First my opinion is worthless and now I have a > misconception about the amount of support I enjoy. I don't think that's what the latter poster was saying, nor are you getting crucified. As for what *I* said, I meant a solitary opinion along the lines of "I like this!" or "I don't like this!" is useless in determining whether or not a particular feature is desirable, other than by tabulating the total number of "votes" for either opinion. Yet many people seem to think that their liking or not liking something alone is an argument for keeping or changing it. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 15:17:16 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: IN> Bigger & Better IPG/APG (WAS: What happened?) At 8:19 AM -0400 05/07/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >I remember space being tight in the APG & IPG -- while a "less art" option >would help, what about a 144 page version instead oh 128 pages? It might be helpful. You might also see if you can squeeze in the info from the main book (kinda sorta like how the Superior line of books are doing that for each Superior's info). Resonance mechanics, and the dreaded tables. >Would it be worthwhile, for the extra expense? If the product is an improvement over the current book (which I'll be forced to re-read anyway), then it might be. (The IPG itself is a GOOD book, and well the APG just needs to be _fixed_ in certain sections.) >What could I add...? Hmm, hmm... See if there is room for Bright Lilim for the APG. I'd also tighten up the second section of both books (the info about meeting the boss, falling, redeeming, etc). Make it such that they compliment one another, but don't necessarely duplicate one another. >Is this likely to happen? Not anytime soon, if ever. But it was something >I had pure fangirl (_not_ LE) curiosity about. *grin* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 16:52:50 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> APG?IPG/Art/Stuff (Re: What happened?) At 9:23 AM -0700 5/7/00, Casca wrote: >On Sun, 07 May 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> >thought the APG was very art light but I've not read it in a while I >> >admit. That said the art in it was not the IN line's best to put it >> >nicely. >> >> How about "a lot of it sucked"? (There were some nice pieces, I think, >> but some really awful, useless ones.) > >What I want to know is why the Smif-drawn Malakite and Mercurian pictures were in the APG and not in the core rules where they belonged. This is something I would dearly love to see rectified in a second edition or reorg. > _Which_ Smif-drawn Malakite and Mercurian pictures? Yes, Smif drew the pictures for the APG for those Choirs. He also drew the pictures in the main book fr those Choirs. In fact, he drew everything in the main book except for the photos in the very back, and you never know -- he might have taken them, too. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap and no computer desk -- the keyboard shares the lap, and the trackball sits on a pile of GURPS books. I want the computer desk back! Moving is a hassle. (PS: may be typing with 1 hand, or even toe! Please forgive capitalization.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 15:55:10 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Bigger & Better IPG/APG (WAS: What happened?) At 3:17 PM -0500 05/07/00, Tafka J. wrote: [. . .snip. . .] Before I forget, just wanna add the disclaimer (for those of you not following along at home), that this is just the (inspired? insane?) ramblings of Fan-Girl McCoy, and not LE McCoy. TPTB don't know about it, and more than likely won't until the APG/IPG are closer to being out of production. I forgot to add that to my last post, and am now correcting that before people start clambouring over one another about a 'rumored' new edition of the IPG/APG. Not that I wouldn't mind for a new edition myself. . . Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 16:49:45 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> APG?IPG/Art/Stuff (Re: What happened?) At 4:52 PM -0400 5/7/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > >What I want to know is why the Smif-drawn Malakite and Mercurian >pictures were in the APG and not in the core rules where they >belonged. This is something I would dearly love to see rectified in >a second edition or reorg. > > >_Which_ Smif-drawn Malakite and Mercurian pictures? Yes, Smif drew >the pictures for the APG for those Choirs. He also drew the pictures >in the main book fr those Choirs. In fact, he drew everything in the >main book except for the photos in the very back, and you never >know -- he might have taken them, too. > I *think* what they mean are the Smif pictures of a Malakite and Mercurian where their vessels are shown in the foreground, with a lumenescent image of their Celestial Form is in the background and sky. Each of the Demons and Angels had such a picture in the core rules, save the Malakim, who simply had a picture of a Malakite's vessel, and the Mercurians, who had a Mercurian Celestial form only. The "double image" of Vessel and Celestial form for those two appeared in the APG instead. That being said, they're not nearly as interesting, IMO, as the Core Book pictures that were used. In particular, neither picture focused on the wings of the Angel, which was the major dividing point between them. - -- 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: Sun, 7 May 2000 17:07:13 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> What happened? At 2:14 PM +0100 5/7/00, Warsinger wrote: >On Sun, 7 May 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> >Writing as a private person rather than LE recognised, no really. >> (Keeping this here for hopefully obvious reasons...) > >I'll follow your example but I won't be replying this every time :) I will. Trust me. It'll be necessary. >> * vignettes > >I thought there was enough of those already, and I quite liked the >existing ones. But then I'm not overly fond of them - I hate short >stories in general - just as I'm getting to like the char the story is >over. >> * more detail on Malakim and "evil honor" humans > >Hmm, Malakim are one of my pet rants, so I'll leave this one alone, >probably better brought up in a seperate topic if at all. (Rough summary >of my objection - Angels of Honour not Angels of Kicking A*se) That's exactly what I meant by more detail. O:> >> * Menunim > >Hmm - sorry if you like them, but I see them as practically unplayable. Have you read the revised version of them that was being playtested for S3? O:> >> >Then again I'm in the very small >> >minority of liking the expanded resonance tables, >> >> Page-flipping masochist... O:> > >Hmm? Well they aren't in the main book so I have to look them up extra >anyway. Exactly my point. > Plus I copy out the resonance tables from the main book for PCs >anyway - saves time - so not that hard to add these ones. A related point. O:> >> >thought the APG was very art light but I've not read it in a while I >> >admit. That said the art in it was not the IN line's best to put it >> >nicely. >> >> How about "a lot of it sucked"? (There were some nice pieces, I think, >> but some really awful, useless ones.) > >I'm aware you are involved in the game in general :) And I felt bad> >saying some of it belonged in the bin. I have about .0001% of say in the art stuff. I usually find out about art when I get the fresh-from-the-printer LE copy, not before. And I really wasn't LE when the APG was done. It was at the printer about the time I got the title, so I had about _zilch_ say in it. Or else those _damned_ check digit tables wouldn't be there! (Have I mentioned that I loathe them with a passion that surpasses the passion that Malakim loathe Balseraphs with? Anyone who likes them can of course keep them and tastes differ, but they _will_ die in the future. Sorry 'bout that.) >heh - at least you get an excuse for bad typing :) If you've ever had a baby kicking the keyboard you're trying to use... - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap and no computer desk -- the keyboard shares the lap, and the trackball sits on a pile of GURPS books. I want the computer desk back! Moving is a hassle. (PS: may be typing with 1 hand, or even toe! Please forgive capitalization.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 22:12:16 +0100 From: "Christopher Lee" Subject: IN> Bad Day Ok, Ok, I am sorry for getting all annoyed, but I honestly thought for one minute that I was getting a very unfair pasting. Sean, of course you need not apologise for getting involved on my side and I appreciate it. I just didn't want there to actually be sides. I'm sure you know what I mean. David, you have a fair point about people's individual opinions only being worth as much as the support they can generate. I assume this does not preclude airing them regardless of their 'value'? Anyway, I won't say any more about this now and I don't expcet to hear anything else! I have had a Bad Day and i will go to bed and wake up tommorrow with a better frame of mind (I hope!). Chris Lee ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 22:58:05 -0500 From: "Michael Neal" Subject: Re: IN> What happened? > At 2:14 PM +0100 5/7/00, Warsinger wrote: > >On Sun, 7 May 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> * Menunim > > > >Hmm - sorry if you like them, but I see them as practically unplayable. > > Have you read the revised version of them that was being playtested > for S3? O:> Menunim are not unplayable. They never were *unplayable.* Pre-Superiors 3, they were hopelessly screwed by the rules, but that didn't make them unplayable. Hell, Warsinger, I tried to play one in one of your PBEM games; it's not my fault that I never had a chance to prove you wrong. And, post Sup 3 (when it comes out), Menunim aren't even that screwed any more. (THANKS, JO!) One of these days, I'm going to have a chance to play Gernam, and you'll all be sorry you dissed Menunim. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 00:01:16 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required Very solid. Applause. One minor suggestion: he should have a human Servant or two, working for, say, IKEA... Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 00:17:30 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Zactartol: Demon of Some Assembly Required At 12:01 AM -0400 5/8/00, Douglas Muir wrote: >Very solid. Applause. Thanks! >One minor suggestion: he should have a human Servant or two, working for, >say, IKEA... I totally agree, though that would be more context specific than I was going for in the writeup. (On the other hand, I'm rethinking whether he needs *three* cats...) - -- 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: Mon, 8 May 2000 10:19:25 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Fixing humans From: Neel Krishnaswami > Another possibility is to make celestials basically human-level, but > give them all Words and use the Estate mechanics from _Nobilis_ for > all their miraculous abilities. That would be more work, but I think > it could work even better. that would be very cool, i think. though how would you decide what level their word/estate was at? liam ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 10:24:18 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) From: Whistling in the Dark > In specific, Nicole's explicitly dissonant actions and borderline > dissonant attitude should be resolved in what way is she explicitly dissonant? > I know there are quite a few who really love the vignettes and > practically think it's sacrilege to consider changing them. In terms > of the "flavortext" argument, I'm actively pro-flavor. But given how > little would need to be done to put psycho-kitten Nicole into > perspective, it seems crazy not to do it. i dunno. this isn't some reorganising of rules we're talking about. they're pieces of fiction written by derek pearcy. i'm not a writer, so i can't say for definite, but i'd imagine it would be very annoying having someone tamper with your work, years after it's been printed, because it doesn't maych their interpretation of the game you've written liam ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 10:25:46 +0100 From: "Liam Astley" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Best Choir for Angel of Comedy From: > Personally, I don't see Comedy as an angelic Word. Why? Most forms of > comedy are at the expense of someone, not something angelic IMO. not all the words, especially the more powerful ones, sound "nice". i would think most forms of war are at the expense of someone, but that's an angelic word liam ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 03:36:53 -0700 From: "Robert Veneman-Hughes" Subject: RE: IN> Re: Best Choir for Angel of Comedy > i would > think most forms of war are at the expense of someone, but > that's an angelic > word And that's a really good line. - -Robert ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 03:38:20 -0700 From: "Robert Veneman-Hughes" Subject: RE: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) > in what way is she explicitly dissonant? She uses a song to knock her former servant across an alley; it is dissonant for Mercurians to do violence of any kind towards a human. - -Robert ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 05:38:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "O. S. Kerr" Subject: RE: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) > > in what way is she explicitly dissonant? > > She uses a song to knock her former servant across an alley; > it is dissonant > for Mercurians to do violence of any kind towards a human. > In my mind, this could explain why Gabriel is Not Pleased to see her... Hmmm. I wonder, since she's kicking mortal ass all over the place, how and when she got the gift from Novalis. Owen __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 2000 06:40:55 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) On Mon, 08 May 2000, "Liam Astley" wrote: > i dunno. this isn't some reorganising of rules we're talking about. they're > pieces of fiction written by derek pearcy. i'm not a writer, so i can't say > for definite, but i'd imagine it would be very annoying having someone > tamper with your work, years after it's been printed, because it doesn't > maych their interpretation of the game you've written But this isn't Derek's game. It's Steve Jackson's game, and Derek merely the writer. Speaking as a writer, yes, I can practically guarantee that there would be some level of hurt feelings. But Derek is a paid employee of SJG, and if Evil Stevie wants to change the game, then he can. Case closed. - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 09:49:22 -0400 From: "Caias Brian Ward" Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) That's the nature of Work For Hire. It's not yours anymore. Granted, editors learn that if you jerk the writers around too much, they go and stop working for you. But it's part of the package. Caias - ----- Original Message ----- From: Casca To: Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 9:40 AM Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) > On Mon, 08 May 2000, "Liam Astley" wrote: > > > i dunno. this isn't some reorganising of rules we're talking about. they're > > pieces of fiction written by derek pearcy. i'm not a writer, so i can't say > > for definite, but i'd imagine it would be very annoying having someone > > tamper with your work, years after it's been printed, because it doesn't > > maych their interpretation of the game you've written > > But this isn't Derek's game. It's Steve Jackson's game, and Derek merely the writer. > > Speaking as a writer, yes, I can practically guarantee that there would be some level of hurt feelings. But Derek is a paid employee of SJG, and if Evil Stevie wants to change the game, then he can. Case closed. > > -- Casca > > "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of > His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: > with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their > feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the > doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." > -- Isaiah 6:2,4 > _______________________________________________________ > Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! > Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 10:15:06 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Pushing Books (Re: Players and Supplements) At 9:49 AM -0400 5/8/00, Caias Brian Ward wrote: >That's the nature of Work For Hire. It's not yours anymore. Granted, >editors learn that if you jerk the writers around too much, they go and stop >working for you. But it's part of the package. Not necessarily so. Bits of fiction may well be picked up under First North American Serial Rights (or even All Rights without being Work for Hire), allowing the publishing company to use it -- maybe into perpetuity -- but not necessarily make changes to it. Fiction rights can be wonky. Or, it may be that it was a part of the Work-for-Hire project in toto, in which case they can do what they like to the fiction. But if so, it's a touch unusual. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1615 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.