From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat Jul 22 18:41:26 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 SAA25100 for ; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:41:25 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id SAA05785 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:39:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:39:40 -0500 Message-Id: <200007222339.SAA05785@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 #1728 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 Saturday, July 22 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1728 In this digest: Re: IN> Words in Celestial vs Demonic Re: IN> Questions about fate (or Fate) Re: IN> Cherub of Stone Attunement Re: IN> Cherub of Stone Attunement Re: IN> Here Comes The Bride, and She Is Pi**ed Re: IN> Re: Legion & Haagenti Re: IN> Re: Legion & Haagenti Re: IN> Interventions. Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) Re: IN> Servitors and obeying orders Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) IN> [ADMIN] NO FLAMING Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) Re: IN> Characterizing archangels Re: IN> Dead Superiors Re: IN> Re: [slightly off-topic] Latin question Re: IN> Dead Superiors Re: RPGA (Was Re: IN> Dead Superiors ) IN> perceiving other celestials Re: IN> perceiving other celestials Re: IN> I know it's late, but! Trailer 1 - The Agony and the Ecstasy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:26:09 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Words in Celestial vs Demonic At 3:08 PM -0700 7/19/00, Bruce Dykes wrote: [...] >But Words? How does a celestial recognize a Wordbound? The Word-bound does something like _explain_ it, or use some cool power that generally imparts the notion that, Gee, This Person Just Might Have A Word... Tossing excess Essence around casually can help. Being able to descend in a flight of 1,000 birds (Hi, Angel of Birds!) helps. So would casually warping a bit of marble into a little bit of sculpture (Hello, Angel of Sculpting!). Aside from that, you have to rely on rumor, gossip, or other information sources. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:30:38 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Questions about fate (or Fate) At 11:27 PM +1200 7/18/00, Keith Bolland wrote: [Yves & Kronos] >[*] I wish there was an easy word to describe the pair of them. > "Auguries"? In our TOTALLY NON-CANON "soap opera," we've taken to refering to them as "Avatars of the Symphony." - --Beth, with the baby sleeping on her chest. For the moment. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:11:54 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Cherub of Stone Attunement At 1:44 AM +0000 7/21/00, Janet Anderson wrote: >If for some reason you fell off, could you invoke your Attunement to draw >some free-swinging girder, scaffolding chain, hook, crane, etc. to you and >save yourself? Ooooo, maybe! Is there a weight restriction on it? If not... >Could you use it to draw *yourself* to the nearest beam? The canon ruling on thisis more gray, and I'd want to look at the mechanics more. (The baby is in a bad position for this to be done now, darnit.) If I were GMing, probably, yes. >And lastly, can you use the Attunement to (adversely) affect machinery such >as computers, compasses, and electronic devices? I don't think so -- IIRC, it says something about a "_pseudo_magnetic field"? (Emphasis mine.) They have an affinity for mineral things -- they draw the minerals to themselves via divine resonance with the things, in the way that a mother holds out her arms to hug her child. It's not a magnet, it's LOVE... Note the IIRC. Could be wrong there. But isn't it poetical? O:> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:01:33 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Cherub of Stone Attunement >>And lastly, can you use the Attunement to (adversely) affect machinery such >>as computers, compasses, and electronic devices? > >I don't think so -- IIRC, it says something about a "_pseudo_magnetic >field"? (Emphasis mine.) They have an affinity for mineral things -- >they draw the minerals to themselves via divine resonance with the >things, in the way that a mother holds out her arms to hug her child. >It's not a magnet, it's LOVE... Hah. Nice metaphor. I like this. Note, BTW, that this was more or less how early proto-physicists viewed things like lodestones and static electricity. "Mm, this rock just luuuuvs iron." Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Here Comes The Bride, and She Is Pi**ed From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Here Comes The Bride, and She Is Pi**ed (was: Re: >A Malakim of Trade screams and winds up for a suicide >stroke, Oops. That should read, "suicide _run_". Sorry... Moe __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:31:15 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: Legion & Haagenti At 11:34 PM +0000 7/18/00, -=|horsefly|=- wrote: >On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:14:48 -0400 Whistling in the Dark wrote in response to Daedalus3D@aol.com: > [snippity-snip] >>Right? Right? Anyone? Anyone? > if it were to be done in one volume, i agree that Liber Temporum has a >nice ring to it, I kinda liked "Book of Eternity," m'self. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:16:21 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Legion & Haagenti From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > > I kinda liked "Book of Eternity," m'self. I'm rather fond of "Liber Apocrypha," myself... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:23:56 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Interventions. At 7:14 PM -0400 7/18/00, John Karakash wrote: > Unless a human is technically allied with Hell (i.e. a Soldier), >I believe 111 is still a good intervention for him. I'm pretty sure >this >was convered in the CPG (which is not anywhere near me at this time). >Beth? Interventions for an unaligned human (i.e., not a Soldier, Saint, undead, yadda) depend on what he was doing at the time. CPG, pp.10-11. - --Beth (Life is so much better when the books are in range of an outstretched hand.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 17:24:46 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) Douglas Muir wrote: > Gracious, that seemed to have touched a nerve. Oh, don't flatter yourself. You're _trying_ to hit a nerve, and failing. All you're succeeding in doing is being a pest. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:48:23 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Servitors and obeying orders At 21:36 +0000 7/20/00, Janet Anderson wrote: >In the course of a discussion on Malakim required to work with demons, >Walter Milliken observed: > >>Note, however, that a Stony Malakite isn't required (by a >>>dissonance >>>condition, anyway) that he obey orders.... > >Well, *no* Servitors are required to obey orders by a dissonance condition >except Laurence's. (Dominic's? My books are at home.) But in theory they >all want to, at least most of the time, or they'd either switch Superiors or >Fall. My point here being this might be one of the cases where disobeying the letter of an order might be better, since it would be more in the spirit of what David stood for. I certainly don't expect it to happen frequently -- this was a pretty extreme case. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:53:34 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) At 17:00 -0500 7/20/00, David Edelstein wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: >> Not from any formal survey, certainly, but comic campaigns (as opposed to >> occasional comic episodes) seem to be in a distinct minority on this list. > >In what way do you think this list necessarily represents the majority >of IN players (or potential IN players)? I think one of the biggest >mistakes that's been made is repeatedly equating the IN list with the IN >customer base. In what way do you think it *doesn't* represent it? Other than the selection factor of net access, I don't see any mechanism operating to make this list any more unrepresentative than any other non-scientific sampling. >I'm saying that all of the satirical humor that was present in the >original rulebook has pretty much been bleached out of the line. That bleaching process started with INS/MV, actually. > And I >think that Derek Pearcy's tongue-in-cheek attitude was a lot of what >originally attracted people to IN. Certainly not in my case, though the humor aspects weren't lost on me. But I don't see the original IN as "tongue-in-cheek" at all. The original INS/MV, yes. But, at least to me, the initial IN stuff came through as dark satire, at best. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 17:50:32 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) Walter Milliken wrote: > In what way do you think it *doesn't* represent it? Other than the > selection factor of net access, I don't see any mechanism operating > to make this list any more unrepresentative than any other non-scientific > sampling. How about the fact that people who sign up for the IN list are pretty much by definition more interested in IN than most? A lot of people play an RPG now and then (or even regularly) because they like it, but that doesn't mean they're passionate enough about it to join a fairly heavy-traffic e-mail list. Also there's the fact that most of the people on this list are probably more "wired" than the average gamer, and connected to general trends in the industry. For better or for worse, this is going to give them a viewpoint that's somewhat skewed from that of the average gamer who says "In Nomine? Sure, sounds cool, let's run a game this Saturday over pizza. Then if we don't like it, let's try Unknown Armies." > That bleaching process started with INS/MV, actually. Inasmuch as the SJG version is much LESS satirical than the French original, sure. Are you suggesting the original SJG version was still too satirical, and so further watering down is needed? - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:26:02 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] NO FLAMING In case it's been forgotton, flaming's not allowed on the list. If it continues, all flamers, on all sides, are going to get u n s u b s c r i bed. I don't care who started it. First, and last, warning. - --Beth, List Admin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:13:49 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Adventures in In Nomine (was Re: Dead Superiors) At 12:29 -0400 7/21/00, Douglas Muir wrote: >Given the rather stringent restrictions they were operating under -- trying >to cram a _lot_ of material into a standard 128 page GURPS book, Actually it's a highly non-standard 224 pages. But yes, we did cram a lot of stuff into it, since it contains roughly the 208 pages of the original IN book, plus a lot of rules clarifications from the FAQ, errata, etc., plus some important stuff from non-core books. That doesn't really have anything to do with the tone of the book, though, which is what David is talking about. Is GURPS IN dryer than the original? Yes, probably. Some of that had to do with organization, some with lack of space to add more "color", and some with writing style. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:51:47 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Characterizing archangels At 1:02 AM -0400 7/20/00, Charles Phipps wrote: >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) IMC, the reply would be, "And so the innocent are released, Servitor, and so amends are made if they are Truly necessary." And then the Out Of Character loonie in me calls out, "Next!" and the triad brings in the next case waiting out in the hall... O:> At 9:46 AM -0500 7/20/00, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Charles Phipps wrote: >> ...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? Why, as every good demon knows, Superiors have BIGGER......wings! Or maybe that's just our Lilim. They certainly seem to think it's a good euphamism for the promotion. Bigger, blacker, with razor edges that can cut the very air till it bleeds, the stench of blood and incense rising from them... oops, sorry, that's the Balseraph-written porn-rags in Shal-Mari... - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:32:47 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Andrew Hackard wrote: > At 11:46 AM 20/07/00 -0600, ben wrote: > >Hmmm. Would "The Complete Calabite" sell? A book dedicated to a single > >choir/band? > > Can you write 128 pages about Calabites? SJ Games just isn't going to > publish something shorter than 128 pages. (My gut instinct is that no, > it wouldn't sell, and SJG would lose a lot of good will in the process. > TSR took a *lot* of heat for what fans saw as the money-grubbing > inherent in the Complete Obscure Subclass series.) Honestly, I thought the APG and IPG were *the* way to go. Of course, they had a lotta problems, but they could be redone... To satisfy the people who want Choir/Band splatbooks, why not just can all of the "extra" stuff in the I/APG? We don't NEED details about how the Superiors act, because we have the Superiors books for that! We don't NEED that much about Falling and Redeeming... okay, maybe a few pages in the back. Maybe ONE page to talk about Relievers or Demonlings. Title page, TOC, vignette, splatpage: 7 pages Being an Angel/Demon: 3 pages Choir/Band A: 16 pages Choir/Band B: 16 pages Choir/Band C: 16 pages Choir/Band D: 16 pages Choir/Band E: 16 pages Choir/Band F: 16 pages Choir/Band G: 16 pages Relievers/Demonlings: 1 page Falling/Redeeming: 4 pages Index: 1 page THERE. TWICE as many pages for each choir/band as the A/IPG books have, which should be *plenty* to flesh 'em out! Let's face it - the people want splatbook-type stuff for these choirs and bands, and this is the best way to do it. Because lord knows we don't need 14 different 128-page books... not even 7 of 'em. TWO books will do just fine, and those two already exist. They just need to be redone... - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian, Q4B4L! Meow! If I had a shiny gun, / I could have a world of fun Speeding bullets through the brains / Of the folk who give me pains; Or had I some poison gas, / I could make the moments pass Bumping off a number of / People whom I do not love. But I have no lethal weapon; / Thus does Fate our pleasure step on! So they still are quick and well / Who should be, by rights, in hell. -- Dorothy Parker, "Frustration" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:57:03 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> Re: [slightly off-topic] Latin question At 10:56 AM 21/07/00 -0400, Thomas J Howell wrote: >Anyway, I teach high school Latin (and used to teach it in college), Oh my. You have my sympathy. (Three years teaching high school Latin burned me out. The one year of math before that didn't help...) - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:03:39 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> Dead Superiors At 10:07 AM 21/07/00 -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >Can you write 128 pages about Calabites? > > > >CalabiM! 10 FOR X=1 TO 100 20 PRINT "I will not post to mailing lists when I'm too exhausted to think." 30 NEXT - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 01:09:11 -0400 From: "BDP" Subject: Re: RPGA (Was Re: IN> Dead Superiors ) >There were no games of IN at Dragoncon. > >I saw a guy thumbing through the Liber Castellorum and >was gonna holler at him since I had my main book, APG, >and GMG in my backpack and just enough time to think >up a good story and recruit players, but I was playing >Changeling at the time and he didn't notice. If the fellow in question was ponytailed and goateed, slightly chubby, and carrying a tote bag with a dragon on it, and wandering the gaming area aimlessly while reading ... as if waiting for someone, that was me. I purchased LC at the con and spent a good deal of time thumbing through it in the gaming room. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 10:06:11 +0100 From: "mark.bachu" Subject: IN> perceiving other celestials This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01BFF3C4.781D7800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, my name is Shelby, and I'm ne wto the list, nad for that matter the = whole n Nomine game. =20 One of my friends bought me the game so I could run it for our usual = group... however, cut a long story short... is their any way for a = celestial in a human vessal to sense the presence of another celestial = also in a human vessel? - ------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01BFF3C4.781D7800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, my name is Shelby, and I'm ne wto = the list, nad=20 for that matter the whole n Nomine game. 
One of my friends bought me the game so = I could run=20 it for our usual group...  however, cut a long story short...  = is=20 their any way for a celestial in a human vessal to sense the presence of = another=20 celestial also in a human vessel?
 
 
 
- ------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01BFF3C4.781D7800-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 21:19:00 +1200 (NZST) From: Keith Bolland Subject: Re: IN> perceiving other celestials On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, mark.bachu wrote: > Hi, my name is Shelby, and I'm ne wto the list, nad for that matter the > whole n Nomine game. One of my friends bought me the game so I could > run it for our usual group... however, cut a long story short... is > their any way for a celestial in a human vessal to sense the presence of > another celestial also in a human vessel? Not as an integral part of the mechanics - you can't just do a simple Perception role and spot celestials. However, the INC (In Nomine Collection, a compendium of tips and tricks - very handy) has an excellent article on creative ways to figure out that grumpy janitor is really a Calabite: http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/Tips/perception.html No need to share that with your players, of course. :) //-- <*> Keith Bolland --------------------------------------- // "Life isn't fair. But the root password helps." -- The BOFH ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:47:31 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> I know it's late, but! Trailer 1 - The Agony and the Ecstasy At 9:56 AM -0700 07/20/00, Jennifer Campbell wrote: >In Nomine - The Agony and The Ecstasy Heh. Cute. Very cute. Keep up the good work! (I actually find that the Movie-Trailer fiction that has been written has a lot of very interesting and beyond belief ideas laced throughout it. Yes, I have written about three of them myself, but I only truly like the last one I wrote. . . There's just something about the imagery and what's not said that makes it _work_. I think you've got a similar thing going here.) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1728 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.