From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Dec 16 08:44:45 1997 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 IAA20895 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:44:45 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id IAA18593 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:32:17 -0600 Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:32:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199712161432.IAA18593@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 #517 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 Tuesday, December 16 1997 Volume 01 : Number 517 In this digest: Re: IN> Superior Pickup lines Re: IN> IN Anime movie trailer : 2 Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Superior Pickup lines Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> IN Anime movie trailer : 2 Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> I need advice and answers Re: IN> I need advice and answers Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions Re: IN> New Batch of History Stuff ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 05:33:55 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Superior Pickup lines >From: rbeall@fdldotnet.com (Grim88) > > >Kronos: It is your Fate to be forever alone. Cya. (Kronos never could work out why he had better luck with ameobae than women...) jo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:00:34 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> IN Anime movie trailer : 2 >This is, of course, all in anime, and all appropriately subtitled. So than that begs the question, what is anime? - -Jesse I ain't got no shame, But I got my pride, I am just trying to get along, On the upper, upper, upper, West Side! PDQ Bach, "Classical Rap" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:11:34 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions >Small Wpn is Precision? Oh well, it should be Agility anyways. It >uses the rules here. Guns don't. Small Wpn seems to work fine for Precision, it is just a matter of where the knife goes in. I could see using either Agility or Precision as the base for Small Wpn, both make sense. - -Jesse I ain't got no shame, But I got my pride, I am just trying to get along, On the upper, upper, upper, West Side! PDQ Bach, "Classical Rap" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 00:22:06 -0600 (CST) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions >On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > >> High forces usually mean high or respectable Strength anyway. Basing Fight >> on 2X CorpForce won't change the average fight, but taking on bonuses for >> Strength -will-. > >No more so than you making fists Power 0, Redneck. My damage bonus means >that an average Celestial (Str 6) will do Power 0 with his fists. A low >Strength one (Str 3, e.g.) will do Power -2 with his fists, and a combat >monster (Str 11, e.g.) will do Power +2. What's the problem there? At >WORST, you can do CD+3 damage, and that's with a Str 12! In other words, those who are getting bonuses under the old system get bonuses here, and those who don't get penalties. Str 11 = +2 to Power in old system, +2 to power new system Str 6 = +0 to Power in old system, +0 to power new system Str 3 = +0 to Power in old system, -2 to powe new system (Of course, I threw out the super-strength bonus for my games' combat system, because people with Str 9 and up also have high Fight levels which gain them overkill bonuses -anyway-.) >I make 12 an autofail, personally. At any rate, my suggestion mildly >reduces the high target numbers of combat, and adds a damage bonus similar >(but more varied and based on Str) to yours. So...what doncha like? HUH? What do you -mean-, your system eliminates the high target? The average Celestial will have 3 CorpForces- that gives them a 6 to add to their Fight skill under your system. If a player has 3 CorpForces and a Fight/1, that already sets them at an over 50% success rate. And since I don't like the Str damage bonus -anyway,- I'm certainly not going to like a more complex version of it. Redneck Kris Overstreet, will write for food... | "It's Christmas in Heaven, http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck | there's great shows on TV; c/o White Lightning Productions | the Sound of Music twice an hour http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ | and Jaws I, II and III." Webmaster for Antarctic Press | --- A Nybbas Christmas http://www.antarctic-press.com/ | ***QUESTION EVERYTHING*** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:30:17 -0500 From: Jesse Subject: Re: IN> Superior Pickup lines >Litheroy: You show me yours, I'll show you mine. >Zadkiel: Just put this on, and we can proceed. >Mammon: Do you have any friends? The more the merrier! Who are these people? - -Jesse I ain't got no shame, But I got my pride, I am just trying to get along, On the upper, upper, upper, West Side! PDQ Bach, "Classical Rap" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 00:58:28 -0600 (CST) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions >On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > >> >On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, A. wrote: >> > >> >> [Pee K] >> >> >from Strength, and leave Dodge alone> >> > >> >> 1) would this eliminate the appropriate combat skills? Fight, I >> >> understand, but what about Large weapon and Ranged weapon and the like? >> > >> >No. Swords would use 2xCorpF + Large Wpn (Sword) as a target number. >> >> But Small Weapon and Ranged Weapon still roll off Precision instead of Strength. > >Small Wpn is Precision? Oh well, it should be Agility anyways. It >uses the rules here. Guns don't. Again, I disagree. If you're using a dagger or switchblade, the skill is not how fast you can move, but how well you can aim the stab- and that is definitely Precision. >> >> And what does this change? In the old system, players with high Strengths >> hit accurately and can have damage bonuses. (9 and above get bonuses, and >> every overkill point of (STR + Fight) also registers as a bonus.) >> >> *(Note: This is for standard IN combat, not the system in my games.) > >In the old system, you only get damage bonuses after you go past the >autosuccess level! This is ridiculous both balance-wise (if you want to do >major damage, you also end up hitting EVERY time...I hear the yellow brick >road music playing here...) So? and common-sense-wise (a guy with Str 8 does >NOT do more damage than a guy with Str 2 unless his Fighting skill takes >him into overflow). A guy with Str/2 doesn't do damage as often as a guy with Str/8. Use a bit of imagination when you interpret what the dice say. A whiff is not necessarily a clean miss- hell, in a fistfight you seldom if ever miss you opponent, you just throw punches that don't do anything. "9 and above get a +1 bonus". Big deal. The Str 8, >Fighting/1 guy doesn't get a bonus, and does just as much damage when he >hits as the Str 2, Fighting/1 guy. Again, how long does it take Str/2 Fight/1 to do any damage at all? The system is wacked. We can make up >excuses "Well, the reason a higher ST means you hit more *often* is >because it means you strike a SERIOUS blow more often than your opponent >(even if he has 3x your Agility). Oh yeah, and the reason you don't do any >more damage is because when he rolls a 6 it means he got lucky and when >you roll a 1 it means you were unluck but when YOU roll that 6 it means >you hit as hard as someone with your Str would be expected to. Or >something." What the HELL are you talking about here? I can't make the least bit of sense of what you're saying at this point. >Strength should affect damage, and should (at most) have SOME effect on >whether you hit...as much effect as Agility does, at least. It should >*not* be the SOLE determiner for if you hit or not. I don't think Agility should really be involved in getting hit. In -not- getting hit, yes, but when you're throwing a punch or swinging a sword, there's really very little room for Agility. >One should be able to dish out massive damage with a high ST *without* >autosuccessing every time. So don't permit autosuccess. >These two problems are what's wrong. My suggestion fixes them. Um. Your two problems, if I understand them, are: (1) "I think Agility should be part of what determins if you hit or not." How much agility does it take to swing a baseball bat at someone? (Myself, I think Large Weapon should be rolled against Precision too, but I wasn't asked.) You don't move very much, you're moving something else (the bat). How much agility does it take to throw a punch? Not much, if you're doing it right. If you're doing an agile punch, you're throwing yourself off balance and setting yourself up to be totally thrashed. (2) "I think high Strength should do more damage, but shouldn't grant autosuccess." How many times have people argued this one? As for the former, there's already bonuses in place. As for the latter, define autofail rolls and use them. Autosuccess should - -only- be for simple tasks like buying a pack of cigarettes. And please, calm down, you're coming off as an immature kid who is whining about how the rules don't suit him, instead of a person who's given thought to how the game might be improved. What's more, the high emotion level is contagious, and people like myself, who tend to get worked up in intense debate anyway, have a harder time keeping from degenerating into a flamewar. I disagree with (1) above, and I don't have a problem like you do with (2). My complaints about the fighting system are (1) the very poor explanation of them in the IN Rulebook, and (2) the nonintuitive system of defining weapons Power. As a player -and- a GM, I don't -care- about increasing accuracy in combat resolution- that just leads to more number-crunching, and IMHO math will kill a game faster than anything else. Your new system does not really address (2), and (1) could be accomplished without changing the actual system. It doesn't really fix any problems I see in the system, and it makes the system even more complex, therefore I am opposed to it. Redneck Kris Overstreet, will write for food... | "It's Christmas in Heaven, http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck | there's great shows on TV; c/o White Lightning Productions | the Sound of Music twice an hour http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ | and Jaws I, II and III." Webmaster for Antarctic Press | --- A Nybbas Christmas http://www.antarctic-press.com/ | ***QUESTION EVERYTHING*** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 00:59:31 -0600 (CST) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> IN Anime movie trailer : 2 >> IN NOMINE : DOMINICAN TANK POLICE > >ROTFL! > >*recovers breathing* > Welcome to the list, Dead Man Walking. }:-{D Redneck (it's an Eyrie in-joke, people) Kris Overstreet, will write for food... | "It's Christmas in Heaven, http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck | there's great shows on TV; c/o White Lightning Productions | the Sound of Music twice an hour http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ | and Jaws I, II and III." Webmaster for Antarctic Press | --- A Nybbas Christmas http://www.antarctic-press.com/ | ***QUESTION EVERYTHING*** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:31:47 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > >On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > > > >> High forces usually mean high or respectable Strength anyway. Basing Fight > >> on 2X CorpForce won't change the average fight, but taking on bonuses for > >> Strength -will-. > > > >No more so than you making fists Power 0, Redneck. My damage bonus means > >that an average Celestial (Str 6) will do Power 0 with his fists. A low > >Strength one (Str 3, e.g.) will do Power -2 with his fists, and a combat > >monster (Str 11, e.g.) will do Power +2. What's the problem there? At > >WORST, you can do CD+3 damage, and that's with a Str 12! > > In other words, those who are getting bonuses under the old system get > bonuses here, and those who don't get penalties. Exactly. > Str 11 = +2 to Power in old system, +2 to power new system > > Str 6 = +0 to Power in old system, +0 to power new system > > Str 3 = +0 to Power in old system, -2 to powe new system Looks good to me. A Str 3 person punching someone does no damage 1/3 of the time. Quite realistic, IMO. Unless one really tries, it's hard for a less-than-average-strength guy to do enough damage in one punch that his opponent takes a week or more to recover. > >I make 12 an autofail, personally. At any rate, my suggestion mildly > >reduces the high target numbers of combat, and adds a damage bonus similar > >(but more varied and based on Str) to yours. So...what doncha like? > > What do you -mean-, your system eliminates the high target? Gee, man, I dunno what I mean by that...maybe the fact that I DIDN'T SAY THAT might have something to do with it. :) "Mildly reduces" and "eliminates" are not synonymous. Look it up. I swear, it's true. :) > The average Celestial will have 3 CorpForces- that gives them a 6 to add to > their Fight skill under your system. If a player has 3 CorpForces and a > Fight/1, that already sets them at an over 50% success rate. Right. As opposed to the person with 3 CorpForces, Strength 8, Agility 4, and Fight/1, who succeeds on a roll of 9 or less. In *other* words, one can't build a combat monster by JUST having high Strength. And one isn't *penalized* for taking a high Agility instead of high Strength when it comes to HITTING THE PERSON...they just do less damage, on average. In other words, it makes more sense. > And since I don't like the Str damage bonus -anyway,- I'm certainly not > going to like a more complex version of it. Okay, so you don't feel that a stronger person does more damage than a weaker one. Gotcha. I'm afraid that rules out your opinion when it comes to what criticism I use to fine-tune my rules. Because, ya see, the whole point of my draft here is to make the rules make sense. Stronger people doing more damage than weaker people makes sense. If you disagree, that's fine, but it means that no matter HOW good my rules are, you won't like them, so I'd like to see what other people think instead. Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Married to Rev. Unibomber on 11/15/96 - be jealous ;) Meow! The Devil went down / to Newport town He brought his red surfboard / to race against the Lord It was totally rocking... totally rocking... "The Devil Went Down to Newport", Mono Puff ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:57:46 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Redneck Gaijin wrote: > >Small Wpn is Precision? Oh well, it should be Agility anyways. It > >uses the rules here. Guns don't. > > Again, I disagree. If you're using a dagger or switchblade, the skill is not > how fast you can move, but how well you can aim the stab- and that is > definitely Precision. I can see a case for that...but how fast you move AND how accurately you can move are both a factor. I actually think basing it off the better of Agility *or* Precision would be best. > >In the old system, you only get damage bonuses after you go past the > >autosuccess level! This is ridiculous both balance-wise (if you want to do > >major damage, you also end up hitting EVERY time...I hear the yellow brick > >road music playing here...) > > So? That was a munchkin ref. The only way in IN to make a character who can do decent damage is to make one that also hits EVERY time. You don't find the concept of characters who NEVER miss AND do great damage a little bit straining? And you prefer a system that makes it *impossible* to build a character who SOMETIEMS misses but does decent damage? If so, these rules are not for you. Ignore them. > A guy with Str/2 doesn't do damage as often as a guy with Str/8. Use a bit > of imagination when you interpret what the dice say. A whiff is not > necessarily a clean miss- hell, in a fistfight you seldom if ever miss you > opponent, you just throw punches that don't do anything. True, but why do they both do the same amount of damage (average) when they hit? And why doesn't the guy with Str/2, Agility/8 hit more often for effect. After all, once he "hits that guy's glass jaw" (a phrase I hear used often for when a wimp gets a CD of 6), he can keep hitting it again and again... > Again, how long does it take Str/2 Fight/1 to do any damage at all? Because he never lands a blow! Having to kludge and say "Well, that missed roll means that you DID hit him, but didn't do any damage" is dumb. When do you know when you clean missed, and when you just hit weakly? The difference can be important at times. Why make the GM have to decide arbitrarily instead of just having a system that makes sense? > The system is wacked. We can make up > >excuses "Well, the reason a higher ST means you hit more *often* is > >because it means you strike a SERIOUS blow more often than your opponent > >(even if he has 3x your Agility). Oh yeah, and the reason you don't do any > >more damage is because when he rolls a 6 it means he got lucky and when > >you roll a 1 it means you were unluck but when YOU roll that 6 it means > >you hit as hard as someone with your Str would be expected to. Or > >something." > > What the HELL are you talking about here? I can't make the least bit of > sense of what you're saying at this point. Exactly. That's the whole point. It was a combination of the justifications and kludges people have given for the existing combat system, all of which are rather false-sounding. > I don't think Agility should really be involved in getting hit. In -not- > getting hit, yes, but when you're throwing a punch or swinging a sword, > there's really very little room for Agility. I disagree. Strongly. A person with a horrible Agility doesn't have the coordination to kick without losing balance. They can't snap a punch (hit quickly then withdraw the arm) easily...they're easily countered and simple to fight, even if they ARE strong. I've been in fights with drunk guys. They certainly don't lose any strength, but they do lose Agility and are easy to predict and dodge. > >One should be able to dish out massive damage with a high ST *without* > >autosuccessing every time. > > So don't permit autosuccess. Why not? I didn't say I didn't like them. > Your two problems, if I understand them, are: > > (1) "I think Agility should be part of what determins if you hit or not." > > How much agility does it take to swing a baseball bat at someone? (Myself, I > think Large Weapon should be rolled against Precision too, but I wasn't > asked.) You don't move very much, you're moving something else (the bat). Swinging a bat? Not much. Thrusting with a bat? A lot more. If someone wanted to just outright *swing* a bat at someone, I'd let 'em roll against Strength...then they'd be off balance for at least a turn while the other person punched them and moved in too close for the bat to be swung again. Swinging a bat is a good tactic, once. If you don't hit, you don't get to swing again (unless the person is too afraid to close with you or too slow-witted to react in time)... > How much agility does it take to throw a punch? Not much, if you're doing it > right. If you're doing an agile punch, you're throwing yourself off balance > and setting yourself up to be totally thrashed.8 Yes, it DOES take coordination to throw a punch well. Anyone can punch, but if you're not fast, it gets blocked/dodged. If you're not coordinated, you can miss your opponent altogether (no one stands perfectly still in combat). Again, I *have* been in quite a few situations where someone missed me altogether because they were very uncoordinated. > (2) "I think high Strength should do more damage, but shouldn't grant > autosuccess." > > How many times have people argued this one? That shows that many people think it's a problem. > And please, calm down, you're coming off as an immature kid who is whining > about how the rules don't suit him, instead of a person who's given thought > to how the game might be improved. What's more, the high emotion level is > contagious, and people like myself, who tend to get worked up in intense > debate anyway, have a harder time keeping from degenerating into a flamewar. You've already done so. Your comments have been more than a little bit caustic, and I have replied in kind. Characterizing my strong feelings as "whining" is cheap, Redneck. I feel that I have a valid point here, and while I seek constructive criticism, I do not accept that "the rules are fine, so don't change them". The rules are not fine, IMO, they are broken. (Note: The combat rules...I like the rest of 'em.) This is an old discussion that has happened many times. It always ends in an argument. I do *not* want an argument, regardless of how much you may want one. I am NOT here to debate about whether there *IS* a problem or not. What I am doing here is asserting that there is a problem, and that here is my way of fixing it. I ask the list: Do you like the fix? If not, what should be done? I do not ask the list if a fix is necessary. If you feel that it is not necessary, ignore my suggestions and go on using the rules as written. > I disagree with (1) above, and I don't have a problem like you do with (2). > Your new system does not really address (2), and (1) could be accomplished > without changing the actual system. It doesn't really fix any problems I see > in the system, and it makes the system even more complex, therefore I am > opposed to it. Redneck, why are you OPPOSED to it? Why do you argue about it? Why does it matter to you? I'm not a SJG employee...it's not like I'm gonna start changing Canon on you. And even if I did, it's like like you'd start using it. I did not ask anyone if they were against me fixing this problem. I don't care if they are. I am not addressing those people. I am addressing the people who think that there IS a problem. They are out there. I have seen them. You have seen them. You know that they agree with me...agree that the way Strength, Agility, Hitting, and Damage are handled is nonintuitive and needs a little fix here and there. I ask THOSE PEOPLE... do you like my suggestions? If not, what could be changed to make it better? Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Married to Rev. Unibomber on 11/15/96 - be jealous ;) Meow! The Devil went down / to Newport town He brought his red surfboard / to race against the Lord It was totally rocking... totally rocking... "The Devil Went Down to Newport", Mono Puff ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:00:41 -0600 (CST) From: redneck@txdirect.net (Redneck Gaijin) Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions >Okay, so you don't feel that a stronger person does more damage than a >weaker one. Gotcha. Under the current rules, they already -do.- >I'm afraid that rules out your opinion when it comes to what criticism I >use to fine-tune my rules. Because, ya see, the whole point of my draft >here is to make the rules make sense. Stronger people doing more damage >than weaker people makes sense. If you disagree, that's fine, but it means >that no matter HOW good my rules are, you won't like them, so I'd like to >see what other people think instead. Stronger people already -do- do more damage than weaker people. Your adjustments simply make the system more extreme. A Str 3 fighting bare-fisted has a total Power of -5 under your system. This means that, with (let's be generous and say 2 CorpForces) and Fight/2, they would have a total chance of 15/36 to do a maximum of ONE POINT of damage, which can then be Dodged. A Str 10 with Fight/3 gets a total of 0 or 1 fighting barefisted under your system. They get anywhere from a minimum of 5/6 to full automatic chance to do a maximum of seven points of damage, which can then be Dodged. In effect, a low-Strength fighter doing damage has their job taken from 'difficult' to 'impossible,' whereas a high-Strength fighter goes from 'guaranteed' to 'guaranteed, and here's some extra.' A bonus for extremely high strength is mildly irritating. High bonuses for high strength, and penalties for low strength, are infuriating. If you don't see practical play problems with this, I do. It's bad enough 2/3rds of the characters I see have 2 EthForces so they can boost one or the other category. It seems to me this system would guarantee all players take 4 CorpForces or get killed in their first fight. Redneck Kris Overstreet, will write for food... | "It's Christmas in Heaven, http://www.txdirect.net/users/redneck | there's great shows on TV; c/o White Lightning Productions | the Sound of Music twice an hour http://www.jurai.net/~redneck/wlp/ | and Jaws I, II and III." Webmaster for Antarctic Press | --- A Nybbas Christmas http://www.antarctic-press.com/ | ***QUESTION EVERYTHING*** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:29:47 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> I need advice and answers > >2) Why is Coprporeal/Ethereal/Celestial Forces added to hand-to-hand combat > >skills but not to ranged weapon skills or non-combat skills? > > I wasn't around for that bit of game-mechanics. I *think* it may > have been because a Strength 12, Vessel/6 critter has 144 body hits. > Owch. Gotta get those CDs up so you can actually have a prayer > of vessel-killing a monster like that in any sort of finite time. > Or you could have one person in the team with Ethereal or Celestial Entropy who will laugh his/her head off as (s)he blasts the imbecile who thought it was a useful idea to have 3 non-Corporeal Forces. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:39:44 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> I need advice and answers > > And if you're going to send a PC up against the The Incredible Malakite > (TM), you need to give them an RPG. }:-{D > Yes, but how many Celestials have enough Strength to carry a load of GURPS supplements? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:45:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > > I have a believe about Balseraph lies. I believe that the best lies are > 99% true. Wheel of Politics, spin spin spin. > > Absolutely. In almost every game I've played, any time I've been interrogated, I did nothing except tell the truth, and no one copped on about all the stuff I left out. I went through an entire session as a Habbalah in a group of angels and didn't get found out. They just didn't ask the right questions, and I always had a plausible reason for not changing into Celestial form. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:59:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > > > > But Small Weapon and Ranged Weapon still roll off Precision instead of Strength. > > Small Wpn is Precision? Oh well, it should be Agility anyways. It > uses the rules here. Guns don't. > Agility is being able to move quickly, not, I would submit, being able to do things well. You can think of Precision as manual dexterity and Agility as being speed. Which would make Small Weapons precision-based. Of course, in my opinion, brass knuckles should be based on Fighting, not Small Weapon. > > In the old system, you only get damage bonuses after you go past the > autosuccess level! Untrue for hand fighting. There are three ways of getting bonuses which bring the Power -3 to Power 0 (cumulatively). Fighting of 5 or 6. Strength of 9 or higher. Some form of protection, ie boxing gloves, iron-tipped shoes, etc. You could probably rule that hobnails and steel gauntlets do additional damage. > Strength should affect damage, and should (at most) have SOME effect on > whether you hit...as much effect as Agility does, at least. It should > *not* be the SOLE determiner for if you hit or not. > I tend to agree. > One should be able to dish out massive damage with a high ST *without* > autosuccessing every time. > I dunno about that. I remember the WOD games being criticised for how hard it was to kill someone with firearms and someone said that in actuality, the combat system overstated the likelihood of killing someone with a shot. The only cases I remember of people being beaten to death in real life were gang attacks with iron bars and baseball bats. It usually took quite a while as well. A punch by someone reasonably good at fighting hurts, but even the number of punches they can land in five seconds usually isn't something it takes a week to recover from. (And remember, that's what 3 hits is in real life.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:07:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Kevin Walsh wrote: > > > Actually, the way I see it, the only difference here should be in the > > capacity to absorb damage, measured by hits in In Nomine and the > > Stamina+Fortitude pool in Vampire. 3 Health Levels inflicted on a Vampire > > has the same effect as 3 Health Levels inflicted on a mortal, it's just > > usually harder to inflict those levels on a Vampire. > > That is not correct. The dice pool penalties for successive levels of > damage are more severe for mortals than for vampires. > > Not unless the vampire is frenzying, in which case they don't take any wound-penalties. It's the healing times that are different. The Health Level track is the same for everyone who doesn't have the Huge Size merit, or isn't some monstrosity from the Umbra. ObonTopic. Looking over Vampires in In Nomine, I noticed that, assuming that a Need for Blood is worth something in the order of 3 points per level, and that a Vulnerability to Sunlight is a damn severe problem, worth about 5 points per level (I mean silver is worth 3 points per level), Vampires are actually underpowered in some senses compared to mundanes. On a purely point based system. For 24 points worth of Discord, a Vampire gets 10 points worth of Demonic abilities, can control Essence expenditure, and can learn Songs and attunements. And since eternal life is counterbalanced by soul death in the event of your vessel ever getting fried (quite literally, if someone leaves the window open), it really is quite a bad career move. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:11:57 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > >>>Yes. One. Much as I hate to admit this, ICE's system (RoleMaster, > MERP, etc.) does include many things in its critical tables, and that is > one of them. Including the nice touch that *female* opponents that take > this crit. are stunned by your obvious stupidity.<<< > > > I dunno....it may not be quite as sensitive a target area for those who > don't have external gonads, but I understand that getting kicked in the > crotch is no picnic for a woman either.... > Being kicked anywhere isn't much fun. However, as far as I'm aware, which isn't terribly far, it wouldn't stun. Kicking them in the stomach is probably a better choice if you can manage it, and they're not wearing armour of some description. Of course, since the crotch is quite a small area, there should probably be a default of -2 for attempts to hit it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:29:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > > Exactly. > > > Str 11 = +2 to Power in old system, +2 to power new system > > > > Str 6 = +0 to Power in old system, +0 to power new system > > > > Str 3 = +0 to Power in old system, -2 to powe new system > > Looks good to me. A Str 3 person punching someone does no damage 1/3 of > the time. Quite realistic, IMO. Unless one really tries, it's hard for a > less-than-average-strength guy to do enough damage in one punch that his > opponent takes a week or more to recover. > Assuming a fighting skill of 1 and ignoring the addition of Corporeal Forces, because I reckon that's there in the _basic_ combat system, rather than the slightly more complicated system presented afterwards. Str 11 = Does damage 67% of the time. Str 6 = Does damage 29% of the time. Str 3 = Does damage 8.3% of the time. That's with the official rules (again, I'm ignoring the addition of Corporeal Forces, but if you want them added...) Str 11 = Does damage 100% of the time at 1-4 effective power (depending on Corporeal Forces). Str 6 = Does damage 41.6 - 48.6% of the time (depending on Corporeal Forces). Str 3 = Does damage 13.8 - 29% of the time (depending on Corporeal Forces). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:44:22 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > That was a munchkin ref. The only way in IN to make a character who can do > decent damage is to make one that also hits EVERY time. You don't find the > concept of characters who NEVER miss AND do great damage a little bit > straining? And you prefer a system that makes it *impossible* to build a > character who SOMETIEMS misses but does decent damage? If so, these rules > are not for you. Ignore them. > This is silly. Killing someone with your hands is hard. Thus the low power involved. And it's also assumed, because a five second combat round is an _abstraction_, that you're doing more than just throwing one punch. It's measuring the chances that the cumulative effects of your punches are doing damage. With guns, it's assumed you're only taking one shot, unless you burst. But guns still do more damage than fists, for some strange reason. Note the rules given for generating mortal's hits in the errata (first introduced in Night Music apparently). Humans have a default 0 Toughness (the equivalent of Vessel Level). So most humans have 8 Body hits. The power of guns is quite significant, as a result, and Protection suddenly becomes a very important issue. Any Celestial who's in any way oriented to combat will laugh at the sort of damage that would kill a human. (Well, not laugh at, it's actually more likely that they'd get mildly annoyed.) But I don't think that's really a problem. > > True, but why do they both do the same amount of damage (average) when > they hit? And why doesn't the guy with Str/2, Agility/8 hit more often for > effect. After all, once he "hits that guy's glass jaw" (a phrase I hear > used often for when a wimp gets a CD of 6), he can keep hitting it again > and again... > Confusion again. Agility makes a good runner, not a good fighter, except in terms of your Dodge roll, which is an important ability that's being overlooked. > I disagree. Strongly. A person with a horrible Agility doesn't have the > coordination to kick without losing balance. They can't snap a punch (hit > quickly then withdraw the arm) easily...they're easily countered and > simple to fight, even if they ARE strong. I've been in fights with drunk > guys. They certainly don't lose any strength, but they do lose Agility and > are easy to predict and dodge. > _Precise_ muscle coordination is a feature of precision, not agility. The Dexterity attribute is broken up in this system into two attributes, Precision and Agility. Precision corresponds to Ars Magica's Dexterity. Agility corresponds to Ars Magica's Quickness. Have you ever met people who aren't very good at running but have very good hand-eye coordination? That is the difference between high Agility and high Precision. > > I am addressing the people who think that there IS a problem. They are out > there. I have seen them. You have seen them. You know that they agree with > me...agree that the way Strength, Agility, Hitting, and Damage are handled > is nonintuitive and needs a little fix here and there. > > I ask THOSE PEOPLE... do you like my suggestions? If not, what could be > changed to make it better? > Ok, no more comments shall be made, until I get upset again. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:09:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Other Vessel Questions > > If you don't see practical play problems with this, I do. It's bad enough > 2/3rds of the characters I see have 2 EthForces so they can boost one or the > other category. It seems to me this system would guarantee all players take > 4 CorpForces or get killed in their first fight. > *mutters* I was going to post a self-righteous claim that I, at least, would never do such a thing, until I realised that I had on a number of occasions. Interestingly, I've also penalised Corporeal Forces for some of my characters, but never have I penalised Celestial Forces. Why is this, I wonder? And the answer is, because their resonance depends on it. Also, Skills cost the same amount as Songs, and people often load up on Songs before taking Skills, and when they do take skills, they often pick ones like Fighting and Dodge, so their characters come out strangely ill-equipped for anything that requires subtlety. Then they wonder why they're out of Essence so soon. So who have I penalised? An Impudite, ethereally, because I wanted him to have some chance of stealing Essence, and he was a combat character. I swung between taking his CorpForce or his EtherForce away from him, and in effect I made him a weaker combat character, because he wasn't as good at shooting as he might have been. Incidentally, he doesn't know a single Song. Not even one. He is quite good at driving, moving silently, shooting with rifles, shooting with handguns, tracking, fast-talking and lying, though. And then there's his level 6 Role as a hit-man. An as yet unmade Balseraph of Fire, ethereally, because, well, he's a Balseraph of Fire. An as yet unmade Cherub of Judgement, ethereally, because there will be a Seraph in the group to think for him. (Sorry, that was uncalled for. Cherubs aren't always stupid.) A Malakite of Judgement, Corporeally, because a) I thought it was funny, and b) as a lawyer, he really didn't need it, but I reckoned his resonance would be quite useful. A really cool character, but I can't envision any campaign in which he could conceivably surface. A Calabite of Nightmares, Corporeally, because a) I thought it was funny, and b) as someone who's going to be spending much of his time harassing mortals rather than Celestials (I mean, they can't dream), he didn't need it, and c) I reckoned he did need that Ethereal Force, because he's most likely to encounter enemies in the Marches. An as yet unmade Habbalah of Factions, Corporeally. That Force is going to the Celestial side. Autosuccesses on Fast-Talk and Seduction rolls, muahahahaha. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:22:58 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> New Batch of History Stuff John L Veazey wrote: > The Bible was not originally written in Hebrew, or at least many of > the original documents. There were several different languages used > including: > Hebrew, Greek, Roman, and I believe others. > > So I KNOW for certain that Yahweh is generally mentioned as a gender > neutral, but not always. Sorry, no, almost all the Old Testament is written in Hebrew. Maybe Hebrew of different periods, but all the same language. The only exceptions are some bits in Aramaic, a very small percentage of the whole -- parts of Daniel, I think. And Aramaic is very, very similar to Hebrew. The New Testament is written entirely in Koine Greek, except for a few isolated words and phrases in Hebrew or Aramaic, where it is quoting the Old Testament. Earl ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #517 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.