From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Jun 2 22:12:38 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 WAA25448 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 22:12:38 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id WAA05934 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 22:11:07 -0500 Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 22:11:07 -0500 Message-Id: <200006030311.WAA05934@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 #1653 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 Friday, June 2 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1653 In this digest: Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Re: IN> Love amongst the Superiors IN> MA Gaming Groups? Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Demons of Abominations Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Next Playtest? IN> Do Angel's Party? IN> Sixth Sense Question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 21:33:10 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Maurice Lane wrote: > > Got a real quick question, here: I'm working on an > relic that can temporarily transform an inanimate > object into something else (when incorporated into the > item to be changed), but none of the Songs seem to fit > (the Celestial Song of Form comes closest, but it > works on the caster only). Use the Celestial Song of Form in conjunction with the Celestial Song of Transferral. Obviously, the artifact would have to contain both, with appropriate Features to reflect the specialized uses of each. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 19:55:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Love amongst the Superiors Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:50:29 -0400From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Love amongst the Superiors >Actually, in a possible future of our own game (which >Elizabeth and I have played with -- it's all part of >that "Third Avatar" plot we've discussed here a few >times), Jean has a relationship going with Lilith. >This grew out of a very ambiguous note in the main >book about the Archangels' viewof her. >- ---Walter :flipping through main book and FotM: heh. Hah. Hah-hah. HAHHAH! BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH! :imagining Jean and Marc, cast in the roles of "techno-nerd"/"slick operator but generally all right guy" best friends from a bad 80's movie (clothing to match, naturally), falling all over each other trying to impress a cigarette-smoking bad-girl Lilith (while Gabrielle and Novalis, respectively* glower at them): BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH! I am just _way_ too easily amused. :) Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of MST3K *Because it's just funnier that way. In the best movies of this type, the nerd _always_ gets the passionate type while the smooth talker ends up with Ms. Wholesome... ;) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 00:33:15 -0400 From: "Aaron Medwin" Subject: IN> MA Gaming Groups? Whistling in the Dark got my hopes up, but he's too far north, sadly. If there are any groups(or individuals looking for a game) in either the Boston area(anywhere on the T), or as far west as Fitchburg, could you please email me *privately*(kupo@io.com)? Maybe we can work something out. - -Aaron Medwin Would-be IN Gamer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:44:23 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Mark wrote: <<< The rule refers only to Ethereal combat - combat in the Ethereal Plane. It does *not* refer to any use of a song which reduces someones Mind Hits to zero. The Ethereal Song of Entropy will leave you a mindless, drooling drone, but it won't leave you an *unconcious*, mindless, drooling drone. >>> Is it so?? I don't have my books with me, so I can't look it up. So you're saying one can't get a discord if he/she reaches zero mind hits because of an Ethereal Entropy? Guy wrote: <<< I doubt that the character hit with the song would be trolling thru the Marches tho. Ethereal combat *usually* happens in the Ethereal plane, not the Corporeal one, and when someone is "killed" Ethereally, they are ejected from the Ethereal plane. If the song were used in the Corporeal plane, I think that this would translate into simple a coma. >>> D'OH!!! Stupid brain!! I'll never listen to you again... Actually, I'm getting a bit confused, here. I assumed that when somebody is in a coma (or knocked unconscious), he/she wanders the Marches. But I didn't think it would be limitted to Corporeal injuries... So what's happening when you're in a "simple coma"? Just a black out? <<< Now that I think about it, I don't think characters who are knocked unconcious from Body hits enter the Ethereal plane as well. They're just "out of play". >>> Ok, I think I'm good for re-reading the whole book... > Of course, they could always just get the Ethereal Song of Shields. Yeah, but if they have very few Ethereal Forces, they'll have to spend additional essence to start the Song. Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 20:12:38 +1000 From: condition@subdimension.com Subject: Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! At 09:11 31/05/00 -0400, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: >Christopher Lee writes: > > So I have designed a sort of Marxist Ethereal realm, peopled by class > > warriors and politicised proletarian heroes. The general appearance > > is a cross between Fritz Lang's Metropolis and the look of 30's > > political posters, with square-jawed workers struggling to achieve a > > socialist utopia. > >Also -- why is there only one Marxist realm? > >After all, the vigorous, active state busy seizing capital for the >people described in _The Communist Manifesto_ is nothing at all like >the loose confederation of voluntary associations envisioned by >Kropotkin. Marxists are even worse than libertarians when it comes to >sectarian disagreements. I'm sure that you'd have syndicalists, left >anarchists, state Communists, Trotskyists (state Communists who hate >the other state Communists, plus a bunch of anarchosocialists who >believe that *they* are the true Trotskyism), and liberation theology >Catholics. :) However would this be enough to support a significant realm. Even amongst individuals of the same tendancy there different ideas on what that society would like. For many socialists although they are striving for a better world without classes but they can't describe exactly what that world would look like. After all with only this society(as contrast) and times of revolutionary upsurge as examples there isn't a lot to go on (Oh I'm not talking about Stalinists and Maoists here). So would the realm(s) even be static at that? I was just thinking here - I 'm not too good when it comes to the cannon but here it is; If pagans can go to heaven and hell then I assume that so can atheists. And if Atheists can go to heaven - then I would assume that Socialists/Communists might. And if they do I imagine it wouldn't be as much of a suprise for them then as for it is for some fundamentalist Christian/Moslem/Jew. And following this logic could there be Atheists that become Saints - the Corporeal Player's Guide says that a mortal who supports an Archangel even unknowingly can come back as a Saint. And if you read the description of Saints of Janus and David they seem kind of appropriate for Socialists. But what would this mean for religion if Atheists could become Saints? And maybe could you even end up seeing a St.Marx. - -- Condition ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 06:45:10 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Best Song for the Job At 7:00 PM -0700 6/1/00, Maurice Lane wrote: >Got a real quick question, here: I'm working on an >relic that can temporarily transform an inanimate >object into something else (when incorporated into the >item to be changed), [...] is there not a liber reliquarum Feature for this? thought there was... hmmm... if not, hey, hsndwave. or rule it is a Song that only works when enchanted into a relic. i think i'd look at thr Feature costs for summonable, in the LR. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 08:30:47 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Best Song for the Job Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > At 7:00 PM -0700 6/1/00, Maurice Lane wrote: > >Got a real quick question, here: I'm working on an > >relic that can temporarily transform an inanimate > >object into something else (when incorporated into the > >item to be changed), [...] > > is there not a liber reliquarum Feature for this? thought there > was... hmmm... if not, hey, hsndwave. or rule it is a Song that only > works when enchanted into a relic. i think i'd look at thr Feature > costs for summonable, in the LR. The costs for such a feature were bandied about in playtest (in fact, was in one of the original drafts), but it was taken out because the permutations got *way* complex. It would've increased the feature list by 30% or more! =) You can see the remnants (no pun intended) in an example in the chapter where various characters want to have artifacts with multiple forms. One of the base criteria is how useful each object is and how big a size change it will be. Frex, if you have a car that turns into a ring, that's much like having a Summonable car. Etc... OTOH, what Maurice seems to be talking about here is changing something else which sounds like a variant (more expensive) version of the Song of Form (probably Celestial since you are sure what the 'base' object will look like). I'd up it to 5pts/level but give a small break on the Essence requirements as long as the changes weren't harmful. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 08:14:54 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! condition@subdimension.com wrote: > If pagans can go to heaven and hell then I assume that so can > atheists. Correct. > And if Atheists can > go to heaven - then I would assume that Socialists/Communists might. Yup. (And it is possible to be socialist or communist _and_ religious.) >>>But what would > this mean for religion if Atheists could become Saints? It would mean some religions need to rethink their doctrines. And so would atheists. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 06:17:20 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Long live the Revolution! > >It would mean some religions need to rethink their doctrines. And so >would atheists. > I'd think that hardline atheists might have a hard time maintaining that view once they'd actually reached Heaven and met some angels. Common sense would dictate a shift to agnosticism (well, if all this is true, then maybe there is a God .. but no-one here can prove it), or at least something to explain the whole life-after-death, good-souls-reach-heaven phenomenon :) I suppose you could be paranoid and spend your whole afterlife trying to prove that Heaven was really a lie and a trap, or a figment of the collective imagination. That would make quite an interesting character -- you might end up being made into a saint just to get you out of the way and back to Earth :) jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 07:04:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Guy Royse Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Laurent wrote: <<< Actually, I'm getting a bit confused, here. I assumed that when somebody is in a coma (or knocked unconscious), he/she wanders the Marches. But I didn't think it would be limitted to Corporeal injuries... So what's happening when you're in a "simple coma"? Just a black out? >>> I'm basing my assumption off of this. When someone reaches zero Mind hits they a) are ejected from the Ethereal plane (if they were there), b) knocked unconscious, and c) acquire an Ethereal Discord. I can't see how someone who was just ejected from the Etheral plane would be able to then fall unconscious and then re-enter it. It just doesn't make sense. And I don't see how it would be any different if the Mind hits occured on the Corporeal plane. The analogy I would draw to the "real world" is this. Often drugs and trauma that induce periods of unconsciousness in humans result in a dreamless state that doesn't equate to sleep and gives no rest. Anyone who's had surgery and been shot up with sodium penathol probably probably knows what I am talking about. I see the Ethereal plane as the place where we go when we sleep and not the place where we go when we pass out, are drugged, or are knocked out. These non-sleep states more accurately reflect a shutdown of the body and mind to deal with trauma then a period of actual rest. Basically I make a distinction between sleep and unconsciousness. Laurent wrote: <<< Yeah, but if they have very few Ethereal Forces, they'll have to spend additional essence to start the Song. >> Either that or burn a bunch of character points to get it at a high level. Or both. Guy __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:16:05 EDT From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Demons of Abominations In a message dated 6/1/00 2:16:12 PM, tcp@zoomnet.net writes: >Who exactly would be a good demon Prince to serve to have someone who creates >Deep Spawn like horrors (for you Call of Cthulhu fans), Formorians (for you White >Wolf Werewolf players), and the general average Buffy type "demon?" Beleth. Those sort of critters just scream Nightmares, don't they? Of course, the creator of ghouls and Dybbukim could be Haagenti or Saminga (or Death in service to Gluttony, perhaps). ('Mmmmm.... Arm.') Adam (and possibly Dr. Walsh), from the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series, would be in service to Vapula, IMHO. Mark (Just a few thoughts) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 13:50:55 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) At 10:04 -0400 6/2/00, Guy Royse wrote: >Laurent wrote: ><<< Actually, I'm getting a bit confused, here. I assumed that when >somebody is in a coma (or knocked unconscious), he/she wanders the >Marches. But I didn't think it would be limitted to Corporeal >injuries... So what's happening when you're in a "simple coma"? Just a >black out? >>> > >I'm basing my assumption off of this. When someone reaches zero Mind >hits they a) are ejected from the Ethereal plane (if they were there), >b) knocked unconscious, and c) acquire an Ethereal Discord. > >I can't see how someone who was just ejected from the Etheral plane >would be able to then fall unconscious and then re-enter it. It just >doesn't make sense. And I don't see how it would be any different if >the Mind hits occured on the Corporeal plane. That's basically the way I interpret it. I don't think the rules are particularly clear on this, though, and I don't recall any canon clarifications anywhere, offhand. (David, did anything get done with this in the EPG?) >I see the Ethereal plane as the place where we go when we sleep and not >the place where we go when we pass out, are drugged, or are knocked >out. These non-sleep states more accurately reflect a shutdown of the >body and mind to deal with trauma then a period of actual rest. >Basically I make a distinction between sleep and unconsciousness. Exactly. If you don't work it this way, then there are a number of weird problems. For example, a Shedite host can be made unconscious, in which case the Corrupter is ejected after 30 minutes. This doesn't make as much sense if the host mind (and presumably its demon) is just sent to the Marches for the duration of unconsciousness. Also, I'd assume you can knock out any celestial with various drugs, a blow to the head, etc.; it's a lot less interesting if they're just tossed into the Marches, where they can immediately report (via Dreams/Nightmares Servitors) what's just happened to them. There was some discussion about whether humans spent the whole night's sleep in their dreamscape, or just the REM periods when they're actually dreaming. I don't recall if there's been a canon decision on this, but if humans are only in their dreamscapes when in REM, then what happens to them in deep sleep is probably similar to what happens when they're unconscious. And, presumably, celestials deliberately "sleeping" are akin to humans in dream-state, while unconscious celestials would be more like humans in deep sleep. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 13:15:52 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) Walter Milliken wrote: > That's basically the way I interpret it. I don't think the rules are > particularly clear on this, though, and I don't recall any canon > clarifications anywhere, offhand. (David, did anything get done with this > in the EPG?) Yes. When you're knocked out, your mind is *not* wandering the Marches. Your consciousness only wanders the Marches when you're *dreaming*. A human has to be in REM sleep, and a celestial has to deliberately send his consciousness there (which he obviously couldn't have done if he just got knocked out). > There was some discussion about whether humans spent the whole night's > sleep in their dreamscape, or just the REM periods when they're actually > dreaming. I don't recall if there's been a canon decision on this There's a box on it in the EPG. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:31:55 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) At 14:15 -0400 6/2/00, David Edelstein wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: >> That's basically the way I interpret it. I don't think the rules are >> particularly clear on this, though, and I don't recall any canon >> clarifications anywhere, offhand. (David, did anything get done with this >> in the EPG?) > >Yes. When you're knocked out, your mind is *not* wandering the Marches. >Your consciousness only wanders the Marches when you're *dreaming*. A >human has to be in REM sleep, and a celestial has to deliberately send >his consciousness there (which he obviously couldn't have done if he >just got knocked out). Great -- that seems straightforward, and makes sense. The one question left is what happens if a Kyrio host is knocked out. The FAQ answers this for stunning (it ties up the Forces in the host, but doesn't affect the rest of the Kyrio). I'd suggest the knockout case follow the same rule. Shedim are already clearly subject to having the host knocked out, and I'd assume the Song of Possession works similarly. I.e., the celestial is knocked out in both cases. There is still the issue of what happens if a celestial is stuck past the end of its possession duration, which isn't a likely problem with stunning, but is a lot more probable if someone drugged the host, or it got knocked into a coma somehow. I think I'd rule that the rider is ejected then (Shedim are already ejected after 30 minutes), and left in whatever state ejection from a host would leave them: Kyrio - frees the Forces, is in celestial form there if last host Shedite - in celestial form Song of Possession - back in original vessel (or host) Hmmm... here's another weirdie: what happens if a Shedite uses Song of Possession while in a human host? Does the composite human+Shedite take over the new body, or does just the Shedite move? I'd argue that the former is a more entertaining result, and the latter opens the question of what happens to the host mind for the duration of the possession. (It seems likely it would regain full control of its body.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 17:43:06 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Best Song for the Job At 8:30 AM -0400 6/2/00, John Karakash wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >> At 7:00 PM -0700 6/1/00, Maurice Lane wrote: >> >relic that can temporarily transform >> >> is there not a liber reliquarum Feature for this? [...] > > The costs for such a feature were bandied about >in playtest [...] Ah-ha! That was my second choice. Thanks. (Gee, the things one remembers at 6am after being woken up by the best alarmclock known to man... Babyspitup.) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:19:42 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) David Edelstein wrote: > > Walter Milliken wrote: > > That's basically the way I interpret it. I don't think the rules are > > particularly clear on this, though, and I don't recall any canon > > clarifications anywhere, offhand. (David, did anything get done with this > > in the EPG?) > > Yes. When you're knocked out, your mind is *not* wandering the Marches. > Your consciousness only wanders the Marches when you're *dreaming*. A > human has to be in REM sleep, and a celestial has to deliberately send > his consciousness there (which he obviously couldn't have done if he > just got knocked out). This is how I've ruled it and I think Beth as well. Sleeping is a very specific state in IN and just getting bashed on the noggin isn't enough. Of course, a GM might allow someone who has been knocked out (though NOT a celestial or ethereal) to enter normal sleep after awhile. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 19:25:32 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Etheral Song of Entropy (Was: Rules Question) At 6:19 PM -0400 6/2/00, John Karakash wrote: >David Edelstein wrote: >> Yes. When you're knocked out, your mind is *not* wandering the Marches. >> Your consciousness only wanders the Marches when you're *dreaming*.[...] > > This is how I've ruled it and I think Beth as well. Yup. I think I even saw that section of the EPG before Io-chan's unexpected arrival. >[...] Of course, a GM might >allow someone who has been knocked out (though NOT a celestial >or ethereal) to enter normal sleep after awhile. Or not. Up to the GM. O:> - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 17:48:10 -0700 (PDT) From: MANDY JON BOWYER Subject: IN> Next Playtest? Anyone know when the playtest for S5 or the EPG will start?. Mandy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:04:40 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? MANDY JON BOWYER wrote: > > Anyone know when the playtest for S5 or the EPG will start?. EPG, probably soon. (I hope.) S5 will have to be written first, and I wouldn't count on that happening soon at all. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 20:24:29 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? At 5:48 PM -0700 06/02/00, MANDY JON BOWYER wrote: >Anyone know when the playtest for S5 or the EPG will start?. I know nothing, 'cept that I hope they don't coincide with one another like during S1/GMG/GURPS:IN. Augh. (I also hope Sales of S3 show that IN has a future. *crosses fingers*) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 21:37:18 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Do Angel's Party? In an interesting question that's been bugging me for some time-I was curious in Heaven if there were any *really* special occasions. I mean we've all heard every day's a marti-gra up there but that may just be for the souls there. Is there occasions where angels gather together like the 1,000,000th anniversary of Jesus's birth (Michael and Khalid likely call in sick these days) or Dominic's birthday (where the question is what do you get the Archangel who hates everything) or etc? Curiousity abounds and I was wondering if anyone had any ideas. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 20:01:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Sixth Sense Question Just finished watching The Sixth Sense (I tend to lag in my movie viewing: I STILL haven't seen Phrophecy III yet). Interesting stuff there: any suggestions on how to integrate that into a IN campaign? Also, who would, in canon, be responsible on Heaven's side to make sure that ghosts stop hanging around and get to where they're supposed to go, anyway? Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of Spooky Films __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1653 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.