From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Jul 20 08:51:05 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 IAA12504 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 08:51:04 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id IAA19515 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 08:48:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 08:48:53 -0500 Message-Id: <200007201348.IAA19515@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 #1721 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 Thursday, July 20 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1721 In this digest: Re: IN> Outcast Kyriotates of Michael. Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN Re:IN> A fun little thought, with hairy implications. Re: IN> More on Kyriotates of Michael. Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN Re: IN> Furfur and Hardcore Re: IN> Words in Celestial vs Demonic Re: IN>News from the Gamming store front Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairyimplications] Re: IN> Dead Superiors IN> Thirty seconds over the Vale... Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairyimplications] Re:IN> Holy vs. Unholy Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairy implications] Re: Grigori stuff (was Re: Deeply Heretical (was Re: IN> More Grigori speculations)) Re:IN> Thirty seconds over the Vale... IN> Characterizing archangels Re: IN> Dead Superiors Re: IN> A fun little thought, with hairy implications. Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN Re: IN> Dead Superiors Re: IN> Dead Superiors Re: IN> Characterizing archangels ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:53:01 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Outcast Kyriotates of Michael. At 6:24 PM -0600 7/18/00, ben wrote: >:-) > >How can an Outcast Kyriotate of Michael get his vessel back if he's lost it? He goes and begs to be let back into Heaven he'll be good really he will and no he's not lying because he knows better than to lie to a Seraph Archangel he won't do it again honest. O:> >If he does lose it, does he basically become a normal Kyriotate? Basically. I _might_ allow a Kyriotate of Michael to go to Limbo, if it were inhabiting a host or its vessel _solely_ when it were killed, since it can have a vessel. Then it could regenerate Essence and use it for making a vessel normally. (Or maybe give it the choice of Limbo (and Trauma!) when its vessel s toasted, or pulling out painfully and "roughing it" in any other hosts it might have...) That's not canon, BTW. That's just me. >It talks about generating vessels and creating vessels in the attunement >description. Does this mean the Kyriotate could -- theoretically -- start >without a vessel, and buy one when he gets 3 character points? With Michael's permission and connivance. (Or some other Superior's.) (The "creating vessels" stuff is a holdover from a previous draft which allowed non-Superiors to create vessels out of Essence/Experience points. When Essence was equal to experience points. I think.) _That's_ canon, far as I know. Karakash will catch me if I've forgotten something... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:55:30 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN At 6:05 PM -0700 7/18/00, Bruce Dykes wrote: [...] >Overall, I'm pleased with GURPS:IN. It looks just like >IN, and those cool conversion rules. But You lose >points for not including my favorite crossover, >IN:Lensman. 8-) *sniff* I'd have liked to, but A: no space, and B: no conversions to licensed works that don't have the license currently functioning/book in print. *sniffle* Feel free to make a web-page for it, though... O:> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:03:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re:IN> A fun little thought, with hairy implications. At 2:11 AM +0000 7/19/00, -=|horsefly|=- wrote: >On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 18:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Maurice Lane wrote: >>But can they Jump? > a Malakite who has *just fledged* has sworn no >Oaths, correct? I would say no, but more personally than canonically. If you _forced_ me to make canon, then I'd say that the act of fledging _included_ the vows, all four of them (despite the cool house rules letting Malakim pick out their two optional ones on their first Earth trip), and a Malakite is never without vows. But I'd rather leave that just a teensy bit more open for other people's campaigns and because this idea is making me giggle manically. >>In fact, the creation of the Malakim proved Lucifer's >>point precisely: they are shining examples of what God >>intended His angels to be all along. >> >>Slaves. >>Unless, of course, you say that they can Jump. It's >>absolutely _essential_ that they be allowed to do so, >>if you want to run Bright campaigns. As a nigh-total side-trip, in the totally non-canon "Soap Opera" that we've been doing up here in NH, Gabriel visited our Malakite stealth Archangel (don't ask) who's trying to convert Andre to the Third Side (_don't_ ask), and made hints that either this Malakite _could_ Jump, or that she could go totally loons-bad. Hard to tell with Gaby. Though she also said that she'd "take care of things" if the Malakite's "fire went out" or words to that effect. Isn't it comforting when Gabriel shows up and starts talking to you in Fire-speak? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:29:09 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> More on Kyriotates of Michael. At 5:58 PM -0600 7/18/00, ben wrote: >Can a Kyriotate of Michael go celestial and have their vessel vanish the >same way other celestials do? If so, can they then possess some other >people and have their normal vessel as a reserve? Yes, and yes -- but the 5 Forces allocated to their vessel (assuming a human vessel) cannot be used to possess anything else. So it doesn't matter if you're using your vessel or not -- if you don't have 10+ Forces, and you do have a human vessel, you aren't going to be possessing any 5-Force humans. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 13:15:35 -0700 (PDT) From: sw@haven.eyrie.org Subject: Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN > At 18:05 -0700 7/18/00, Bruce Dykes wrote: > For me, the biggest difference in the feel between IN and GURPS IN (other > than mechanics-related issues), is that the vessel rules feel really couldn't > be carried over in any reasonable way that I could find. (At least, in > any way that PCs could afford....) So, while the low-end non-combat > celestials aren't very different, combat monsters with high-end vessels > with huge numbers of Body Hits just aren't likely to show up in GURPS IN. > The system simply makes them too expensive. They're not actually > prohibited, but they'd require more points than a starting character > normally has to play with. Some might say this isn't a bug, but a feature... But on another subject with changes in GURPS:IN, what about the rules for Geasae, where 4 Geasae of one level equal one of the next? In a way, it makes a lot more sense than the linear rule for Geasae in IN... and if you can down-convert them, it makes it really amusing... one Major Favor (Geas/6) is worth 4^5 Trivial Favors (Geas/1). Or 1,024... A Lilim could get *years* of fun and games out of that, instead of just one big whack! - --JT ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:36:09 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN At 1:15 PM -0700 7/19/00, sw@haven.eyrie.org wrote: > > >But on another subject with changes in GURPS:IN, what about the rules for >Geasae, where 4 Geasae of one level equal one of the next? In a way, it makes >a lot more sense than the linear rule for Geasae in IN... and if you can >down-convert them, it makes it really amusing... one Major Favor (Geas/6) is >worth 4^5 Trivial Favors (Geas/1). Or 1,024... A Lilim could get *years* of >fun and games out of that, instead of just one big whack! I was wondering about that too -- is that an Errata going back to IN as well? And if so, are there a lot of these "hidden Errata"? - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:00:31 -0400 From: Bull Subject: Re: IN> Furfur and Hardcore At 12:30 PM 7/19/00 -0400, John Karakash wrote: > I hadn't heard of hardcore wrestling before. My universe >has now been expanded. =) > More than you ever wanted to know, eh? As a few notes... As someone mentioned, hardcore indeed seemed to rise in popularity about the time that Furfur rose in power. It actually started in ECW (Originally East Coast Wrestling, I believe, and then changed to Extreme Championship Wrestling) around 95/96. They were a small, Philadelphia based promotion that decided they needed to do SOMETHING to gain an audience and "be different", so instead of the usual gimmickry and show of a traditional wrestling matches, they started doing more and more things like using objects wrapped in barb wire, throwing people off balconies and through tables, stuff like that. Stuff that was a LOT rougher, and while still a stunt, still often injured the participants. Some of this had been around before... Dusty Rhodes used to do Barb Wire matches back in the late 80's early 90's. But these were always rare gimmick matches saved for Pay Per View Shows, and not something done at "regular" shows, let alone at House Shows (Non Televised Shows). Around 97, ECW had a large cult following, and both the "Big 2" wrestling feds, WCW and WWF, started recruiting hardcore wrestlers (man originally from ECW), though it was a bit tamer than in ECW (With a few exceptions... Mick Foley, being a prime example). The Hardcore style of wrestling has invaded and been integrated into regular wrestling, while ECW often now has to scramble for "bigger and better" shocks... I mean, once you see a wrestler slammed through a flaming table off a 30 foot balcony onto several hundred tacks... Where do you go from there? :] In the last 3 or 4 years, there have been numerous deaths and/or serious injuries of children and teens as they do "Backyard Wrestling", creating neighborhood wrestling orgs and seriously hurting or killing each other doing "Extreme" wrestling moves on each other without knowing how to fall or whatever. Bull -- Who knows WAY too much about this, and yet... Not enough :] ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________ Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633 ___________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:08:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Dykes Subject: Re: IN> Words in Celestial vs Demonic - --- -=|horsefly|=- wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:27:39 -0400 Whistling in the > Dark wrote: > [snip] > >Are Words in Demonic also Words in Celestial? Or > would your War > >Servitor of the Demon of Havoc become the Angel of > What Translates > >Into 'Havoc' In Helltongue? > since Words don't seem to be disputed as less real > if they're > given in Hell (see the Word-conflict of Gabriel and > Beliel), i'd > assume Helltongue is rather flexible in how close to > "true" > something can be. or maybe Lucifer can still speak > Celestial for > the purposes of granting Words, but in the granting, > the Word is > tainted by his Balserephic nature, so the Hoarde can > pronounce this > Word in Helltongue without any translation, and > angels can speak > the Word in Celestial (though most would probably > like to wash their > mouthes out afterwards or avoid the issue entirely). I missed the original, but I'll give my out of canon take on Words: Divine Words are resonances with the Symphony, Infernal Words are diabolical impositions of Will upon the Symphony. I don't know how it works in INS/MV, but I'm sure this concept was approached during the original IN playtest... What this means is that for the Divine, that while the Seraphim Council does the formal binding of the Word, by that time it's more of a formal motion of recognition than an actual investiture of power. And for the Infernal, any bal with enough cojones can walk around claiming to be the Demon of Hardcore. 8-) For a while, anyway. I can see Kobal awarding Words left and right just to watch the imps explode... But that's my campaign, not canon. I've also reworded some of the superiors... Now I have a question about Words and Distinctions... Distinctions are easy to handle...most demons are going to keep their Distinctions under their hats, unknown to most, while among angels, it'll vary by Archangel...Laurence will have a formal ceremony with as mony of his servitors present as possible, while Michael will have a small (or not), informal gathering in The Glade. Dominic may simply issue a memo, while Novalis will throw a massive party with all invited. But unless someone is present at the award ceremony, it'll be up to the decorated angel to share the information. But Words? How does a celestial recognize a Wordbound? certainly there will be seneschals tending to their details, undercover intelligence units, and outcasts and renegades who won't be present for any binding ceremonies...are Words tattooed in Enochian on celestial forms? I'm sure that when two related Wordbound near each other, they'll be able to tell by a resonance or echo, but what about nonwordbound? bkd > God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid > to laugh. "My goal is to eliminate irony and make a fool out of God." - The Waitresses __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:26:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Dykes Subject: Re: IN>News from the Gamming store front - --- Charles Phipps wrote: > Anyone else have some theories why Superiors 3 is > selling so well? 1) Gaby is the most flawed Archangel in Heaven. Eli is MIA, Dominic can be just a prat if you're not playing a Judgement oriented campaign and need more depth, and the deepest character flaw Michael has is that he's jealous of Laurence. 2) Khalid has such a fundamentally great Word, and wasn't adequately done the first time around. 3) Yves is the most powerful and enigmatic Archangel in Heaven (again, Eli's MIA). Every little bit helps... All the other canonical AAs to date are fairly straightforward in their characterization and motivation. bkd __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 18:03:49 -0500 From: Matt Trent Subject: Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairyimplications] David Edelstein wrote: > > Jumping can be a manifestation of madness, but it can also > > be the result of a shift in world view. > > Only inasmuch as a shift in world view might convince a human that he > wants to maim or disfigure himself. It happens. The most prominent case in my memory (spurred by your gouging out his own eyes comment) is Oedipus in Oedipus The King. > > Angels can come to agree with> Hell's party line without suffering dissonance and/or Discord, enough > > contact with demonic friends can do this. > > Feeling sympathy for the demons' POV wouldn't in itself cause an angel > to become selfish, which is what it takes to become dissonant and Fall. Suppose that an angel has an epiphany and suddenly releases that all this time it's been fighting on the wrong side. For an example lets take the stereotypical Mercution of Flowers who has the misfortune to witness a pair of Laurance's more hard nosed malakim slaughtering a few of her human friends. Sure they weren't perfect, but they hadn't really done anything but act as the unwitting dupes for the local sorcerer. She realizes that her side just doesn't care anymore and then she thinks about that lilim she met a few weeks ago. She was nice enough and even helped one of said human friends out of a bit of financial trouble. Suddenly she knows that her side is just wrong, and she jumps. Trent Ofanite of Doubt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 18:59:44 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors At 11:42 AM 19/07/00 -0400, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >SUPERIORS: Sup1-3, with 4 due in September (for some definition of >due). I can confirm that work is proceeding on this book, and barring infernal Intervention, we expect to ship it in September, along with the reprinted core book. >CYCLES: The Revelations Cycle, and other rumored Cycles for the >future. Adventure books that have some source materials as well. >Shareware and other totally optional components downloaded and >installed when a user wants them for some reason. What an amusingly apt description. Which is all I'm going to say on that subject for, oh, a week at least. . . . (God, I love doing that.) - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 18:55:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Thirty seconds over the Vale... I was going to post this last night, but I got distracted by the idea of Jumping Malakim, and ... well, you know how it is. It needs a little work to flesh out, so I'm open to suggestions. Please note that the actual numbers will be affected by how many celestials there are in your campaign! :) BTW, getting back to Jumping, I hadn't really considered that many Malakim either fledge that way, or are left over from the War (both cases where the angel is allowed their ultimate expression of free will). I'd probably rule IMFC that you _can't_ just create them without giving them that fundamental choice at _some_ point, thus obviating my final objection. Good work all around, everyone. And now... (cue air raid sirens) ;) Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of Defeat in Detail Honestly, at first it was nothing but a peace gesture. Michael was just trying to be helpful. His troops needed some training, preferably in a arena where they'd be stretched a little, and everybody in Heaven knows that Blandine is perpetually overworked. It seemed reasonable for him to suggest that the Archangel of Dreams allow a certain number of Servitors of War to do a rotation through the Vale. Potentially useful, too: if she ever needed backup, Blandine would have at least some members of the rest of the Host that understood the terrain. Blandine was skeptical. Not precisely at the idea, but about whether Michael's Servitors would be able to function properly in the Marches unsupervised. On the other hand, everyone was being civilized about the whole thing, so Blandine decided to compromise a little. Michael could deploy forces there ... as long as they had prior ethereal experience. Former Servitors of Dreams, those gifted with the Dream Walking Attunement, a reasonably high levels in the Songs of Dreams, or something similar. Everybody else would have to wait until the experiment was evaluated. Michael _did_ grumble a little, but it was about what he was asking for, anyway, so he didn't complain too much. At about this time David, thinking that the basic idea was sound, signed on as well. Please bear in mind that at this point, nobody was looking to screw over anyone else. Michael and David got together and started making up lists of qualified personnel... and got pleasantly surprised. They had quite a few more than anyone would think (_especially_ Blandine). Lots and lots more. It was amazing how, over the millennia, so many angels had switched jobs, spent some time on the pickets or in the Crusade, done the Word of Dreams a favor, or even Redeemed from Beleth's ranks. Of course, relatively speaking, only a relatively small percentage of their organizations qualified: however, a small percentage of a very large pool of celestials adds up fast. They had broken down their review by Choir before they started, and reviewing the lists of Malakim alone took weeks. Finding out that they had over _ninety_ _thousand_ qualified Malakim alone was still quite shocking, though. This was completely, utterly, unexpected. It was practically an embarrassment of riches: they had altogether too many angels for mere raids and reconnaissance missions... David and Michael both began to smile. Very, very nasty smiles. Blandine is going to be very infuriated soon, and for good reason. David and Michael have cooked up a plan between the two of them: Michael sends in his Malakim to the Vale en masse, swarming over every demon they see. Five to one odds sound about right. Most Servitors of Nightmares tend to work alone, so overwhelming them with superior numbers should work in the beginning. Of course, cutting them off from Beleth's Tower would be desirable, but Michael can use support troops (read: every other Choir), calling them in to handle that for just long enough for Beleth's Servitors to clump together. That's when _David's_ Malakim show up, screaming and snarling, bolstering Michael's raiders. Granted, they can't actually hit first, but that's rarely an issue in a melee battle after the first nanosecond. Hit hard, smash formations, take out as many of the big boys as possible. Of course, David and Michael will be in the thick of things themselves, so they'll know the best time to order everybody back. They're raiding, not starting the Final War, so accomplishing strategic surprise and then withdrawing is neither permitting evil to live when it's their choice or retreating from a fight. Superiors can rationalize a lot of things. From their point of view, they've come up with a plan that could decimate Beleth's Servitors and capture a large part of the Vale. Of course, from _Blandine's_ they've just condemned her organization to a nasty war to the knife that would virtually force her to accept help from two Archangels she personally can't stand, which is one reason why they haven't kept her up to date. The effect of all of this on the corporeal plane isn't going to be pretty, either: a lot of people are going to wake up scared out of their wits (many quite literally), or not wake up at all. Any angel that stumbles across this is going to realize that this entire situation is going to have messy permutations all around. About the only thing that could shut it down before it starts would be getting either Blandine's or Laurence's personal attention, which may be hard if they're not Servitors of Dreams or the Sword, don't know any, or don't know the location of appropriate Tethers. Dealing with David or Michael afterwards may also be a chore (read: painful and excruciating), unless the PCs can cover their tracks well enough. Oh, and how much time do the PCs have before millions of dreams are shrouded by black wings? It depends. What time is it? Pleasant dreams. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 21:08:11 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairyimplications] Matt Trent wrote: > It happens. The most prominent case in my memory (spurred by your > gouging out his own eyes comment) is Oedipus in Oedipus The King. Still a sign of derangement. > Suppose that an angel has an epiphany and suddenly releases that all > this time it's been fighting on the wrong side. Then he becomes one of those rare non-dissonant Outcasts. To become a _demon_, he has to turn toward selfishness and core personality-violating behavior. - -David ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jul 2000 02:33:01 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> Holy vs. Unholy On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 11:29:28 -0400 (EDT) Thomas J Howell wrote: >It's always bothered me that IN makes no real distinction between >Holy and Unholy pistols. I always thought that attuned artifacts should >be difficult to use by the other side. that's an interesting house rule, but as i recall them presented, Holy and Unholy pistols can be used to great effect in darkening a campaign, as well as increasing the risk to whoever is careless enough to leave a Holy/Unholy pistol laying around for the Other Side to use it against them. my two bits, -=|horsefly|=- God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 21:17:51 -0500 From: "Kiara S. Legner" Subject: Re: IN> Ranting [was:A fun little thought, with hairy implications] >> > I have a hard time reconciling the thought of an angel with no D/D Jumping. > It seems to me that while certainly within the *rules* it sort of breaks the > entire flavor of the game. Why would an angel want to Jump if it didn't have > any? Sometimes I wonder if anyone reads that coolest of text from the Main IN book. You can find it on the back cover of any soft back. It starts out "They are much like us..." or something to that extent. Sometimes I just get tired of many people casting angles as perfect being without doubt or fear or any other flaw that isn't expressed as outright discord. << Y'know, saying that an angel with no dissonance or discord isn't likely to jump is a very far stretch from saying that an angel is perfect. Angels *so* have flaws that are not discord. They make mistakes, and do all sorts of things not necessarily typed as "good". But that's not the point. The point is that it's *really* hard to turn your back on the Symphony when you resonate to it all the time. That being the case, just why *would* an angel who can hear the Symphony well Jump? Other than being Lucifer, of course, and we don't know what his dissonance looked like at the time of the Fall... Ki ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 2000 19:57:11 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: Grigori stuff (was Re: Deeply Heretical (was Re: IN> More Grigori speculations)) On Wed, 19 July 2000, Walter Milliken wrote: > The main drawback to this theory is that many (originally thought to be > all) the Grigori were hunted down and killed by Heaven. Unless that was > all a sham, that's a fairly high price to pay to plant a *very* few agents. > But then, maybe that *was* what God intended. "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also AFTERWARD [emphasis mine]..." -- Genesis 6:4. It then goes on to talk about the Flood, whose purpose was to wipe out the sinful, wicked humans. Hunted down, indeed. Drowned is more likely. - -- 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: 20 Jul 2000 03:30:34 -0000 From: "-=|horsefly|=-" Subject: Re:IN> Thirty seconds over the Vale... On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 18:55:20 -0700 (PDT) Maurice Lane wrote: [snip] >Oh, and how much time do the PCs have before millions >of dreams are shrouded by black wings? > >It depends. What time is it? > >Pleasant dreams. OMAL this is fabulous. of course, i'd use it more from David or Michael's standpoint, but i favor War and Stone. letting them get away with it and having Blandine's angels find out as this is happening to Beleth's demons is also choice 0;;;> ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 01:02:08 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Characterizing archangels Hey I'm having two momments of characterization that I would like some opinions on: An interesting question that my seraph will pose to Dominic: "I can appreciate your word's peril if I cannot understand it as you High Inquisitor but even as you find me innocent....again....do recall that your word is only half finding things flawed. The other half I caution you not to forget is finding things good." (his opinion of why Dominic is so tortured and problematic in my game) For the "true" story of Laurence's rise to Superior I have an intriguing momment that totures Laurence to no end every single day of his life.... (though I'm not sure he appreciates it's signifigance) During the Purity Crusade Laurence in the Greek Underworld Dream Realm along with the Core of Uriel's other elite corps were tracking down Hades and the other Ethereals. Uriel as usual going for the big fish in Hades while sending his core to do the rest of the group in. While there Laurence encountered a Seraphim not of Purity who was leading Dream Shades away from Uriel's purge to Heaven where they could take their place as souls of God. Laurence questioned the Seraphim immediately as he had orders to destroy these shades and wanted to know exactly why a fellow servant of heaven was hiding these heathen blasphemers (I think those were his exact words at the time). The Seraphim replied that it was not for Uriel to judge who was to be purified and for what reasons but merely it was his place to carry it out....God's purification *and* love was upon them and as such they were not for Laurence. Terrified and shivering and stricken by doubt Laurence broke for the first and only time his holy vow as a Malakim to obey his superior in all things by allowing them to go in a willful violation of his oath by omisson. Uriel flush from victory was extremely annoyed with his servant and sent him to his cathedral for pennance....even as he was summoned to Heaven for trial...and ultimately to God. Laurence prayed for understanding of God's will and forgiveness (though he was torn over the decision as whether or not he had done the right thing). As he kneeled there alone in the cathedral light shined down through the stain glass windows of the Cathedral down on Laurence while he prayed and angels following the light came upon him kneeling with his sword....following the light and discovering that Laurence's wings were now that of an Archangels and his armor of that of commander of the Heavengly host. I'd really like some input. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 07:42:05 GMT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors > >>CYCLES: The Revelations Cycle, and other rumored Cycles for the >>future. Adventure books that have some source materials as well. >>Shareware and other totally optional components downloaded and >>installed when a user wants them for some reason. > Funnily enough, what I think IN desperately needs -- way more than write-ups of dead superiors -- is some books of complete, well-written, fun, GOOD, scenarios to run. If you assume they run at about 15-20 pages each, you could fit 5 into a book on one theme (eg. Baal's master plan to conquer the known universe, it is discovered that Janus & Valefor are the same person, scenarios for angels on Earth, scenarios for demons on Earth, et. al.), with 20 pages to fill out any extra background/rules. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:16:34 -0700 (PDT) From: "O. S. Kerr" Subject: Re: IN> A fun little thought, with hairy implications. > (This actually touches on something else that I've been > thinking about: does an original Malakite's former Choir > influence their outlook? How is an Elohite/Malakite > different from a Kyriotate/Malakite?) Excellent question. Would the Kyrio/Mal be better at tactics and strategy, as he had been used to thinking and doing many things at once? Would a Merc/Mal have a hesitancy about killing a deserving human? > (*) Apologies to Mr. Wm. Shakespeare; it just seemed *so* > suitable. On his behalf, I accept. (He likes it, you see. Every time we quote him, he gets more Essence in the Marches.) O. > ===== ** Lead Playtester for Storyteller: The Colon ** ** I minored in behavioral psychology. Tragic irony and human suffering are just hobbies. ** __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 04:00:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Dykes Subject: Re: IN> GURPS-IN and material for IN - --- Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >Overall, I'm pleased with GURPS:IN. It looks just > like > >IN, and those cool conversion rules. But You lose > >points for not including my favorite crossover, > >IN:Lensman. 8-) > > *sniff* I'd have liked to, but A: no space, and B: > no conversions to > licensed works that don't have the license currently > functioning/book > in print. *sniffle* I'm just teasing...I seem to recall a mention of IN:Lensman way back on the list, and since then I've been trying to come up with other Lensman crossovers...Lensman:Cthulhu I threw out as a gag in a post on another forum, and then I realized it could actually work! And then there's Lensman:Lexx, but let's not go there... Instead (dragging this back to topic), let's go to scifi.com's Seeing Ear Theatre, and the second episode of JMS' City of Dreams:Rolling Thunder, which is a very good radio drama starring the everyone's favorite bal: http://www.scifi.com/cityofdreams/ bkd __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 08:41:10 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors At 7:42 AM +0000 7/20/00, Jo Hart wrote: >>>CYCLES: The Revelations Cycle, and other rumored Cycles for the >>>future. Adventure books that have some source materials as well. >>>Shareware and other totally optional components downloaded and >>>installed when a user wants them for some reason. >> > >Funnily enough, what I think IN desperately needs -- way more than >write-ups of dead superiors -- is some books of complete, >well-written, fun, GOOD, scenarios to run. I agree, which is why I said that all the inprints need to be developed for a healthy game line. Of all the different types of books (Guides, Superiors, Libers and Cycles) the only one that hasn't come out in the last year and a half or more is a Cycle/adventure book. Therefore, it's acutely needed. It doesn't change the fact that any adventure book becomes highly optional compared to, say, one of the Guides. But you need the whole enchilada to be really healthy. (*My* point is a new Liber book wouldn't "interrupt" the publication of Superiors. That's true of a new Cycle or Adventure book too.) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 09:35:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors > I agree, which is why I said that all the inprints need to be > developed for a healthy game line. Of all the different types of > books (Guides, Superiors, Libers and Cycles) the only one that hasn't > come out in the last year and a half or more is a Cycle/adventure > book. Therefore, it's acutely needed. The reason that Jo is spot-on is not because it needs to look like a healthy game line, but what the non fans who don't sit on this list all day long say. Oftentimes, it is more interesting to listen to those who are giving the game wide berth rather than listen to those who are already happy with the product. For example, very recently on the forums on RPG.net, as in the last week, there was a thread called "Best Game You'll Never Play." Several times, In Nomine was brought up in the thread, and the number one reason for not following the game was "no playable adventures." Number one. With a bullet. (I believe the key word here is "playable," as I don't believe the Revelations Cycle qualifies.) I also think Jo is spot-on with a book of sample adventures. After all, Hogshead just released a 24 page book with _5_ unique adventures, and it's already being well received. (Not that I think SJG has a snowball's chance in Hell of getting Robin Laws to write anything for In Nomine, mind you.) Demonstrating how to run and play the game is a sure fire way of getting people to join -- even if the bullet is bitten and it's sold as a pamphlet, or given away as a free .pdf download. Such a creature, if well put together, does work, does sell, and makes people happy. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 09:46:44 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Characterizing archangels Charles Phipps wrote: > I'd really like some input. Okay. > While there Laurence encountered a Seraphim not of Purity who was > leading Dream Shades away from Uriel's purge to Heaven where they > could take their place as souls of God. If you want to be canonical, celestials can't influence a soul's ultimate destination. At best, the seraph ("seraphim" is plural) could jostle souls out of a temporary condition of dream-shade-hood, some to go to Heaven, some to Hell -- unless the seraph had somehow pre-selected dreamshades that were Heaven-bound. > Laurence questioned the Seraphim immediately as he had orders to > destroy these shades I find it very unlikely that any Archangel, even Uriel, would destroy human souls except for Undead and Hellsworn, and especially if some of those souls might otherwise wind up in Heaven. If Uriel was doing THAT, maybe THAT'S why he was summoned to the Upper Heavens. > The Seraphim replied that it was not for Uriel to judge who was to > be purified and for what reasons but merely it was his place to > carry it out....God's purification *and* love was upon them and as > such they were not for Laurence. That would have to be one enormously persuasive seraph to convince Laurence. And I get the strong impression that ANY Urielite would think Uriel was PERFECTLY in his rights to judge what needed purifying (i.e. everything) and when (i.e. always). A high-ranking seraph of Destiny with the Divine Logic attunement might be able to carry it off. If it were Yves himself, the thing becomes far easier to believe in canon. Novalis might do, too, and she's a lot more forthright. > Terrified and shivering and stricken by doubt Laurence broke for > the first and only time his holy vow as a Malakim to obey his > superior in all things by allowing them to go in a willful > violation of his oath by omisson. Which means Laurance was dissonant, at least for a bit. As I recall, Uriel had some very low number of notes of dissonance that he would tolerate in his servants before destroying them. Maybe it was three. If it was one, you either toss canon or have Laurence waiting for execution. > ...and discovering that Laurence's wings were now > that of an Archangels and his armor of that of commander of the > Heavengly host. Just out of curiosity, how do Archangelic wings differ from those of regular angels, and what does the Host Commander's armor look like? Earl ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1721 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.