From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sat May 13 03:34:01 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 DAA23048 for ; Sat, 13 May 2000 03:34:01 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id DAA23818 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sat, 13 May 2000 03:33:14 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 03:33:14 -0500 Message-Id: <200005130833.DAA23818@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 #1624 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, May 13 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1624 In this digest: Re: IN> New Angels Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> Quick Question Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Re: IN> Quick Question IN> Another In Nomine crossover IN> Derek Pearcy interview IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> Quick Question Re: IN> Another In Nomine crossover Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> Quick Question Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Re: IN> House combat system - comments wanted. Re: IN> House combat system - comments wanted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:35:19 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> New Angels At 9:28 PM -0500 5/11/00, Kiara S. Legner wrote: > > > Actually, my game, my numbers. And most of the angels in my game >fledge. It's rare to have them crated whole cloth. That's my campaign style too. And Relievers, Gremlins and Imps seem to be spawned from the symphony itself, rather like the spontaneous generation theories that used to say rotting meat caused flies to appear from nothingness. As a result, created angels (or demons, more rarely) usually regard their creator as their parents, and have a closer relationship to them. There's also a good number of Celestial/Celestial joinings facilitated by a Superior in this way, as per the APG. (Which makes Novalis *very* popular among Angelic Lovers, and Lilith Hobson's Choice for Infernal ones -- or Angelic/Infernal crossbreeds....) - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:54:15 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) > Surely you've heard that hummingbirds hum because they don't know the Words? Oh, ok. I get it now... Actually no, I'd never heard it before. See, a hummingbird in French is "un collibris" (not sure about the spelling), and it doesn't have anything to do with the word "humming". Plus, you don't use this word everyday in software engineering... Thanks! Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:53:14 -0400 From: neelk@cswcasa.com Subject: Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form O. S. Kerr wrote: > > > IMC, Novalis's celestial form was a lion about the size of > > an elephant, with flowers blooming wherever one of her feet > > touched the ground, followed by a great host of wild beasts > > of all types. Anyone looking at her can tell that she's > > obviously strong enough to rip apart continents, and ferocious > > enough that no one could stop her if she wanted to -- but > > she -chooses- otherwise. > > Just a guess, but have you ever read any C.S. Lewis...? :) Yes, Aslan from Narnia was one of the inspirations. The Space Trilogy (especially the first one, _Out of the Silent Planet_) helped me flesh out what was going on in the rest of the universe, and I shamelessly stole from _The Great Divorce_ to explain the structure and functioning of the lower Heavens. My next game is probably going to owe more to caper flicks and criminal comedies than to Christian apologies, though. I've discovered I have a soft spot for whiny, codependent, self- involved and pathetic demons who are utterly out of their depth. :) - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@cswcasa.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:58:30 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form neelk@cswcasa.com wrote: > IMC, Novalis's celestial form was a lion about the size of > an elephant, with flowers blooming wherever one of her feet > touched the ground, followed by a great host of wild beasts > of all types. Given that Novalis is one of the more firmly-gendered AAs, and feminine, is her celestial form really a lion, or a lioness? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 08:04:44 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Novalis' Celestial Form >From: neelk@cswcasa.com >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > >My next game is probably going to owe more to caper flicks and >criminal comedies than to Christian apologies, though. I've >discovered I have a soft spot for whiny, codependent, self- >involved and pathetic demons who are utterly out of their >depth. :) > Join the dark side :) I've always had a soft spot for really pathetic demons. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 11:09:11 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Laurent wrote: > > > Surely you've heard that hummingbirds hum because they don't know the Words? > > Oh, ok. I get it now... > Actually no, I'd never heard it before. See, a hummingbird in French is "un > collibris" (not sure about the spelling), and it doesn't have anything to do > with the word "humming". Plus, you don't use this word everyday in software > engineering... Collibris, collibris. Nice name for an angel possibly. What's French for 'butterfly'? - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:11:42 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) > Collibris, collibris. Nice name for an angel possibly. >What's French for 'butterfly'? Papillion, I believe. Probably a stray accent floating around as well. - -- Andrew Hackard /\ "My money and my Promotional Writer /()\ [CENSORED] go to Steve Jackson Games / \ Illuminati University" andrew@sjgames.com /______\ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 08:17:38 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) >From: John Karakash >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > > Collibris, collibris. Nice name for an angel possibly. >What's French for 'butterfly'? > Papillon jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 11:29:53 EDT From: "Angela Smythe" Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question Thanks everybody for your answers. I feel ready to GM for my munckins. Angela ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 11:30:57 -0400 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) Jo Hart wrote: > > Collibris, collibris. Nice name for an angel possibly. > >What's French for 'butterfly'? > > > > Papillon Duh, I should have remembered that one. Thanks! - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:01:16 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) At 11:09 AM -0400 5/12/00, John Karakash wrote: > Collibris, collibris. Nice name for an angel possibly. >What's French for 'butterfly'? Papillon, which is also the name of a Steve McQueen/Dustin Hoffman movie about escaping from Devil's Island. It's perhaps the best escape movie ever made. Devil's Island. Hmmmmm.... - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 17:05:27 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) >> What's French for 'butterfly'? > Papillion, I believe. Probably a stray accent floating around as well. it's "papillon" with only one "i". And no accent. Laurent. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 11:34:29 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) >it's "papillon" with only one "i". And no accent. Thanks! My fallible memory lets me down again. Twice, even: the Latin is "papilio", one L. - -- Andrew Hackard /\ "My money and my Promotional Writer /()\ [CENSORED] go to Steve Jackson Games / \ Illuminati University" andrew@sjgames.com /______\ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 18:35:01 +0100 From: "Genevieve Cogman" Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question - -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth McCoy To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: 12 May 2000 13:58 Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question >On the other other hand, being inside a zombi would probably be >about as disgusting to the Kyriotate as the time the Kyrio of >Destiny possessed a Remnant! (I ruled (*), for the twitch-value, >that the Kyrio of Destiny attunement doesn't work on Remnants. >(Izzit canon? No. It's just my suggestion.) It was quite nicely >freaked out and in fact depossessed the person quickly. It did >possss him again later, but with much in-character "ick!"ing.) >(* Maya was co-GMing and I don't remember which of us suggested >that the attunement shouldn't work on a Remnant, but I think we >were both fairly enthusiastic about it... (Maya, am I right, or >am I side-slipped again?)) You are correct -- we both agreed on it. Seemed entirely appropriate. And yes, the freak-out factor was most gratifying. - --- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 14:02:14 EDT From: Samovar3@aol.com Subject: IN> Another In Nomine crossover I've been tempted/convinced by Moe to share this with the list. It was originally inspired by the "Obi-Wan as a Balseraph" article on the INC (by someone who I forgot the name of), but it started to take a life of it's own after that. Consider this a possiblity for Stellar Inquistions! I've thought about doing an In Nomine/Star Wars crossover. However, I tend to a somewhat darker tone in my games, with perhaps a dimmer contrast, so these questions came to me: Why do you think it's called the "Rebellion?" Aren't they fighting for Freedom? Doesn't the Empire want to impose unity and order on the galaxy at any cost? Rather a bit like Stone, don't you say? Isn't it funny how the Empire curtailed the freedom of the press and restricted the flow of information? Isn't it also interesting that while the Empire used tried-and-true equipment, the Rebellion often used jury-rigged stuff that was experimental in nature? If you've seen Episode One, don't you think that the Senate Chambers (a symbol of the Old Republic) were a place that several divisions and factions were made? Do you think it was an accident that Vader said "Come with me, Luke, it is your _destiny_!" or was there a further purpose to it? In the planned writeup (which I'll get around to doing someday), I wouldn't put all the AAs and DPs on one side or the other. I think it's a bit fresher to split them up. So, as a start, the following would be for the Rebellion: Lilith (they are fighting for freedom) Novalis (joined after they blew up the pacifist planet of Alderaan, one of her tethers) Nybbas (the media crackdown was no coincidence, it was aimed at this Prince's growing power) Andrealpheus (most of his allies are here, so he joined. Besides, his servitors and soldiers are roughly treated and used by the Empire's military.) Malphas (it's another faction, and the unity of the Empire is nauseating to him) Vapula (the Empire is too static and unimaginative in a technological sense for him. Plus, all his ideas get thrown out by the bureaucrats in charge as "too dangerous.") Laurence (he's not so idealistic that he believes the Empire's propaganda. Plus, he's upset that the Jedi were killed off since they were an order of soldiers of his.) Valefor (who do you think helped steal the Death Star plans? The Rebels end up stealing quite a bit, and they're hailed as heroes for it!) Kronos (he's supporting the Rebellion because Yves supports the Empire.) Blandine (to her, the Rebellion brings hope. That's something she supports.) Alaemon (having people keep secrets about being members appealed to him. Rebel Intelligence is his.) Jordi (vaguely on this side. He opposes the human bias that the Empire brings. He supports alien rights, which are vaguely under his Word.) The Empire: David (the New Order is his creation. It brings unity and keeps people together.) Janus (the Old Republic was around for _way_ too long. The Empire is something new and it brings change.) Baal (the Imperial military. Nuff said.) Asmodeus (Imperial Intelligence is his and Dominic's. They're finally working together openly.) Dominic (see Asmodeus.) Jean (having a powerful centralized government allows him to have more control over technological progress. He couldn't resist it.) Saminga (he gets to kill things. And the others don't stop him!) Belial (who do you think pushed for the Death Star?) Litheroy (he liked revealing the corruption of the Old Republic. He thinks that revealing Rebel agents is a good thing.) Eli (he helps Jean create a lot of the Empire's stuff. He just doesn't care about the chaos that's being kicked up.) Yves (that quote was just too damning.) Christopher (follows his patrons. He also says the Imperial orphanges have done a lot of good for the children.) The Neutrals: Kobal (thinks the whole thing is hilarious.) Haagenti (is leaning towards the Empire, because the Rebellion is trying to conserve it's goods, but is following Kobal's lead for now.) Gabriel (thinks the Empire is too cruel to work with it, but will not work with the DPs in the Rebellion.) Beleth (she benefits from the fear and terror that both sides cause. Though she's leaning towards the Empire, just because Blandine is working with the Rebellion.) Michael (doesn't like the loss of fighting individuality that the Empire has caused, though doesn't agree with the Rebellion.) Zadakiel (tries to protect everyone and is too busy to take a side.) Marc (the restrictions the Empire has put on trade and the piracy the Rebellion resorts to has kept him from either side.) Mammon (is playing off of both sides.) Furfur (has been kicked out of the Rebellion for being too violent and dangerous. He ends up creating radical splinter groups that like blowing things up for no real reason.) I think I got somewhat carried away with this. Any comments, questions, or thoughts will be welcome. Sam ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 13:36:48 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Derek Pearcy interview Probably of only mild interest (it's old, and he talks more about INWO than In Nomine), but I just discovered an interview with Derek Pearcy by a German gaming magazine. The interview is in German: http://www.pegasus.de/ringbote/Interviews/DerekPearcy.html but you can get a pretty fair translation by feeding it into Babelfish (http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/ ). This would be a real handy tool if one had pages from the French or German editions of IN available in HTML... - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:06:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 19:35:49 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another one) At 3:41 PM -0400 5/11/00, neelk@cswcasa.com wrote: >>One thing that's always bugged me is the portrayal >>of angels of flowers as fragile, ethereal beings who >>couldn't possibibly cope with the rigours of Real >>Life. >Tried http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/maher2.html ? O:> > --Beth _Quite_ nice. Add my voice to those begging SJG to acquire the fiction license. :) Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:33:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 09:13:14 -0500From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question >Shedim can only possess things they can *corrupt* and >push toward their fate, which requires a self-aware >entity with free will. That's why animals are off->limits to them, and celestials as well (celestials >*are* corruptible, but the process is more linear for >them -- "dissonance" = corruption, and for a Shedite >to just hop into their body and make them do >dissonant things wouldn't constitute a truly >dissonant action). So I'd say Shedim can't possess >undead (except for Shedim of Death), and probably not >Saints either. Nor ethereal spirits or anything else >that is a vessel, not a true body. I think the >simplest interpretation is to say that Shedim can >possess MORTALS, period. I like that interpetation, but I have one nitpick: what about mortals that have already achieved their Fate? The main book pretty much defines Fate (page 67) as being the worse you can be, ever: from the point of view of the Shedite, somebody in this state doesn't _have_ any free will anymore, as Hell has already won this one. Granted, said Fated individual can still strive for Destiny, and thus stay out of Hell, but the Shedite isn't about to help with that plan! So, the Corrupter is in a bind, when it possesses such a person: what else can he do that tops achieving damnation? I would say that possessing a Fated individual is just _asking_ to become dissonant, which feels weird to contemplate. Now, Soldiers and Infernal Pact Sorcerers are special cases, IMHO, as they have chosen "generic" Fates (becoming Hellsworn), rather than their specific, personal ones. Because of this, there is a possible path for them that leads them to Heaven, albeit a very unlikely one: their free will still exists, so the Shedim can possess them (and nip any problems in the bud). Just my $.02 worth. Morgan (FAW) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:53:23 -0400 From: "A.Hamilton" Subject: Re: IN> Another In Nomine crossover - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 2:02 PM Subject: IN> Another In Nomine crossover > I've thought about doing an In Nomine/Star Wars crossover. However, I tend to a somewhat darker tone in my games, with perhaps a dimmer contrast, so these questions came to me: > No way is this a flame, but I got some disagreements. Perhaps because I tend to be an optimist and like a high contrast, bright tone to my games..but.. > Why do you think it's called the "Rebellion?" It's not. Technicaly, it's the Alliance. The Rebellion is the name the Emperor and Co put on them for propaganda purposes. Certainly some of the Rebels took the name as a badge of pride, the way many folks in my home state(s) call themselves Rednecks. > Aren't they fighting for Freedom? Their fighting to restore the Old Republic. It's ideals of peace, harmony, and problem solving through peaceful discord..where each citizen is allowed to make his/her/its choices. Rather a bit like how the Symphony is supposed to be sans celestial influence. > Doesn't the Empire want to impose unity and order on the galaxy at any cost? Rather a bit like Stone, don't you say? Not really. The way I understand it anyway. Seems to me that Stones schtick is building community through adversity. If anything, David would be squarely on the side of the Alliance. > Isn't it funny how the Empire curtailed the freedom of the press and restricted the flow of information? Nope. That along with gun control are the classic first step in a dictatorship. Sounds like a Game policy more than anything. > Isn't it also interesting that while the Empire used tried-and-true equipment, the Rebellion often used jury-rigged stuff that was experimental in nature? Huh? The Deathstar was hardly 'tried-and-true'. I reallly don't think this applies. Yes the TIEs were lacking in shields, but this was because it was A)cheaper, B) the Empire considers pilots to be cannon fodder and C) they were more manuverable than the various Alliance/Rebel craft. Further, a lot of the Rebel equipment was actualy -older- stuff, hauled out of mothballs because of the dire situation. > If you've seen Episode One, don't you think that the Senate Chambers (a symbol of the Old Republic) were a place that several divisions and factions were made? Without a doubt. But part of the point was that the Old Republic was already dead and Palpatine was feasting at the corpse, using the rot and corruption for his own Selfish aggrandizement. > Do you think it was an accident that Vader said "Come with me, Luke, it is your _destiny_!" or was there a further purpose to it? Yeah. Vader was a Balseraph of Fate. Snippage of Superiors I agree with. > Lilith (they are fighting for freedom) Okay, this I can definitely see happening. At least see Lilith aiding the Rebels in covert ways. Nevermind that the Empire was not only racist but sexist and you've possibly got the makings of not just a Bright Lilim, but a a Bright -Lilith-. > Nybbas (the media crackdown was no coincidence, it was aimed at this Prince's growing power) Unless of course Nybbas was given complete control of the Media. This could go either way. > Andrealpheus (most of his allies are here, so he joined. Besides, his servitors and soldiers are roughly treated and used by the Empire's military.) Don't Andre's servants -like- it rough? :) And I won't go into all the BDSM possibilities of those probe droid thingies that Vader used on Leia in SW: ANH. > Malphas (it's another faction, and the unity of the Empire is nauseating to him) I see Malphas as more playing both sides against the middle. But that's just me. :) > Vapula (the Empire is too static and unimaginative in a technological sense for him. Plus, all his ideas get thrown out by the bureaucrats in charge as "too dangerous.") Huh? The Deathstar? From the later books and novels you have stuff like the Star Crushers? Vappy would be happy as a pig in..well, you know... > Valefor (who do you think helped steal the Death Star plans? The Rebels end up stealing quite a bit, and they're hailed as heroes for it!) Janus works equaly as well here. Hell, Lando could be one of his Vessels. Think about it. Calrissian never stays in one place long, he's smooth, debonair, and a heck of a theif in some ways. > Kronos (he's supporting the Rebellion because Yves supports the Empire.) I'm guessing this is because of the Vader 'destiny' comment. I still disagree. Flying a snub fighter against a Star Destroyer, knowing your going to die so others can live free sure sounds more like Destiny then Fate to me. > Alaemon (having people keep secrets about being members appealed to him. Rebel Intelligence is his.) Not familiar with Alaemon yet, but the Empire kept a lot more secret than the Rebellion. Secret weapons, secret cloning tanks, secret police, secrets everywhere. > David (the New Order is his creation. It brings unity and keeps people together.) > Janus (the Old Republic was around for _way_ too long. The Empire is something new and it brings change.) See my comments above. > Dominic (see Asmodeus.) I guess, depending on your take on Dom this could fit. But remember, not only is it disonant for a Angel of Judgement to let someone escape justice, it's dissonant for them to let an innocent be punished. and Human law means two things to Dom and crowd; Jack and Squat. > Jean (having a powerful centralized government allows him to have more control over technological progress. He couldn't resist it.) Except the Empire is built on hate, fear and anger. All things an Elohim would find repugnant. The Emperor is negative emotion unbridled. > Litheroy (he liked revealing the corruption of the Old Republic. He thinks that revealing Rebel agents is a good thing.) Don't know Litheroy, but from this description, he'd love revealing the corruption of the Empire even more and would agree with the Alliance goal of restoring the Republic to its glory days of openness. > Eli (he helps Jean create a lot of the Empire's stuff. He just doesn't care about the chaos that's being kicked up.) Wha? Eli doesn't care? The Empire tries to squash individuality and creativitity. Look at the ST's and how variation from procedure is punished. > Yves (that quote was just too damning.) Unless Vader was a Balseraph. :) > Christopher (follows his patrons. He also says the Imperial orphanges have done a lot of good for the children.) If you consider killing their parents, oppressing their planet, and shipping them off to be brainwashed for use as blaster fodder -good- for the kiddies.. > The Neutrals: > Kobal (thinks the whole thing is hilarious.) > Haagenti (is leaning towards the Empire, because the Rebellion is trying to conserve it's goods, but is following Kobal's lead for now.) I definitely see Haagenti on the side of the Empire. It intends to Devour the entire Galaxy. Literaly. That's the eventual goal of the Dark Side. > Gabriel (thinks the Empire is too cruel to work with it, but will not work with the DPs in the Rebellion.) Three words about her attitude toward the Empire: SMITE! SMITE! SMITE! > Beleth (she benefits from the fear and terror that both sides cause. Though she's leaning towards the Empire, just because Blandine is working with the Rebellion.) The Empire (At least in the movies) is all aobut fear and terror. I"d definitely put her in that camp. > Michael (doesn't like the loss of fighting individuality that the Empire has caused, though doesn't agree with the Rebellion.) All that personal glory and fighting the good fight? Sounds right up Mike's alley to me. > Zadakiel (tries to protect everyone and is too busy to take a side.) > Marc (the restrictions the Empire has put on trade and the piracy the Rebellion resorts to has kept him from either side.) Maybe. Except the Empire had already stolen those goods. And the Smugglers are more about free and open trade than they are about theivery. A couple of final thoughts: The Empire is all about selfishness and ruthless ambition. Sound Familiar? It should. Cause that's the demonic theme through and through. The Alliance OTOH is all about self-sacrifice to save others. Sounds like the Angelic theme to a 'T'. However, I think if one takes some liberties with the Star Wars universe and with the IN universe as presented in cannon, I think it might be interesting to see what you come up with. I just think it would take some serious explanation on some of these superiors. Cool Idea either way though. > Sam A.Hamilton ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 16:27:42 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 At 12:06 PM -0700 5/12/00, Maurice Lane wrote: > >_Quite_ nice. Add my voice to those begging SJG to >acquire the fiction license. :) I've been burying myself in Genevive's and Jo Hart's stories the last couple of days. The astounding thing about both of them (and Beth, as I recall) is that they know when to drop the mechanics entirely, and write good stories. Plus, I love a good period piece. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 16:33:17 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 - --On Fri, May 12, 2000 12:06 PM -0700 Maurice Lane wrote: > Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 19:35:49 -0400 > From: Elizabeth McCoy > Subject: Re: IN> New Heretic Superior (Yup, another > one) > At 3:41 PM -0400 5/11/00, neelk@cswcasa.com wrote: >>> One thing that's always bugged me is the portrayal >>> of angels of flowers as fragile, ethereal beings who >>> couldn't possibibly cope with the rigours of Real >>> Life. >> Tried > http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/maher2.html ? > O:> >> --Beth > > _Quite_ nice. Add my voice to those begging SJG to > acquire the fiction license. :) > > Morgan (FAW) > Kyriotate of Destiny > And mine to those begging Beth to NOT STOP WRITING! Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation (Blowing his entire lunch today reading...) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 16:47:32 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Quick Question Maurice Lane wrote: > So, the Corrupter is in a bind, when it possesses such > a person: what else can he do that tops achieving > damnation? A person might have achieved his fate already, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's reached his *personal* limits of depravity. A Shedite would find possessing such people to be less profitable than trying to damn those who still haven't damned themselves yet, but he can still do more to ensure that an almost-damned soul becomes even less likely to redeem himself. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 18:13:59 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) At 9:02 AM -0500 5/12/00, David Edelstein wrote: >Angela Smythe wrote: >> Does that mean that Kyriotates (and by extension Shedim) could possess >> saints? They have vessels, but are still Human. They have dreamscapes, but >> are Celestial Spirits. >[...] so I'd be inclined to say a Shedite can't possess them >either. If Kyrios can take Undead, Shedim can take Saints -- they're human. >Even if Saints could be possessed, no Shedite is going to want such a >resistant Host. (Remember they are all Blessed, which means they get to >double their Will *every time* they resist the Shedite's urgings!) _This_ is true! - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap and no computer desk -- the keyboard shares the lap, and the trackball sits on a pile of GURPS books. I want the computer desk back! Moving is a hassle. (PS: may be typing with 1 hand, or even toe! Please forgive capitalization.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 18:19:08 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 >> http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~maya/nomine/maher2.html ? >> O:> >>> --Beth >> >> _Quite_ nice. Add my voice to those begging SJG to >> acquire the fiction license. :) >> > >And mine to those begging Beth to NOT STOP WRITING! That one's Maya's, not mine. The only one of mine that's up for public consumption is the Betharan/Caliah HUNT piece. (Well, and the couple of vignettes I have kicking around. Have I reposted the Lilith-Gabriel (aka, why crazy prophets annoy Princesses) vignette recently?) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap and no computer desk -- the keyboard shares the lap, and the trackball sits on a pile of GURPS books. I want the computer desk back! Moving is a hassle. (PS: may be typing with 1 hand, or even toe! Please forgive capitalization.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 18:31:27 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Possession (was Quick Question) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > If Kyrios can take Undead, Shedim can take Saints -- they're human. Different reasons, though. Remember that Kyriotates can also take celestials and animals, when Shedim can't. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 20:51:50 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Re: Celestial blue At 7:40 AM -0400 05/12/00, Marc Bowden wrote: > Always two, there are. A master, and an apprentice.... *peers* You know, I said the same thing about me and Maya being GM's. . . Nah, just coincdence. These are not the GM's you're looking for. Move along. Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 20:56:46 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 At 4:27 PM -0400 05/12/00, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >I've been burying myself in Genevive's and Jo Hart's stories the last >couple of days. The astounding thing about both of them (and Beth, as >I recall) is that they know when to drop the mechanics entirely, and >write good stories. Plus, I love a good period piece. Yes, they are great writers I'd sacrifice virgin sacrifices for (well, that'd be Genevieve mostly). . . Top notch work, that if there was a License for it, I'd go out and buy the fiction. But also remember, that the Word of Fanboi's, is also an Infernal Word. };;;> Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 20:59:48 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> S3's Cover Art (Funky Mushrooms? You decide!) At 8:34 AM -0400 05/12/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Now, what I'd really like to see would be some Djinn, I think Tebah can be easily ported over to the Liber Djinn Splatbook. . . >a Balseraph. My next grand task. >Oh, mm, a Shedite. That mean I need to finish my half completed Liber Shedim Splatbook cover too? Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 20:20:59 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #1623 > (Well, and the couple of vignettes I have kicking around. > Have I reposted the Lilith-Gabriel (aka, why crazy prophets > annoy Princesses) vignette recently?) (If you havn't seen Lion King enough already Beth you will in a couple of years... So envision two small lions with *very* toothsome smiles) *Plllleeeaassseeee* The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 17:30:17 +1000 From: "Shane and family" Subject: Re: IN> House combat system - comments wanted. Patrick O'Duffy wrote: ... > - I take it you're allowing humans to have Vessels, as per the original > rules and not the CPG amendments? Are you also allowing them to buy their > Vessels higher than their Corporeal Forces? (The example with the Special > Forces certainly implies this.) I'd advise against that; it unbalances > thing and creates humans that are really tough. If mortals must have > levels, allow them to buy Toughness; each point of Toughness gives another > Serious Wound or somesuch. I only have the core book, so yes. It's not like there are that many 'best of the best' Special Forces soldiers out there, after all, unless Vapula's playing around with super-soldier cloning. On the other hand, the rules certainly don't break if a GM says humans can't buy higher than their Corp Forces. Could you explain why Toughness is better than Vessels for mortals? I don't see what the difference is beside the name, especially if I'm just swapping 'Toughness' for 'Vessel level' - mortals only get one body either way. > - In this system, Strength has no effect on your wounds, only Corporeal > Forces. Call me old-fashioned, but I do think someone with Str/7, Agl/1 > should be a tad tougher than someone with Str/1, Agl/7, even if they both > have 2 Corporeal Forces. It's also unbalancing; at the moment, Str and Agl > are about equally useful, but under this syetm Agl is _much_ better to put > points into, as it bumps up Dodge without dropping hits. Hmm, true. Though whether you've Str/7 Agl/1 or Str/1 Agl/7, a bullet can still seriously cramp your style. If I could come up with a simple way of having Str increase the number of light (maybe even serious) wounds without also making a person less vulnerable to critical and fatal wounds, I'd use Strength for determining light wounds. > - I can understand point-blank shots doing more damage, but why are they at > -2 to hit? My thought here was that if you're really close to someone with a ranged weapon, they have to shift their aim more to track your movements - but on the other hand if they hit, the projectile is hitting full force. It is somewhat arbitrary I admit, and I may scrap it for simplicity. > So far, so interesting. You've started along an intriguing track here, and > I'd be curious to see how you finish it up. Please post to the list when > you've completed these rules; I for one would like to see the results. Thanks. I may though end up scrapping/modifying/rebuilding several times (over the course of however long a period it takes me to remember to get around to it) before I'm finally if ever satisfied. The muse is fickle. Some bits and pieces I'm thinking about include: - -- for a given Corp/Vessel score, should a celestial be tougher than a mortal? - -- Just how supernatural is the 'toughness' of a high-level Vessel anyway? Do weapons (a) tend to bounce off (b) do less damage (c) do the same amount of damage but the injuries have less effect (d) all of the above? Shane. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 18:34:32 -0700 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> House combat system - comments wanted. Shane and family wrote: > I only have the core book, so yes. It's not like there are that many > 'best of the best' Special Forces soldiers out there, after all, unless > Vapula's playing around with super-soldier cloning. On the other hand, > the rules certainly don't break if a GM says humans can't buy higher than > their Corp Forces. I'd assume Vapulan super-soldiers would be undead. Human Forces are too fragile. > Could you explain why Toughness is better than Vessels for mortals? I > don't see what the difference is beside the name, especially if I'm just > swapping 'Toughness' for 'Vessel level' - mortals only get one body > either way. Well, Toughness is an adventage for mortals in the errata-ed rules; human's don't have Vessels, but Tough humans have a few more hit points. 2 levels maximum. As for the difference here - t's the difference between getting multiple wounds with a level (at least one, probably more), and just getting one extra wound (maximum of two extras). Again, I haven't played with your rules; this just comes from eyeballing the numbers and thinking about probably outcomes. > > - I can understand point-blank shots doing more damage, but why are they at > > -2 to hit? > > My thought here was that if you're really close to someone with a ranged > weapon, they have to shift their aim more to track your movements - but > on the other hand if they hit, the projectile is hitting full force. It > is somewhat arbitrary I admit, and I may scrap it for simplicity. I'd advise it. You have to remember that +/- 1 is a significant difference in IN, and +/-2 much more so. In the hands of an untrained normal human (Pre 3-4), it's already really hard to shoot someone; by these rules, it's actually _easier_ for people to step back 3 or 4 metres to shoot, rather than stick the gun next to the target. > Some bits and pieces I'm thinking about include: > > -- for a given Corp/Vessel score, should a celestial be tougher than a > mortal? Absolutely. Apart from anything else, celestial Vessels aren't the same thing as human bodies; they don't eat, they don't sleep, they're mostly immune to poisons... Vessels are, by and large, intrinsically _better_ than bodies. > -- Just how supernatural is the 'toughness' of a high-level Vessel > anyway? Do weapons (a) tend to bounce off (b) do less damage (c) do the > same amount of damage but the injuries have less effect (d) all of the > above? I'm inclined to think (c). If you're able to spend the bucks, I strongly advise picking up a copy of the Game Master's Guide, which includes an alternative hit system and some optional combat rules. I was one of the playtesters for those rules, and I did some pretty extensive number crunching and simulations on them. They work very well, and they make mortals more vulnerable (but still playable). I'm also working on an essay on 'cinematc combat options' at the moment. With luck, it'll get accepted for Pyramid; if it isn't, I'll post it here in a month or so. - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia 95% of all the paper mony in this city is impregnated with cocaine. Adolf Hitler's incinerated remains are still in the atmosphere; eveyone's got a particle of inhaled Hitler in their lungs. Everything's unhealthy... - Spider Jerusalem, TRANSMETROPOLITAN #19 ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1624 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.