From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu May 7 17:06:08 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 RAA25802 for ; Thu, 7 May 1998 17:06:07 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id RAA31926 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 7 May 1998 17:04:51 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:04:51 -0500 Message-Id: <199805072204.RAA31926@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 #764 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, May 7 1998 Volume 01 : Number 764 In this digest: Re: IN> In Nomine character maximums Re: IN> Lying (was Re: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) Re: IN> More Questions. Re: IN> The Original Seven Re: IN> One can never have too much nit-picking...(was Re: Demon Prince Audition) IN> Forces maxing out too soon? IN> Seraphic Dodging Re: IN> Two NPCS for your perusal Re: IN> More Questions. Re: IN> Writing Canon Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions (Re: Angels and Dicey Words) Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions (Re: Angels and Dicey Words) IN> Fluff! (Re: Writing Canon) Re: IN> Djinn - hurting their attunements IN> In Nomine Character Maximums (Re: Two NPCS for your perusal) I have a secret to tell....(was Re: IN> One can never have too much nit-picking...(was Re: Demon Prince Audition)) IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. Re: IN> Writing Canon Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions Re: IN> Re: New SWM GM seeks advice Re: IN> In Nomine character maximums Re: IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. Re: IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:13:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine character maximums On Thu, 7 May 1998, Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > Emcouraging growth in other areas is pretty simple - change the costs. If > it costs twice as much as now to get a new Force, I think most players > would buy Songs or Skills instead. :) In my game, the players always do seem to gravitate towards improving Songs and Skills for a paltry 1 pt each than characteristics for a whopping 3 points each (especially since they don't usually get more than 4 points per adventure). I've also made it clear that you can NOT just spend 10 points and get a Force. IF you save up the 10 points, you can ASK your Superior to graft a new Force onto you. If you don't think he'll do it, then just raise your attributes...hence, most Forces in my game cost 12 points each. As I've mentioned, I also like to give the players stuff from their Superiors. This is a GREAT game balance device--it's always something they'll like and use, but it's always something that I'm not gonna sweat over. And if I want to give them something but I feel it's too powerful, sometimes I'll work out a deal with the player. "Hmm...hey, Todd? I think Kobal might be willing to give you that artifact you dealt with earlier, but it's a bit too expensive for me to just GIVE you. If you're willing to chip in half the cost, say 4 points...? Good. Okay, Kobal casually tosses the sphere to you, 'Here. I've got a hundred of these stupid things already; go make some trouble with it.' You catch it in your oily folds and smile...just spend those 4 character points to attune to it." Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 20:15:37 +0100 (BST) From: Steve Jessop Subject: Re: IN> Lying (was Re: IN> Seraphim and the TRUTH. (help!) On Thu, 7 May 1998, Kevin Walsh wrote: > Someone else can explain Kyriotates, because I don't feel up to it. I am not convinced that Kyriotates really belong in Heaven. They are supposed to continually experience different points of view, their resonance being 'multiplicity' rather than 'possession'. Clearly they can't do that in Heaven, since in canon they cannot maintain more than one celestial form even there. I big-time don't understand why it was Jordi who 'invented' vessels (APG), but Kyrios in general can't use them, and he doesn't give animal vessels to his own Kyrios (I think). Confusion. Perhaps that is the point: Kyrios can confuse the heck out of people equally in Heaven or on Earth. Steve. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:08:18 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> More Questions. At 9:55 AM -0700 5/7/98, Alloni Kramer wrote: >Sigh. > > >How do you pronounce Yves? Apparently, "Eve." I sometimes try to slur a "Yeve" into it, but not always. Weird. >Can celestials change Words? (Not just the Word changing meaning, but >actually saying, "I'm getting tired of being the Demon of That Gunk You Rub >Out Of Your Eyes Every Morning. I want something more messy... like being >the Demon of Bloody Eyeballs! Yeah!") Ah, you want the IPG, don't you... p. IPG92: "Once you have a Word you're usually stuck with it, though LUcifer can always change it, for good or ill. He rarely does this on request, though. Given this block to further advancement, some ambitious demons have creatively interpreted their Words to wisen their scope...or engineered a whole new meaning. The Demon of Spam is a *lot* more powerful since the Internet adopted the word for junk e-mail, and he now reports to Nybbas rather than Haagenti." Generally, a celestial, once bound to a Word, *becomes* that Word to a large extent. It is part of him, and he can no more ask for it to be removed than a Malakite can ask for an oath to be stripped from him. >This is less a question of "Is it possible?" (since you're talking about >the Council of Seraphim or Lucifer, depending), and more a question of "Is >it ever done?" It is done sometimes, but it is rare. >Do you create a disturbance if you are in a vessal, sitting on a park >bench, and a kid on a bicycle rides by, trips on your outstretched legs, >flips over, and breaks his neck? Yes. >Do you create one if you are standing by the road, and a kid on a bicycle >rides by, turns his head to look at you, accidentally rides into a sewer >grate, flips over, and breaks his neck? No. >Do you create one if you tell the kid to ride out into traffic and he does so? Probably not. >What if you do so by means of some sort of compulsion? Maybe -- comes into a GM call, here. If you did it by being a Shedite and possessing him, then yes. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:19:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: IN> The Original Seven - ---Grim88 wrote: > > Six of the original seven have had pretty negative things happen to them. > > Michael was Tried by Dominic. > > Uriel had his Crusade and was Tried by Dominic > > Gabriel has gone insane, left Heaven, and was Tried by Dominic (senseing a > trend here?) > > Eli left Heaven, wiping much of his memories. Dominic would love to get his > hands on him... > Dominic does love his work...wonder if he's got something planned? Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:10:58 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> One can never have too much nit-picking...(was Re: Demon Prince Audition) At 11:33 AM -0700 5/7/98, Graveyard Greg wrote: >---Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> However, you don't want me stopped. I'm the only one standing >> between you and... well, chaos. I mean, would you want Janus >> Line Editing the universe? > >I dunno, Princess Beth...It could make more sense if he did! ;) >Maybe we could have the age old question "Which came first, the >chicken or the egg?" finally answered! Yes, but the next book would have something *else* as the answer. Me, I just tell you it's canon doubt and uncertainty. Besides, you can't blame me for anything until the Liber and the IPG. And a little of the APG. - --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:17:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: IN> Forces maxing out too soon? > Realistically, if a player got 1 point per week on average, I'd say the > average player would buy about 3 points' worth of skills and 3 points' > worth of songs for every attribute they raise. That means about 36 weeks > to raise a Force, which means they max out after over 6 years. > Even beyond that, if Force Escalation becomes a problem, you can have the Superiors cut back on the number of raw character points they give their servitors, and give things worth an equivalent number of character points instead. For significant services, things like attunements are appropriate. However, there are also lots of limited-use not-too-powerful talismans and relics which might be suitable as a reward to servitors. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:28:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: IN> Seraphic Dodging On Thu, 7 May 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >>Actually, intentions don't have to be announced verbally. The expanded > >>rules on the Seraphic resonance state clearly that they can resonate on > >>actions directed toward them. So if somebody makes a feint (directed at > >>the Seraph), and they're resonating on that person, they should pick it > >>up. On a check digit of 4, they should pick up what the other person > >>actually intends to do. > > Limit the amount of Dodge bonus you give the Seraphim, perhaps? If > they only get a +1 or +2, no matter how high their CD in combat, > then Ofanim will be better 4 or 5 times out of 6. (Or something like > that. Math is *not* my strong point.) This is exactly what I would do. A resonating Seraph is immune to feints (really only affects the Bal of War attunement, but I let people feint in my game--for every -1 you take to your roll, they're at -1 to Dodge). On a check digit of 4, they know their opponent's intentions, and get +1 to all Dodges for that fight. On a CD of 6, they get +2. Ofanim are better, yes. :) Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 20:30:19 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Two NPCS for your perusal On Thu, May 07, 1998 at 12:33:41PM -0400, Emily Dresner wrote: > > > Among other things, this imposes a hard limit on experience > > expenditures. If somebody is running a weekly campaign, even a minimal 1 > > pt-per-session award makes possible an 18-Force PC within less than 2 > > years. (Of course, IN hasn't been *out* for quite 2 years yet, has it?) > > My players are going to run into this sooner or later. We'll hit 1 year > in July, running biweekly, and between contributions and sessions, they're > picking up Forces steadily. > Hmm...Mithredath is on 9 sessions and has picked up 1pt of Perception, 1 of Agility, a Level 1 Corporeal Artifact, no new Songs, and no new attunements. At that rate it's conceivable that she'd have a Force by the 26th session (I have 2cps saved up), but I doubt it somewhat. Part of it is that I decided that I should account for stuff I learned during the campaigns by buying, for instance, Area Knowledge: New York and Knowledge: Norse Mythology. Part of it is that the GM doesn't give out experience until the end of the adventure (I suppose chapters would be equivalent in your case), and I can't bear the thought of increasing any stat by 2 steps at once without the intervention of a Superior. I also bought things which I felt that I should have had at character creation but couldn't afford, like Emote, Search, and Alertness. Part of the reason I actually bought two Characteristics up was because when I bought the point in Perception, I couldn't justify increasing any Perception skills to myself when I was spending experience, so I had a bank of points which ended up buying the point in Agility. And I never increased anything I didn't use. She is, incidentally, nowhere near having level 6 skills in anything. The closest she comes is the Song of Ethereal Form at level 4 (though the Ofanite of the Wind attunement gives her an effective Lockpicking/6 and Escape/5). At the end of No Dinero, I sat there bemused at the thought that I had 6 character points to spend, and couldn't justify spending any of them on a Characteristic. I'd recently increased Perception, Will and Strength hadn't really been used, and I didn't think my Precision and Intelligence had really been stretched enough; I don't know if I'll ever decide Mithredath's Precision has been stretched enough to justify increasing it. I realise that none of this is any kind of hard rule, and I haven't been playing her for as long as your players' characters, but this is how I deal with experience. > What we are hoping for is expanded rules or 2nd edition rules which talks > about what happens when you pass the 18 Force limit. I assume something > DOES happen, because upper bounds, frankly, suck. If no rules are > forthcoming, I'll make something up, and use House Rules. > I don't mind upper bounds all that much, possibly because the first RPG I ever played was Vampire: the Dark Ages, where the dot limits are marked very clearly on the character sheet. It's not something I can bring myself to care about. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "In the period of dictatorship, surrounded on all sides by enemies, we sometimes manifested unnecessary leniency and unnecessary softheartedness." N.V. Krylenko. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:39:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> More Questions. On Thu, 7 May 1998, Alloni Kramer wrote: Note that this is all IMC, and may not be canon. > How do you pronounce Yves? Eeves. > Can celestials change Words? (Not just the Word changing meaning, but > actually saying, "I'm getting tired of being the Demon of That Gunk You Rub > Out Of Your Eyes Every Morning. I want something more messy... like being > the Demon of Bloody Eyeballs! Yeah!") Canon answer: It's POSSIBLE, but almost *NEVER* happens. Don't ask for a Word lightly, for you become that word. > If you can never change Words, then that would certainly create a whole lot > of competition for those Words that can possibly be treated in a more > metaphorical sense. (Eventually the Demon of Bloody Eyeballs is going to > realize he got shafted, since there is no metaphorical meaning he can twist > so as to put a new and nifty area under his control.) True. > This is less a question of "Is it possible?" (since you're talking about > the Council of Seraphim or Lucifer, depending), and more a question of "Is > it ever done?" Nope. Both the Seraphim Council and Lucifer tend to get snippy when you've already got a Word and THEN you decide you don't like it. "Tough. " > Do you create a disturbance if you are in a vessal, sitting on a park > bench, and a kid on a bicycle rides by, trips on your outstretched legs, > flips over, and breaks his neck? Yes. You caused it, not him. > Do you create one if you are standing by the road, and a kid on a bicycle > rides by, turns his head to look at you, accidentally rides into a sewer > grate, flips over, and breaks his neck? Nope. He caused it. His free will acting up. > Do you create one if you tell the kid to ride out into traffic and he does so? Nope. That free will thing again. > What if you do so by means of some sort of compulsion? If you use a Resonance or a song, yes. If you just threaten him, no. Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 98 15:52 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Writing Canon > To my chagrin i still don't own the I.P.G. but I did peruse it at my >local gamestore, and low and behold, do I not see a lot of familiar names. >David Edelstein of course, he has writter for In Nomine before, but >Elizabeth McCoy too, and Walter Milliken, all fellow list buddies (we can >discuss the last term later). You left out Maya -- her first stuff got into the IPG, too.... > At first that made me proud, I'd talked with >these people, heard them speak, but it also made me curious, just how could >I get my name in a future In Nomine sourcebook? Well, both Elizabeth and myself have written for SJGames before, just not In Nomine stuff (together: GURPS IOU, myself: an adventure in GURPS Fantasy Adventures, and a bunch of Roleplayer -- Pyramid's predecessor - -- articles). We have also been longtime playtesters for SJGames, and contributed tiny bits and pieces to a lot of books. So we didn't come out of left field. (I actually got shanghaied a little on the IPG, doing a bunch of stuff as last-minute total rewrites to replace some unacceptible sections -- being married to the Line Editor has its dangers....) The general answer to "How do I get to write for SJGames?" is: - read the Writer's Guidelines (online in the SJGames web pages) - make sure you know *all* the relevant published material - write stuff for Pyramid on spec (*good* stuff, I should add....) also: - playtest stuff (hard, for In Nomine, which is mostly closed playtesting for secrecy-of-future-plotlines reasons, but GURPS playtesting experience will help) For In Nomine, you also have to write a sample piece (1000 words or so) of IN work to prove you can do the "look and feel" (this may be the Pyramid article), no matter what else you've done. (I had to do this, even though I'm already an accepted GURPS writer.) I think Elizabeth is now handling first reading on the IN "slushpile", though Scott Haring and Steve Jackson also have to approve new writers, I believe. In at least a couple cases, people have been invited to write for In Nomine based on stuff that wasn't intentionally submitted (Elizabeth was one -- for her In Nomine/IOU crossover on her web page), but this isn't what I'd call a reliable method of getting into it.... As a general rule, expect to start out small and work your way up -- SJGames doesn't particularly like to have unknowns working on large projects, since they don't know at that point how much editing they'll need, or whether they'll work to schedule (or even finish the project at all). Basically, what it boils down to is that the SJGames editors must know your work and trust you to get it done professionally, before you'll be invited to do a major project (or get a major project proposal accepted). There are no sure routes, and no fixed ones, either, but the above is about as close to standard rules as there are, and what I tell everyone who asks this question. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 21:02:07 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions (Re: Angels and Dicey Words) On Thu, May 07, 1998 at 12:09:15PM -0400, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >Of course, I also fail to see why Michael's dissonance is against > >retreating. It's a very Eurocentric view of War, IMO. Throughout history, > >the idea of fighting to the death rather than retreating has been an > >aberration, entirely alien to most military traditions. The whole idea of > >face-to-face combat with genuinely lethal weapons, no quarter asked or > >given is, at least according to John Keegan's History of Warfare, a > >European innovation, and very frightening to non-Europeans. > > I'm not entirely sure if it's *that* recent Well, when I said recent, I was referring to the past 3,000 years or so, which is recent in the context of human existence and angelic history. Combat in some modern-day Stone Age societies (and it is implied in the book that this is representative) is generally marked by extreme ritualism, and infrequency of lethality, more resembling mass duelling than what we'd regard as war. He credits the Greeks and the Celts at various points in the book with the idea of foot melee combat, and notes several cases where Persian forces which were far superior in numbers broke when attacked by Greek phalanxes in which individual fighters preferred to kill rather than make sure they survived. Middle-Eastern tactics, and Chinese tactics too apparently, were focused on making sure that the charioteers, generally the nobility, were given primacy in combat, to the extent of making "roads" on the battlefield before the battle started. From their position in the chariot, it was relatively easy to amass hundreds of kills. He makes other interesting points, such as the strong resemblance the tactics of steppe nomads such as the Mongols bore to flock management techniques. They literally herded their enemies. An interesting book, though there are contradictions and I'm not sure of its reliability. The depiction of the extent of ritual in combat, up to and including the present day (and the harsh things that were done to those who broke ritual, such as archers and especially crossbowmen), certainly casts doubt on the image of War Servitors as necessarily being ultra-practical. Of course, the face of War has changed a lot since the days of the Crusades. - -- I believe I've read > Sagas and such works where the Hero stood until cut down, or until > he cut down all the enemy. (Wow, my English Major background is > good for something after all!) > For what cultures, as a matter of interest? The only saga I'm really familiar with is the Tain, which certainly has a number of scenes like that. But that, of course, is Celtic and Iron Age. > There are some IN notations (some in your future, my past) where Michael > is refered to as the "deposer of tyrants" -- he's the War where the > evil are cast down, and he most loves it when the evil tyrant is cast > down by one (or a small group of) hero(s). After all, he did it to > Lucifer... > Interesting. It's dissonant to take a stand and then back down. If > you are set to hold the pass, then by God you will *hold the pass*. I suppose the main difference is whether you believe the pass worth holding. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "In the period of dictatorship, surrounded on all sides by enemies, we sometimes manifested unnecessary leniency and unnecessary softheartedness." N.V. Krylenko. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:51:16 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions (Re: Angels and Dicey Words) At 2:35 PM -0400 5/7/98, York H. Dobyns wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy writes: > >>Also, it's not dissonant to retreat if there are orders -- "Harry >>them, men. Shoot, take out a few, then run if you get organized >>resistance." It's dissonant to take a stand and then back down. If >>you are set to hold the pass, then by God you will *hold the pass*. >>If you are the defender of Light, then by God you will dropkick that >>Balseraph out of Heaven. > >Um, wasn't the guy he *kicked out* the defender of Light, or at least >the holder of that Word? That's why it needed defending. O;> >While the above is a nice clarification of intent, there's a recursive >problem. Maybe it's been solved by the fact that the Supreme Military >Commander is not Michael, but somebody with different dissonance >conditions. In an all-Michaelite military unit, how can the *commander* >ever order a fighting retreat as described above? Orders are fine, but >*somebody* has to get stuck with issuing them -- and from the >description, it is dissonant for a Michaelite commander to order a >retreat, unless he plans to stand as rearguard himself. If you've hashed it out ahead of time, and it's part of over-all tactics, it's probably fine. But yes, it may be for the best that Michael stepped down! - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 16:13:21 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fluff! (Re: Writing Canon) At 10:51 AM -0700 5/7/98, Graveyard Greg wrote: >---Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> As for who makes the decisions... Me, Scott, and Steve Jackson, >> primarily. Suck up to us all. Well, be polite, at least. All >> the groveling in the world won't help if you just don't have the >> IN feel. Though I'll appreciate the footrubs. >> >> And the Geas/6's don't hurt. > >What kind of Geases (is that the plural?) are being offered today? I don't know -- how many years of your life would you like to sign away? I also accept souls. >And might I offer you a pleasing beverage, Ms. McCoy, Ma'am? :) };) >Seriously, though...thanks for the advice. I didn't even have to ask! >Woo hoo! Ah, but if it filled a Need.... };) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:48:06 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Djinn - hurting their attunements At 10:11 AM -0400 5/7/98, Andrew Frades wrote: >IN p. 143, "... but he can't bring himself to cause it harm by his own >hand." > >IN p. 144, "While attuned to something, the Djinn himself cannot cause >it harm, either physical or emotional. If following his target's >desires brings it to harm, and if the attuned person relieved the demon >of responsibility, then the Djinn acquires no dissonance from the >action." Check errata re: p. IN144. P. 144. In the third paragraph under Game Mechanics, replace ``cannot cause it harm, either physical or emotional'' with ``cannot cause it physical harm''. Why, you ask? Simple. After Night Music, there were just too many points where there was obvious emotional harm from Djinn. Even the vignette implied strongly it was okay. Deleting three words was easier than whole gobs in other books. Mind you, most Djinn don't *care* enough to do *real* emotional harm. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 16:37:26 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> In Nomine Character Maximums (Re: Two NPCS for your perusal) At 12:09 PM -0400 5/7/98, York H. Dobyns wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy writes: > >>The In Nomine Line Editor (that's me) says: No characteristics >>above 12. No Forces over 6. No skill-levels over 6. Anything >>else, please check errata and then tell me about it if it's >>not there, so I can put it there. > >Why? Because those are the rules. They were like that when I got here. Don't blame me. >Among other things, this imposes a hard limit on experience >expenditures. If somebody is running a weekly campaign, even a minimal 1 >pt-per-session award makes possible an 18-Force PC within less than 2 >years. (Of course, IN hasn't been *out* for quite 2 years yet, has it?) If they don't buy anything but Forces, yes, it will start breaking fast. Make them buy ammo for their (Un)Holy Pistols. Get them to pay for more attunements. More skills. More Songs. More artifacts. Servants. Encourage them to have kids. And, eventually, we'll see if there's a "glass-ceiling breaker" in the works. Word-Forces, an idea proposed on the list, *MAY* get used someday. Or not! But still no characteristics over 12. No skill levels over 6. Not in canon. >The rule of "no skills over 6" produces the extremely unsightly kludge >that animals can violate the skill-limit, in order to compensate for the >rotten characteristics they have by virtue of their low Forces. I defy >anyone who has ever opened a can of tuna in a cat-inhabited household to >maintain with a straight face that the critters have Will and Per of 0. { Cats keep their Celestial Forces in a hyperspace pocket and are not soul-killable. Celestials, unable to soul-kill them, declare that they have no Celestial Forces. They are wrong. } Animals kluge, yes. Deal with it or house-rule it, but don't bug me, it was like this when I got it... Mind you, anything that's a house rule, that's labled as knowingly out of canon, etc., I don't care about -- I even like to see out of canon stuff. (Em's Lilim take actual pregnancy. They're not canon, but *who cares*! They're cool!) You do what you want in your games, and report back so that others can tell what's a good idea and what isn't, and I am utterly cool. - --Beth, in a very demonic mood right now. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:40:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: I have a secret to tell....(was Re: IN> One can never have too much nit-picking...(was Re: Demon Prince Audition)) - ---Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Yes, but the next book would have something *else* as the answer. > > Me, I just tell you it's canon doubt and uncertainty. > > Besides, you can't blame me for anything until the Liber and > the IPG. And a little of the APG. > > --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > > > Let me say FOR the RECORD that I blame you for nothing, because I like the supplements overall! :) So, if I blame you for anything, it's that you have too much of a good thing! :) Heck, I believe you CAN'T have too much of a good thing, anyway! That is my two cents--take it or take it! :) Graveyard Greg - --wants to be the Angel of Comic Books _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:11:24 -0400 From: "David H. W. de Jong" Subject: IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. I just downloaded the INPCANG.PDF and INPCDEM.PDF character sheet files from the SJG resources page, and viewed them on an Acrobat Reader v2.1. The background and layout look fabulous, but unfortunately the three force headings, and the words 'Essence' and 'Dissonance' appear as black dots. I get two warnings when opening the file. First "an unrecognized token 'gs' was found", then "Unable to find or create the font 'CKLBCL+Morpheus'. Some characters may not display or print correctly." Can anybody send me a version of these PC sheets with the Morpheus font embeded in the PDF? According to the Adobe home page, this can be done using the Acrobat PDF Writer or Distiller. Failing that, or if this was already done, can anyone help me add the Morpheus font to my reader, to try and fix the problem from my end? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! 0;) David de Jong (905) 522-2067 dejongdh@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 98 17:15 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Writing Canon >Humor is tricky. Good, dry humor may be okay -- or we may think >it comes out as lame. Accept this and don't feel bad if you >submit humor and it gets rejected as campy. I'll note here that a bunch of my semi-humorous stuff for Liber Reliquarum got dropped. So it goes.... >Bear in mind that I may be abrupt, cruel, and will scrutinize your >firstborn material and nitpick it. I am the Demon Princess of >Nitpicking. Accept this and be glad that you are giving me Essence. >(I nitpick *myself*, frankly.) And me, too.... >Cultivate a detachment between your stuff and you. It's hard. I'm >still not good at it. (I cannot edit my own stuff clearly. Fortunately, >I have a spouse.) And she edits my stuff. I think it's pretty much a rule that you can't edit your own work beyond a certain point (i.e., making sure it's real English....). Even Steve Jackson, who is a *very* good editor, needs someone else to look at his own stuff. You also have to learn that the editor will sometimes disagree with you, and that *they* get to decide what gets printed. You will sometimes think they're arbitrary, but you have to live with the fact that they're higher up the food chain.... In general, I haven't been unhappy with what's been done to my own deathless prose by SJGames editors. And sometimes things just get cut for space reasons -- most SJGames authors seem to write long, and editors have to chop. You learn to live with it. > All >the groveling in the world won't help if you just don't have the >IN feel. Or write in crayon... a *lot* of people want to write, and most of those think they can do it well. A small fraction really can *well*. Must be demonic influence. Most important, don't expect to sell stuff right away, and learn from your mistakes. Many editors (if they have the time) will try to point out where you went wrong when they reject something. Likewise, when you do sell something, and it gets edited, learn from what the editor did -- they're usually trying to make things clearer and more consise. Writing is something that definitely improves with practice, if you make the effort. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:20:01 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Michael's Dissonance Conditions >From: Steve Jessop > >On Thu, 7 May 1998, York H. Dobyns wrote: > >> In an all-Michaelite military unit, how can the *commander* ever order a >> fighting retreat as described above? Orders are fine, but *somebody* has >> to get stuck with issuing them -- and from the description, it is >> dissonant for a Michaelite commander to order a retreat, unless he plans >> to stand as rearguard himself. > >e) Retreat doesn't mean 'fall back' it means 'abandon a cause.' Hence it >applies to all sorts of things as well as actual physical fighting. This is what I use in my own game. The dissonance condition applies to any conflict; being overmatched or defeated isn't dissonant, but giving up is. If an angel of War is directly opposed by a Demon Prince, then she isn't expected to face him in open battle, but she is expected to harry him and hurt his schemes as much as she is able. She can't just give up, either through simple surrender or by deciding to go out in a blaze of glory: she has to do what is best for her aim. Note that this is modulo the situation. For example, if the angel and Baal are contending for the soul of a human, and she thinks that seeing a hopelessly overmatched angel stand and fight anyway will inspire the human to resist the Prince of the War, then it's dissonant to flee. But if she's the only angel in a town with a gang of demons trying to poison the water supply, then knowingly entering a losing battle *is* dissonant, since her task is to defend the humans and she is abandoning it. (If the only hope is a battle at bad odds, then she can't not do it.) The quote that best describes the angels of Michael is one of G.K. Chesterton's: "All the virtues are courage in the moment of decision." Note that this relies *a lot* on the character's mental state; I think that the only way to assess this reasonably is to let the player decide when the PC is hit with dissonance. (Of course, Elohim are already like this, so it's not too big a deal.) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 98 17:29 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Re: New SWM GM seeks advice >I will be running this campaign for angels, who also want to try being >demons. I hope these are separate characters -- the notion of angels who *want* to be demons is a little... weird. > I am planning on using a couple of recurring NPC's, but >unfortunately the Infernal PGuide is not available at my local supply >store. To start doing demonic NPCs, you probably don't need it. It does have some good stuff in it on the demonic mindset which may be helpful, along with a lot of other expanded material (OK, so I wrote some of it, so I'm biased). But if you start with just the core rules, you should have enough to work with -- especially if you read the vignettes and sample characters for clues on demonic (and angelic) thinking. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:38:57 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine character maximums >From: Emily Dresner > >> Do you want a bell curve? These are spirits, not people we are talking >> about. I could see spirits not having a bellcurve at all. Besides, >> the transformation to Archangel is a state change. A serivator >> might simply be unable to be bigger than 18 forces. > >Well, no. It was just an example of a system which worked well, in my >vast and utterly unhumble opinion. I seriously hated Runequest and Nephilim's mechanics; was CoC any different? I have found that even otherwise good systems tend to have remarkably broken experience mechanics (Jovian Chronicles/Heavy Gear and Feng Shui both come to mind). IN, though I love it, *starts* with a broken set of rules -- I really don't think that it's possible to come up with a minimal-GM-attention-needed experience system. The limits in IN are there because the system simply stops working at high levels. In fact, I would be willing to suggest that the limits are set /too high/ as it is, given the nature of the d666 mechanic. That said, I will cheerily ignore it and suggest some ideas for a "high-level" In Nomine game. The observation that comes to mind first is that 18-Force celestials just don't seem that powerful. Sure, if it goes up against a tank platoon it will probably win, but for a cosmic entity it's really not all that impressive. The trouble is that high levels of attributes and skills kill the die mechanic. The basic idea I have is that rather than changing the mechanics, let high Forces represent a qualitative change in what can be done with your ability. Your stats are still maxed out at 12, but what you can do with them changes. F'ex, a character with a ton of Corporeal Forces isn't just insanely hard, but can transcend the limits of the physical universe -- an Ofanite might start to be able to beat a radio transmission to a bomb, or a Calabite might start using his resonance on physical laws in addition to physical objects. (Likewise with Eth and Cel forces, though what's possible or not is GM dependent.) The celestial would still roll the same dice as before, it's just that the GM would allow a bigger class of actions as reasonable, though likely extreme actions would roll at a big penalty that gets smaller as your Force pile increases. And, any use of transcendant power likely causes enormous amounts of disturbance. (Now you know why superiors cause a big noise when they show.) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:46:01 -0400 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: Re: IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. David H. W. de Jong wrote: > > I just downloaded the INPCANG.PDF and INPCDEM.PDF character sheet files > from the SJG resources page, and viewed them on an Acrobat Reader v2.1. There's your problem. You need the 3.0 Reader, available for free from the Adobe website (http://www.adobe.com). These files were created with Exchange 3, and some of the features (for instance, complete support for embedded fonts) are not backwards-compatible. This process was selected to minimize file size, since the PDFs were for web download. - -- Mark McKenzie markadv@kinekom.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:50:27 -0400 From: "Mark McKenzie" Subject: Re: IN> Need help with pdf character sheet fonts. This is the second time in recent days someone with an older Reader version has had this problem. Can someone add a link to the Adobe site and a note that the v.3 Reader is required to the SJG webpage where these PDFs are posted? Thanks. - -- Mark McKenzie (apparently) Impudite of Uncooperative PDFs, beginning to regret the whole thing markadv@kinekom.com ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #764 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.