From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Apr 29 14:41:17 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA24611 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 1998 14:41:17 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA02017 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 29 Apr 1998 13:13:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 13:13:39 -0500 Message-Id: <199804291813.NAA02017@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 #735 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Wednesday, April 29 1998 Volume 01 : Number 735 In this digest: Re: IN> 3 questions Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control Re: IN> Double Agents Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control Re: IN> Dominic Re: IN> Dominic Re: IN> 3 questions Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry Re: IN> Make-Up Department Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking IN> Question about Motion (Celestial) Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control Re: IN> Risk Re: IN> 3 questions Re: IN> 3 questions Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 11:49:02 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Andrew Frades wrote: > He took this to mean that it would be dissonant for him to start a fight, thus > not quite his choice. I agreed and have not had any problems. He has met many > demons and hasn't killed them all in a gory bloodfest yet partly because he > won't start fights, and partly because they must prove themselves to be evil > before he kills them. He is something of a new breed of Malakim I guess. None > of this has stopped him once he knows a person is evil and has fought them > before, to him the fight continues until it is over, not just until the > corporeal vessel is destroyed. Very interesting! This might just fix a problem with the setting I've been planning for my players - they will play demons in an angel-dominated town, and I want to have a Malakim of David tutoring the local bikers, to keep them on their toes, but I don't want the game to turn into a slugfest. The PC:s and the angels should be able to come to some kind of agreement, which just might be possible this way - esp. since there will be a common enemy - a former servitor of Saminga who's gone renegade and is seen as a much worse than the PC:s by the angels. The plot thickens... :) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "I kick arse for the Lord!" - Father McGruder ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 11:56:30 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > I will now desperately try to relate this back to my main point: the > celestials aren't really interested by broad trends or the big picture. > Each person's salvation (or damnation) is the reason they are on the > ground, and this is an intensely personal thing. For each person, a gun > (or a screwdriver, or a car, or a refrigerator..) can be a positive > or negative influence, and the only that matters is the particular case > the angel (or demon) is faced with. Does that make any sense? I think the perspective varies from celestial to celestial, just as it does for humans. Some are more interested in the Big Picture (and for celestials that is -the- Big Picture), while others don't feel very connected to the big things happening, but are more interested in how to save/damn the little old lady running the candy store on the corner. The scary AA:s are the ones -only- looking at the Big Picture, IMO - they don't care if one person, or a hundred, or a million, is damned, as long as they win the War. OTOH, I find the DP:s who care about every single damned soul much scarier - Saminga is mostly silly, while Kronos gives off very bad vibes. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "I kick arse for the Lord!" - Father McGruder ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 12:04:02 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Double Agents On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Walter Milliken wrote: > > Would it be possible for the fallen angel to stay in his position in > >the heavenly host, unbeknownst to Gabby, passing on inside info, even > >speaking with her and have her not realize immediately what was going on? Or > >indeed any other arch (save perhaps dom... but wouldn't that be a coup!) > > This is actually slightly contradicted by canon in the IPG, which states > (in the section on switching superiors, I think), that Superiors can > pretty much tell who you are and what you've got in the way of > attunements, distinctions, and Rites. It also contradicts the vignette > in the main book where Nichole meets Gabriel and Gabriel immediately > notices Nichole has a non-Fire Rite. I thought Gabriel noticed that the Essence used in summoning her was generated by a non-Fire Rite. This raises a bunch of other questions - I've always thought of Essence as being a completely uniform, without distinctions to separate one "unit" from the next. If Gabriel can tell that a certain amount of Essence was generated in a certain way, how much more can she tell? If Nichole had been given the Essence from someone else, would Gabriel be able to notice that? Could she tell who had given the Essence? If it was an angel or a demon? This could create all kinds of interesting problems for PC:s... ;) Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "I kick arse for the Lord!" - Father McGruder ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:20:46 -0400 From: Frank Lazar Subject: Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control At 11:56 AM +0200 04/29/1998, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > OTOH, I find the DP:s who care about every single >damned soul much scarier - Saminga is mostly silly, while Kronos gives off >very bad vibes. > Actually as described, Kronos is exactly the opposite of Yvves in his considerations. He really only "cares" about the major movers and shakers the "pillars" of Destiny or Fate. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | _ | | We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. /_\ | | We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, // \\ | | Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, \\ //___\\ | | And invocations of equations. \\ // \\ | | \\__// \\ | | These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. \\ | | \\ | | | Frank Lazar http://www.interactive.net/~fmlazar | \\ | - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 07:01:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Ben-Prime Subject: Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control On Wed, 29 Apr 1998, Jo Hart wrote: > Perhaps the demon of the gun control debate, a shedite of malphas... I would think another Habbalite, judging from the way people on both sides fiercely stick to the most illogical of arguments and statistics. ;) Ben - ----- emrys@netrox.net ---------------- http://www.netrox.net/~emrys/ ------ "When I am working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." -- R. Buckminster Fuller - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- WhHi6G2>3 LCJRo hBrc+++g b69/83 B3^E1# a27+ sM1N10~ K8p k3BdSAbCehIOpRrTtxX QbEKLMRTtO v64s opLSO X6#7 w7T r6IsLM E+++ p9f7v4&g4s8 D36C(c*P*!# Hco+usFL7 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 12:00:51 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control David Chart writes >- --On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 9:44 am +0100 "Hart, Joanna" > wrote: > >> Seriously though, do you think angels care about the 2nd amendment, other >> than angels who are specifically assigned to the US? > >I doubt it. And those who do *will* disagree, much along the lines that >David (the other David. No, the *other*... oh, never mind) suggested. Demons >will also have different opinions, although I would guess that more are in >favour of guns: Definately. For one thing; if the right to bear arms is within your constitution, and guns are thus more commonplace and acceptable, your role can probably hide the disturbance of shooting some mortal a whole lot easier. - -- Jules - Demon of Pop Guns jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 12:03:13 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: Re: IN> Dominic Jo Hart replied: >At 13:53 28/04/98 -0500, you wrote: >>I have a general question about a plot seed of mine. >> >>The PCs have been causing a lot of disturbance in the Symphony lately, >>something along the lines of 50 pts every time. >> >>Would it be logical for Dominic to call the PCs up to Heaven to stand >>trial for their actions? >> > >I suspect he'd send out a triad first to see if there was likely to be >enough evidence to warrent a trial up in heaven. > > And then bug their meeting place...just to be sure ;) (sound familiar anyone?) Angels... Be wary of that van with tinted windows parked just down the road. - -- Julian jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 08:13:37 -0400 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Dominic Bryan wrote: > I have a general question about a plot seed of mine. > > The PCs have been causing a lot of disturbance in the Symphony lately, > something along the lines of 50 pts every time. > > Would it be logical for Dominic to call the PCs up to Heaven to stand > trial for their actions? Sure. But it would be more fun if you had each of their superiors show up and warn them first. Also if you have any established servitors of Dominic around have them track down the PCs after a big disturbance using the disturbance tracking rules and ask them if everything is OK. The Justice servitor would probably just be checking things out to make sure it wasn't demons and might be rather surprised to find angels. Then Dominic sends a Tribunal down to have a little chat with the PCs. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 08:47:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions > Alas, I cannot. After I sent them Bethward, I deleted them. > > I suppose dutiful digging through the digest logs will uncover them, but > I have neither the time nor, quite frankly, the interest. Well, until Beth sends them on to me, there is absolutely nothing I can do, since I have neither the time nor the energy to pick through the digests. If and When they appear in my INBOX is when they will go up. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 08:55:45 -0400 From: nofori@pop3.utoledo.edu Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions >Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 01:45:45 +0900 >From: Simon Hailes >Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions > > In follow up to my assignment of actors to Archangels I am now auditioning >for the Lords of Hell, this time instead of doing it myself I will approve >recommendations from those on the list. So lets do lunch, oh yeah, we'll >start off with the first three, Andrealphus, Asmodeus and Beleth. > Remember, if the actor or actress is obscure, refer to which movie he/she >starred in, and have fun :) > Simon > Regis Filbin, Fred Rogers, and Ellen diGeneres. \|=) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 09:09:11 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry Does the term "away team" come from "Star Trek," or did "Star Trek" get it from existing military terminology? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 09:13:34 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Make-Up Department Steve Jessop wrote: > > "seraph" may be related to the Hebrew word for serpent. ... > Or derived from the word for 'burning'? I don't know any Hebrew, > but it was in by footnotes for Paradise Lost (explaining a choice > of adjective). My father once told me "seraph" might come from a word meaning "firey serpent," which would combine the two ideas, though such a specialized term seems a little odd. Any Hebrew-speakers on the list want to give an opinion? I gather from "The Discarded Image" by C. S. Lewis, an introduction to the medieval world-view, that seraphim are traditionally associated with the ideas of heat and fire, and so are traditionally depicted in art as robed in red. They are supposed to be foremost in love of God, while cherubim (traditionally depicted in blue robes) are supposed to be foremost in knowledge of God -- which is rather the reverse of their descriptions in IN. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 09:47:12 -0400 From: Ron Carnegie Subject: Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat At 02:00 AM 4/29/98 PDT, you wrote: >Ran my first demonic game of IN last Sunday (and my second IN game to >date). > >One thing I figured out: the list of playtesters & writers at the front >of the rulebook is a great source of off-the-cuff human NPC names. >(David Edelstein - Sorry, you owe a favour or two to some of my Lilim. >That will teach you to have a Latte at Washington DC airport :-) > >I was running Feast of Blades, and when we got to a combat, I decided to >roll out the mapboard to make it more interesting (I *detest* >non-mapboard combat). Interesting, I have long detested mapboard combat. I feel it pulls the players away from the "feel" of the story and makes it feel more like a game. Cheers, Ron Carnegie rcarnegie@widomaker.com ************************************************* "The poetry of history lies in the quasi-miraculous fact that once on this earth, on this familiar spot of ground walked other men and women as actual as we are today, thinking their own thoughts, swayed by their own passions but now all gone, vanishing after another, gone as utterly as we ourselves shall be gone like ghosts at cockcrow." G.M. Trevelyan ************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 10:13:12 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry On Wed, 29 Apr 1998, Hart, Joanna wrote: > 100th Light Infantry (the 'old' hundredth) [Snip lots] > El Tamami -- Impudite & team provisions demon. It still holds the unlikely > ambition of attaining the word of Profiteering and is a slimy character who > uses too much brylcreme but has the contacts to make good on its claims that > 'Whatever you want, I can get it for you!' > Yxerax -- An obsessive/compulsive shedite who went strange in the head (for > a shedite) after a brush with shellshock during the Boer War. It claims to > be 'the rat messiah' and gets berserk when people harm rodents. > Boz -- Djinn and Regimental archivist. No-one back in Gehenna seems too > worried that the regimental archivist is not actually around but he is still > writing up archives about something or other. Nominally the away team's > commanding officer but too busy obsessively making notes about everything to > press its rank home. > Raimonde -- Calabite 'nurse' on loan from Saminga, who has forgotten about > it. It got transferred from a medical unit after over-enthusiasm with the > triage; if any of the others get wounded, they will go to extraordinary > lengths to avoid seeing it professionally. > Frailing -- Balseraph which fancies itself as a crime lord. Spends most of > its time getting high on good quality cocaine and doing worryingly psycho > things with a happy smile on its face. I LOVE THESE GUYS! They WILL be showing up in my campaign. I need a little comedy relief now and then. > [Next up -- Possibly some plot seeds if anyone is interested, and the scum > of the infernal Navy in the shape of Minesweepers 'HIMS Jam Tomorrow' and > 'HIMS Cash for Questions' (HIMS = His Infernal Majesty's Ship)] Please do. I can't wait to see it. Richard "Mr. Uriel" Gant ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 10:32:03 -0400 From: Robb Kidd Subject: Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Thomas Davidson wrote: > Ben-Prime wrote: > > So I download the PDF format character sheets off of the SJG site, > > and find that they include some fonts that my own system does not. Hence, > > I get lines of dots in some places where I am reasonably sure I am > > supposed to have words. > > Hmmm... I had a similar problem with the .pdf files. This problem > went away, however, when I downloaded Acrobat 3.x. It seems that > the .pdf files use embedded fonts, which Acrobat 2.x doesn't > interpret very well--Adobe fixed this problem with 3.x. Yepper. If you want to view or print PDF documents, you definitely want the latest Acrobat Reader: http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html I was sort of disappointed that the character sheets were designed to print at 300dpi. I got them off our, admittedly elderly, network printer and the graphics were all pokey. Ah well. - -- Robert Kidd - MIS National Center for Missing & Exploited Children ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 07:29:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat > >I was running Feast of Blades, and when we got to a combat, I decided to > >roll out the mapboard to make it more interesting (I *detest* > >non-mapboard combat). > > Interesting, I have long detested mapboard combat. I feel it pulls the > players away from the "feel" of the story and makes it feel more like a game. Hmm, I'm more on the side of the first player. Even in running a PBEM, when a combat between more than two people starts I will draw up a map of where everybody is and post it on the web for their consumption. I find that without some sort of visual indication of where things are, especially in a PBEM it gets very confusing and hard to visualize what is going on. Seeing the figures, or icons on a drawn map, helps me get an idea of what's really happening, and helps me simulate the characters' ability to look around and see what is where. Ultimately, I think it gives the players more control. Not sure how you do this with celestial combat, though :) That sort of thing probably does not lend itself well to miniatures or the like. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 10:47:04 EDT From: MarkDEddy Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions In a message dated 4/28/98 8:23:52 PM, hailes@senet.com.au writes: > In follow up to my assignment of actors to Archangels I am now auditioning >for the Lords of Hell, this time instead of doing it myself I will approve >recommendations from those on the list. So lets do lunch, oh yeah, we'll >start off with the first three, Andrealphus, Asmodeus and Beleth. > Remember, if the actor or actress is obscure, refer to which movie he/she >starred in, and have fun :) > Simon Leonardo diCaprio (Andrephalus) Al Pachino (Asmodeus) Sigourney Weaver (Beleth) Kenneth Brannaugh (Baal) John Malkovich (Belial) So I added a couple, so send the Game after me... Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 15:32:32 +0100 () From: "David.Evans" Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking Hey dudes, Beth proclaimeths... > > Furfur is not playing by the rules -- unless, of course, Lucifer > decides to errata them. This isn't exactly true. Furfur is, in fact, playing precisely by the rules... using a very VERY obscure sub-clause that no-one else knows about. :-) > Hang around and if he doesn't get the Big > Rules Guy to approve his changes, pound him and give him to the > Game. Rulebreakers are bad. Unless the Lightbringer says otherwise; in which case... > Oh, and ask him what his Discord is. > He's got to have one. He's a Calabite. > > [as a note, there *should* be errata for that. It's Angry, IIRC.] > *Nods* Yep, there is errata for that already up on the appropriate page. What it _doesn't_ mention is what LEVEL Furfur's Angry Discord is at. Remembering that it cannot go *below* the level it originated as when he "Fledged" as a 7-Force demon, I'd reckon it would probably be two, or possibly more if Furfur added to it in his own inimitable way, to three or four levels of Angry perchance. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be seeing you... David. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 10:56:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: IN> Question about Motion (Celestial) Okay, I had to make a spot ruling last night because the instructions under the Celestial Song of Motion really, truly, don't cover all the uses of this song. To whit, the Mercurian of the Wind, Dylan, decided to teleport a large 17" television set into the chest of the Infernal Intervention Causing Balseraph. And yes, it was rather fatal. Gaaack, fall over, dead. I ruled he could do this, because it was way too funny not to. The instructions say that you can teleport an object. Away. Not into someone or something. Just away. But I, in my infinite wisdom, decided to let it pass. I would like to know: A) What is the ruling on teleporting objects? B) What is the ruling on picking the destination of teleportation? C) Can you teleport something into someone? This is just future knowledge - at this point I set a precident, and I'm going to let it just run like this. - - Em, Happy Fun Balseraph! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 11:05:22 -0400 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Robb Kidd wrote: > > Thomas Davidson wrote: > > > Ben-Prime wrote: > > > So I download the PDF format character sheets off of the SJG site, > > > and find that they include some fonts that my own system does not. Hence, > > > I get lines of dots in some places where I am reasonably sure I am > > > supposed to have words. > > > > Hmmm... I had a similar problem with the .pdf files. This problem > > went away, however, when I downloaded Acrobat 3.x. It seems that > > the .pdf files use embedded fonts, which Acrobat 2.x doesn't > > interpret very well--Adobe fixed this problem with 3.x. > > Yepper. If you want to view or print PDF documents, you definitely want the > latest Acrobat Reader: http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html Correct. Built with 3.01, so you sort of need the latest Reader (it's free). > I was sort of disappointed that the character sheets were designed to print > at 300dpi. I got them off our, admittedly elderly, network printer and the > graphics were all pokey. Ah well. > In retrospect, I could have gotten away with 150LPI images and not lost much resolution. However, if you've got access to a copier, I'd recommend "print once, copy many times" if your network is being impacted. Odd, though - it was created on a 25Mhz machine and printed on an ancient LaserWriter, and I never had too long of a wait. YMMV. - -- Mark McKenzie ICQ 7946364 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 08:43:25 -0500 From: "David C. Shadle" Subject: Re: IN> 100th Light Infantry > Does the term "away team" come from "Star Trek," or did "Star Trek" > get it from existing military terminology? I think is exsisting military terminology ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 11:47:10 -0400 From: Robb Kidd Subject: Re: IN> Technical difficulties. Mark McKenzie wrote: > Robb Kidd wrote: > > I was sort of disappointed that the character sheets were designed to print > > at 300dpi. I got them off our, admittedly elderly, network printer and the > > graphics were all pokey. Ah well. > > In retrospect, I could have gotten away with 150LPI images and not lost > much resolution. However, if you've got access to a copier, I'd > recommend "print once, copy many times" if your network is being > impacted. Odd, though - it was created on a 25Mhz machine and printed on > an ancient LaserWriter, and I never had too long of a wait. YMMV. Actually, they printed plenty fast. The final output, though, even at 300dpi, had "pokey" graphics -- by that I mean that the printed flaming-feather(tm) image wasn't very crisp. This could be our rather geriatric HP LaserJet III. I'm going to run one through our new, flashy 5si and see what comes out. - -- Robert Kidd - Closer to Oppenheimer ... The Eleventh Brain -- http://pagina.de/ipslore ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 12:31:22 -0400 From: Brandon Quina Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking > *Nods* Yep, there is errata for that already up on the appropriate > page. What it _doesn't_ mention is what LEVEL Furfur's Angry Discord > is at. Remembering that it cannot go *below* the level it originated > as when he "Fledged" as a 7-Force demon, I'd reckon it would probably > be two, or possibly more if Furfur added to it in his own inimitable > way, to three or four levels of Angry perchance. Be afraid. Be very > afraid. Hmm. So the Errata needs to be errated?? ::giggles:: Ive done stuff like that, though. Kobal-isq moments of our lives. (DAD) "Where are the matches, brandon?" (ME) "In the drawer" (DAD) "Which drawer?" (ME) "That drawer, you know. In the kitchen." (DAD) "There are lots of drawers in the kitchen." (ME) "The.. Nevermind, ill just show you." - -- (lore@tmgbbs.com) \|/// Zzzzzzzzzzzz Brandon Lance Quina (- -) ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:02:02 +0100 From: "David Chart" Subject: Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control - --On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 12:18 am -0400 "David Edelstein" wrote: > Very few things are so black and white, either in > the real world or in the In Nomine world, that you can state as a fact that > one position or another is the Heavenly or Infernal one. Thus, I found > labeling the 2nd Amendment as a diabolical contrivance to engineer > bloodshed to be simplistic. Who said there wasn't an Angel as well? The demon used the Amendment to provoke masses of bloodshed, the angel uses it to keep government aggression in check. Just because I didn't *write* the angel doesn't mean he doesn't exist, even in my personal world of In Nomine. Nor, in fact, does my presenting a demon (a Balseraph, no less) imply that I agree with everything (anything) he says. I agree that virtually nothing is that black and white, and that was actually the general point I had. I've not managed to render it down from a long rambling burble yet, though. David Chart Balseraph Knight of Nitpicking Seraph Servitor of Destiny ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:01:00 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Angels & Gun Control On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 12:08:00PM -0400, Walter Milliken wrote: > However, I've been pretty much convinced that the IN world is a little > more violence-heavy than the real world -- with Shedim running around, > you'd think the incidence of serial killers and the like would be higher > than it actually is. The question of how different the IN world is to the real world is something that's pretty important to work out when you're thinking about who runs which operations where. To use the Troubles in Northern Ireland as an example, I'd say that if in the IN universe casualty levels are similar to here, that most of the demons involved in trying to keep them going are Servitors of Factions. (Bringing to mind Brendan Behan's joke that at any meeting of the Republican movement, the first item on the agenda was the split.) If demons of Death were involved, the death toll would probably be a lot higher. As it stands, traffic accidents were killing more people than the Troubles even before the ceasefire, except possibly for exceptional years like 1972. (I seriously doubt that in the IN universe, Celestials wouldn't be involved in such a conflict, no matter how minor it is in the grand scheme of things.) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:06:57 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Risk On Sun, Apr 26, 1998 at 07:14:10PM -0400, Richard L Thomas wrote: >> There is a solution to such Will problems: the Song of Charm. If said demon >> finds that the person involved is an angel, or resists his resonance, then >> use a Song of Celestial Charm (something _so_ incredibly useful everyone >> should learn it) a time or two to soften up their Will, then bounce the >> resonance on them again. > > Actually I was looking for a disturbance free method. You can't have everything. And I dislike the use of Risk with resonance in most cases. I tend to think of the special resonance rules in the Players' Guides as uses of Risk in many instances. I would note that the use of Celestial Charm with resonances is especially useful for Balseraphs who want to resonate on themselves in order to cure Dissonance. The resonance roll can be boosted with Essence. It causes an unfortunate amount of disturbance, but there's always a price to pay. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:16:09 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 11:49:02AM +0200, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Andrew Frades wrote: > > > He took this to mean that it would be dissonant for him to start a fight, thus > > not quite his choice. Yes. And of course Malakim of Destiny may not perform an action that moves someone closer to his/her Fate, and Malakim of Flowers may not use violence when it is unnecessary (an interesting dilemma there). Malakim of Dreams have to try to ensure that any dreamscapes they're fighting in don't move to the Nightmares side. And if there's a good chance you'll lose the fight, then it's not dissonant not to fight, because that isn't destroying evil, it's just committing suicide. Malakim of Fire might be an exception to the above, since they can be assigned targets. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:24:35 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> 3 questions On Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 12:23:55AM -0400, gantr@nku.edu wrote: Malakim are not anymore fearsome than > > another choir of Angel. In fact I think an Ofanite of War is the most > > Deadly (Angel that is). > I have to nitpick this on rules grounds (the attitude grounds are well-covered). Admittedly, the Malakite resonance is probably the least useful in combat of angelic resonances (close behind Mercurian), though it is the best demon spotter by a long way. But IMO, the single most powerful Choir attunement in combat is the Malakim of Protection attunement (from Heaven & Hell), which allows you to keep fighting when other Celestials would be in comas, and allows you to take all of your positive hits in damage in one round without being stunned, while laughing at the Songs of Thunder and Celestial Entropy your enemies are trying to hit you with. Standing and fighting at -15 hits is weird, but fun. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:39:09 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Re: Princess of Nitpicking (was Re: GRAMMAR (Re: Fuzzy? (was Re: Character taxonomy))) On Mon, Apr 27, 1998 at 11:24:27AM -0400, IceHeart EvenFall wrote: > At 05:48 PM 4/24/98 -0500, you wrote: > wouldn't it in fact be another level entirely? nitpicking the Princess of > Nitpicking herself would (at least in my mind) count as impressive a feat > as nitpicking some of the following... > I've explained this before, but I think some of you are new to the list so I'll do it again. Words, in order to exist, must have a focus. In the case of Nitpicking, the focus is mistakes and inaccuracy. Without those, there could be no such thing as Nitpicking. Also, given the Djinn of Nitpicking attunement, it is inconceivable that my Princess could possibly have made such a mistake by accident. The logical conclusion is that it was a test, and quite clearly it was an effective one which attracted new Servitors and furthered her Word. Yes, I want the Knight distinction. I also managed to get a Seraph (well, she claims to be a Seraph) to admit to dissonant behaviour (I have records) and nitpick in a language I don't understand. Because I have my own Word to further, I'm introducing other bits of Nitpicking which don't deserve a post of their own. The plural of geas is indeed geasa, in the nominative case. Geas is itself the genitive plural and not the singular, which is geis. (I finally decided to consult the dictionaries I have at home.) I note in passing that GURPS Celtic myth alleges that Irish pronunciation is not phonetic. It is. It just doesn't use the same phonetic scheme as English, which is hardly a model of phoneticism itself. The first Habbalite is called Camael in the APG and Caimael in the IPG. The wording of Djinn of Theft in the IPG contradicts the definition of people in the main rulebook, which is defined as including Celestials as well as humans. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 13:32:59 -0400 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> The Demon of Gun Control >Who said there wasn't an Angel as well? The demon used the Amendment to >provoke masses of bloodshed, the angel uses it to keep government aggression >in check. It hardly seems logical to me that any angel would support the existance of guns. Of course I am a pacifist, a condition viewed almost like mental illness here in America. - -Jesse ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 22:47:30 -0800 From: Armand Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions >In a message dated 4/28/98 8:23:52 PM, hailes@senet.com.au writes: > >> In follow up to my assignment of actors to Archangels I am now auditioning >>for the Lords of Hell, this time instead of doing it myself I will approve >>recommendations from those on the list. So lets do lunch, oh yeah, we'll >>start off with the first three, Andrealphus, Asmodeus and Beleth. >> Remember, if the actor or actress is obscure, refer to which movie he/she >>starred in, and have fun :) >> Simon >Leonardo diCaprio (Andrephalus) >Al Pachino (Asmodeus) >Sigourney Weaver (Beleth) >Kenneth Brannaugh (Baal) >John Malkovich (Belial) > So I added a couple, so send the Game after me... > Mark I'm tempted to send the Game after you for the Leonard diCaprio casting. That would be like casting Barney as Saminga, and we all know how bad that would be. Armand Ofanim of Get Me Away From the Titanic Furvor! NOW! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:01:32 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> IN Mapboard Combat On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 02:00:33AM -0700, David Streeter wrote: > > I was running Feast of Blades, and when we got to a combat, I decided to > roll out the mapboard to make it more interesting (I *detest* > non-mapboard combat). > I think non-mapboard is better because of the Fog of War. Most of the time you don't have the luxury of picking optimum range and so forth, though mapboards are obviously appropriate when you have time to plan, or are in a Mexican standoff. > >From the GM screen, I ran the combat as rounds with a number of phases: > > 1> "Magic Phase" (it was easier for the AD&D player to understand that, > rather than "Resonance, Song and Attunement phase"), in Perception > order. Attunements which are not constant take effect in the following round, unless stated otherwise. And certain resonances (like the Balseraph one) take longer than others. > 2> "Movement Phase" in Agility order. > 3> "Action Phase" in Agility order (you could not act here if you had > already acted in the Magic Round). > 4> "Dodge Phase" > > Two main gripes: > > a> Movement rates seemed inordinately large compared to weapon ranges. I > used a scale of 1 hex = 6 yards (such that you move your agility in > hexes). For most weapons, penalities to hit were -2 per hex or more. > Most of the time, you shouldn't have that much space to manoeuvre in, though. Combat tends to take place in alleys and small rooms. And running should give a heavy penalty to the runner's to hit roll. > b> Combined with a>, low agility characters moved later than high > agility characters, when moving second is a distinct advantage. It meant > that high-agility characters could never catch up to low agility ones. > Then reverse the initiative order. Or do what White Wolf does. Have actions declared in reverse initiative order and performed in initiative order. > I think both these problems might be solved if the movement round were > in reverse agility order. However, with non-simultaneous damage, moving > last and firing first might be too much of an advantage to high agility > characters. I might make damage simultaneous. Damage is simultaneous in standard IN, as is movement. The only exception is the Ofanim of War attunement. Then again, high Agility > characters will have a low precision, so simultaneous damage might not > be necessary. > Define high Agility. :) I don't think any of my Celestials have more than 7 Agility, but I don't deviate often from 3/3/3, and have no Celestials with 4 Corporeal Forces. > Another thing I noticed: being stunned is BAD. > Isn't that cool? (I've suffered from it on more than a few occasions. It's worse when you're the only effective Corporeal Combat character in the group and you're against two Malakim of War.) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "He was wont moreover to complain openly of the condition of the times wherein he lived, as not being renowned by any public calamities...And, at times, he wished for some terrible carnage of his armies, a famine, a pestilence, conflagrations, or an earthquake." ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #735 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.