From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Feb 23 09:54:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by deliverator.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA03622; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 09:54:48 -0600 (CST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA02313 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 09:58:00 -0600 Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 09:58:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199702231558.JAA02313@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 #35 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 Sunday, February 23 1997 Volume 01 : Number 035 In this digest: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism Re: IN> Continuing Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer IN> 2nd Adventure Idea IN> Michael Beating Lucifer (tangential!) Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer (tangential!) Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism Re: IN> Continuing Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea IN> "A Story of Lucifer" IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd adventure idea Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd adventure idea Archangels and stuff (was Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd Re: Archangels and stuff (was Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 09:11:01 EST From: jdye@juno.com (JOHN C DYE) Subject: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:20:05 -0800 (PST) Jason Newquist writes: >I personally favor the "Lucifer as Obi Wan Kenobi" view, with Darth >Vader as Michael. Lucifer says, "If you strike me down, I shall >become >more powerful than you can possibly imagine." Yes, this is twisting >the >Star Wars mythos around, but the idea of growing stronger from an >apparent >defeat is sound, and is certainly how many demons view the situation. > >There may even be some truth to the matter. Yeah, sure. Let's look at all the examples from history. Carthage? No. Napoleon? Nope. Spain. No. Japan and Germany? Well, when Heaven starts a Marshall plan, I'll believe it (on that day disco will also die in Hell, the Pope will go Hassidic Jewish, and Michael will marry Novalis) I may be forgetting something, so please remind me. Of course, it is your game. BTW why do you think that Evil should be stronger then Good? jdye@juno.com Formerly the GM God, evicted from Beleth's Lands for excessive Internet Use Since becoming John whose Word is Undead Hunter, Malakim of Gabrial in the hopes of getting some Flame proofing ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 10:04:27 -0500 From: unseelie@warwick.net (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer >On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:20:05 -0800 (PST) Jason Newquist > writes: > >>I personally favor the "Lucifer as Obi Wan Kenobi" view, with Darth >>Vader as Michael. Lucifer says, "If you strike me down, I shall >>become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." And then John "Live and Let" Dye disagrees by listing a mess of folks who went down and stayed that way, finally asking... >[W]hy do you think that Evil should be stronger then Good? It's not that it should be -- remember that Lucifer is a Balseraph, and therefore has his own particular worldview to live up to. This point-of-view gives the demons (who are, remember, an alliance of Rebels. The Star Wars parallels keep coming...) something to believe in. Which, if you're playing a demon, seems important for characterization. yours, back in this Vessel (the IQJasonS@aol.com one has higher Status, but a lower Role) - -J ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 12:27:40 -0500 From: unseelie@warwick.net (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism Greetings, servitors and superiors. A few thoughts and questions for your persual. 1) I confess, I was one of the first ones to infer (and then, imply) that mortals could, through effort and the gain of Forces, become celestial. I've since been shown to be wrong. However, this leaves a question open in my mind. The example I'll use is Christopher, whose been mentioned as the Archangel of Children here on the list. Now, I was under the impression that there was a Saint Christopher, who was the patron of children. (Or is that St. Joseph? He's the one with the chewable aspirin.) It was my inference that somehow St. Christopher became the archangel, and that the same thing happened to St. Laurence. Are the names in common simply coincidence, then? 2) What does it look like to observers when one of the Calabim uses his resonance on an object? Does the target implode? Decay? Burst into flames? The Calabite in the introduction mentions what he's thinking about, and the final result, but nothing about the in-between. 3) Maybe it's just my religious upbringing (born Reform Jewish, now eclectic pagan) but...it seems strange to me that so many people want to set the paradigm of IN as JCI vs. Old Gods/Cthulu/Ethereal Lords, considering how many *other* games cover that territory. Part of the appeal of IN for me is the chance to experiment with a world with a single, monotheistic God, for a change. Any other opinions? yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 13:03:39 -0600 (CST) From: fish Subject: Re: IN> Continuing On Fri, 21 Feb 1997, Hunter Johnson wrote: > > Feet (Num.Corp), p. 82: Huh? What does that thing about being able to > >make multiple attacks mean? I don't see any rules for multiple attacks > >whatsoever, much less physical ones based on Agility or Precision... > > Physical attacks made with Small or Ranged Weapons are based on > Precision, but I can't find any Agility attacks either. Okay, yes, Small and Ranged Weapons use Precision, but the description only notes that you can attack with 'supernaturally enhanced hands and feet at once' -- I took this to mean 'Enhanced with Songs, such as Claws and Feet'. Is this a misread? Anyone read the editorial in Pyramid 23? I just got it last night, and the snipe about long lists of mindless questions and misreads stung a bit. Oh well. Maybe I'm just -- fish, Malakite of Power Gaming. | fish flowers (i don't exist!) ><> |\ |\ \ / | | | |\ | > \/ |/| | awflower@midway.uchicago.edu, eidolon@io.com | |< /\ |/| | http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/awflower/index.html | | \ / \ | | ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 13:06:59 -0600 (CST) From: "Q (not from Star Trek)" Subject: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: > >On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:20:05 -0800 (PST) Jason Newquist > > writes: > > > >>I personally favor the "Lucifer as Obi Wan Kenobi" view, with Darth > >>Vader as Michael. Lucifer says, "If you strike me down, I shall > >>become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." > > And then John "Live and Let" Dye disagrees by listing a mess of folks who > went down and stayed that way, finally asking... > > >[W]hy do you think that Evil should be stronger then Good? > > It's not that it should be -- remember that Lucifer is a Balseraph, and > therefore has his own particular worldview to live up to. This > point-of-view gives the demons (who are, remember, an alliance of Rebels. > The Star Wars parallels keep coming...) An alliance? Of demons? I can't see how you can make the connection. If anything, the whole pantheon(?) are nothing more than a fragile coalition of co-conspirators more than willing to stab each other in the back to further their own goals. - -Q something to believe in. Which, if > you're playing a demon, seems important for characterization. > > yours, back in this Vessel (the IQJasonS@aol.com one has higher Status, but > a lower Role) > -J > > > - --------------------------------------- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein Scott "Q" Meyer Scott.E.Meyer@wheaton.edu http://johnh.wheaton.edu/~smeyer ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 12:33:59 +0000 From: "Robert Wolff" Subject: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Well, since I got exactly TWO positive responses {thanks Deathdog and Raoul for saving me from completely slashing my wrists ;) }directed towards my last completed adventure idea (Turn on, Tune in, Drop out) , I guess that people think it's more waste of space than anything else. However, about FIVE people were kind enough to send me supportive e-mail on the `premise' itself, before the completed product. Therefore, I guess all that work was for nothing... people prefer the premise of an adventure, and want to do the work themselves. So here goes... Title: Unfinished Business Introductory Story: I sat in the coffee house, staring out the window at the black and neon light, as the rain continued to pour for what seemed another 40 days and 40 nights. The streets now had the sewer/swamp sweetness when you walked outside, but you knew that if it continued raining for even a few more days, something dark and offensive was going to wash up from some rock deep down there. Even if you didn't consciously recognize it, people were beginning to have that sickly sheen of sweat and fear that comes from pervasive nervousness. I just sat and watched the whole thing escalate. You do a lot of watching in my job. I was waiting for my friend to come in and join me. I heard the bell above the coffee-house door ring out, and smiled slyly as I thought about some angel getting its wings. There in the doorway stood my friend, lean and gaunt, unsmiling, deadly serious. He shook the rain off his clothes and out of his long hair as he gracefully strode over to my table. "Long time no see", I started. "Not long enough". Oh, it was going to be one of `those' meetings. "Well, you might as well sit down", I tried again. He sat down across from me, and proceeded to stare out the window just like I'd been doing. I could've told you what he was thinking about. I mean, come on, I'd known the guy for like, three millennia, easy. After that amount of time, even your enemies become friends. He ordered a `latte, and waited for the waitress to bring the bring his order. You do a lot of waiting in his sort of job, too, I guess. Different company, same shit. When he finally decided to talk, I started to recognize a new smell in the place. Someone else was getting nervous : me. "You read the papers lately?" "Yeah, sure, I've got to keep checking out how the Oilers are doing, don't I". I smirked. I always try and keep it light. Maybe because deep down inside there's something dark in me that knows it's never really going to be all Light. "You want to keep the wisecracks to a minimum? I didn't call you to for your winning personality". He always tries to keep it dark. Maybe because deep down inside there's something light in him that knows it's never really going to be all Dark. He started again by showing me yesterday's headline, the one about the new serial killer out there with the twisted sense of justice. "Yeah, okay, I've read it. So what? I mean, another wacko mortal watched the movie "Seven" too many times, and he's got delusions of grandeur. It's got nothing to do with our little Conflict, does it?" He tossed a police folder onto the table. All he said was "Look at the picture". I began to get that sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. I opened the folder and looked at the picture on the top. Crime photo. Torso shot. Some guy obviously dead... gone on to meet his final reward. So I looked. ...and I looked. ...and then I saw it. "Shit..." "That's right. The cut marks. Could be mistaken for random, but you and I know better. Angelic script doesn't translate too well when you slash it into your victim's forehead, but it is still legible." Oh, boy. I thought quickly. "So what? I mean, maybe he's just got a penchant for out of date languages?" Maybe he's an ex-rabbi? There's got to be lots of explanations." "But what about the name?", he wasn't going to let it go that easy? "I don't know. As far as I know, He was destroyed in a battle more than a decade ago. Can't be the same guy. He's dead." "Well," he started again, getting that tone in his voice that sent the warning bells ringing in my head, " there's dead, and theres Dead. Maybe somebody didn't do a thorough enough job?" Adventure Premise: 14 years ago a Diabolical named Yenko was lost in a Celestial combat by the docks.. His last few soul points were destroyed, and his spirit was shattered. He lost his final Celestial Force. The remaining husk of a body was blown over the side of the pier into the ocean. It didn't matter, however, because everybody present knew he'd been killed, and got back to the business of making sure that they didn't follow suit. However, Yenko's body and mind lived on. He was a Remnant. While his body had sustained superficial damage, and his mind wasn't necessarily the supernaturally powerful tool it had once been, both were still of an order much higher than that any normal human. When Yenko awoke a few days later in the hospital, he awoke with a splitting headache, disturbing nightmares, and severe retrograde amnesia. The hospital helped him recover what useful memories he could, and also tried to help him deal with his severe anger, terrifying dreams, and delusions of grandeur. When Yenko left the hospital, it was with a new face (physical damage had required mild reconstructive surgery), a new name (chosen at random from the phone book), and a new sense of Purpose. Yenko has started dealing out his own brand of Justice, with severe old-testament overtones. Think of the movies "Seven" and "Silence of the Lambs", and you'll get the picture. He's a serial killer with a perfectly normal face, personality, and a body and mind that just won't quit. Literally. Oh sure, it took him a little while to shake the bugs out, but He's Baaaack!! His choice of targets seems to center on hurting the Powers That Be, but not necessarily any one side. He is indiscriminantely, yet with great care and forethought, picking off targets that hurt each Side of the War. One week it's a Good guy, the next week it's a Bad guy. He doesn't necessarily kill Celestials and Diabolicals, but there are plenty of Soldiers out there, as well as just generally useful Mundanes that seem to fall under his swift sword. Explanation: This is an ideal situation in which to run a mixed party of Angels and Demons. The Angels are interested in stopping him from doing any more damage. The demons find his presence embarassing, disturbing, and a little dangerous. Both sides are interested in getting rid of him. Maybe they should work together on this one, instead of working against each other. The problem, of course, is finding him! He doesn' send up any disturbance in the symphony any more. He's a cypher. He's a blank. He's the ghost in the machine. Unfortunately, he's a ghost that won't stay put, stay down, or stay Dead. **************************************** Alternative: The way I'd prefer to play it... The alternative is to not involve the Diabolicals at all, and to have Yenko be an ex-Celestial. He originally was a servitor of Dominic, but now that he's just a Remnant, he's twisted his old sense of Justice in a new and perverse way. He's now punishing the guilty, but without any consideration for "and eye for an eye". Dominic finds this an embarassment, and doesn't want word of this getting out. Servitors of Dominic, or those allied with Dominic, will be ordered to quietly find and eliminate this problem, without letting Servitors of those hostile to Dominic find out that it ever happened at all! Michael and some of the Others would dearly love to splash this all over the Celestial Headlines, so servants of Michael and those Hostile to Dominic will be ordered to unroot this "Living Shell" and show that there's an inherent injustice in all of Dominic's people. The Political Twist: Somebody in Dominic's employ, wishing to do more good through a small evil, has been quietly goading Yenko on. Somebody has pushed Yenko, ever so subtly, to go out and "do some good" in such a gruesome and bloody fashion. This way, Justice is served, but nobody has to get their hands bloody. As well, if it embarasses Dominic, maybe there's a chance for advancement in the near future. Remember what happenned to Uriel... Thus, a sub-plot is to find out who has been goading Yenko along the way. This Lieutenant probably doesn't want Yenko destroyed just yet, and will do everything fair (and maybe a little that's unfair?) to stop the players from destroying Yenko just yet. Dominic will be more than happy to know which one of his trusted Lieutenants has overstepped their bounds, and will be grateful to the players if they uncover the over-zealous servitor, but keep the whole thing quiet. On the other hand, Michael and the others could use this information in the great Power Struggle, and would be more than happy to reward players for this information. After all, if a tie can be made between the Lieutenant and Dominic, maybe the whole thing is really Dominic's fault, and not so indirectly as he'd like us to believe? Remember, though, that whoever you side with, somebody else is going to hold a grudge in the future. How do I get myself into these messes? ********************************************************* Okay, that's the second adventure idea. I'm going to stop writing until/unless I get some positive feedback on either one of these stories. I just can't invest the time unless I know somebody finds these things useful. And if you don't find them useful, let me know that too!! So talk to me, okay? Sincerely, Rob Wolff / Bodhi rwolff@v-wave.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 12:22:21 -0800 (PST) From: Jason Newquist Subject: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer (tangential!) On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Q (not from Star Trek) wrote: > An alliance? Of demons? I can't see how you can make the connection. If > anything, the whole pantheon(?) are nothing more than a fragile coalition > of co-conspirators more than willing to stab each other in the back to > further their own goals. The definition you offer is the practical definition of alliances in world political history. The Axis powers *and* the Free Allies (US, USSR, etc.) of WWII. Any number of cases in Medieval history. Even, to a lesser extent, the 13 American Colonies under Franklin's Articles of Confederation (before the Constitution was ratified) and before. Instances grow ever more numerous as soon as you start matching metaphors more closely: we're talking about demons (individuals, more or less), and isn't that how many individuals work in the world? Looking out for themselves (and their families/colleages/whatever)? I personally know quite a few people (not at my current place of employment, blissfully) who operate on a level of backstabbling, and yet, they all work together in the same company -- apparently, "allies" working for the same cause. No, the definition of allies doesn't preclude activities of infighting, even backstabbing. Besides, everyone knows that your biggest threat isn't your Worst Enemy. It's the guy who is within a step of assuming your role. But the general point is this. By Falling and taking one third of the Host with him, Lucifer became in charge of considerable power. Presumably, before the Fall, he had a Word (I wonder what it was?). But now he alone has the power to grant them. Etc. If there was a rematch with Michael, I'm not sure who'd win. Depends on where it is. Michael beat Lucifer before, but we don't know the context of the battle. And remember, before the battle, Lucifer was still in Heaven, bound by all its rules and regulations. Now things are different. He's made his own rules, and has had time to regroup and reorganize. I dare say that if Michael found himself in Hell, Lucifer alone could take him and win. Perhaps even in neutral territory, like Earth. But in Heaven? That's questionable. In any case, the lesson Lucifer learned from Michael's whomping is simply that the War must take a different tide. A subversive, subtle one. As we see in Derek's short story online describing his manner. It's a lesson the Dark One learned well, apparently. Evil might be doomed to fail, but the question isn't one of success and failure, but rather what the price will be for good to overcome. This is one of the themes we are seeing JMS develop on _Babylon 5_, for instance. - ---------------------------------- Jason Newquist, lists@nocturne.org Network Operations, San Jose Netcom Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 14:58:13 -0600 (CST) From: fish Subject: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer (tangential!) On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Jason Newquist wrote: > Now things are different. He's made his own rules, and has had time to > regroup and reorganize. I dare say that if Michael found himself in Hell, > Lucifer alone could take him and win. Perhaps even in neutral territory, > like Earth. But in Heaven? That's questionable. Especially since demons (including Lucifer) can't ascend to Heaven unless they're redeemed. Angels can go wherever they want (with more or less difficulty) but demons are pretty seriously Not Allowed in Heaven. -- fish, Malakite of Rules Lawyering | fish flowers (i don't exist!) ><> |\ |\ \ / | | | |\ | > \/ |/| | awflower@midway.uchicago.edu, eidolon@io.com | |< /\ |/| | http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/awflower/index.html | | \ / \ | | ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 15:05:17 -0600 (CST) From: fish Subject: Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Robert Wolff: [A story and adventure seed] > I'm going to stop writing until/unless I get some positive feedback on > either one of these stories. I still haven't read your first story (I'm really behind on list mail, argh) and adventure seed, although I have to say that ascribing drugs to Angelic Words doesn't really sit well with my stomach. But this one I like. I'm not sure I buy that Remnants remember angelic language (seems to me that that would be too tightly tied up in their Celestial Forces to remain after they're Remnantised), but it's certainly an interesting concept. Not a bad intro story, either. Tangenitally, I've always found the interaction (besides conflict) between the angelic and demonic forces to be interesting; that is, friendships, partnerships, or working relationships that spring up. Certainly it's not anything that's going to make your Superior really happy (unless it's a Dominic-Asmodeus deal), but clearly in the worldview they exist. Anyone have any thoughts on how this could be justified (by individual angels or demons)? How would a Superior react if he found that you've been working with the other side? -- Clearly this second question will depend to a large extent on who your Superior is. If it's Laurence you've got a problem, but (ironically) Dominic may not have as large a spasm. -- fish, Malakite of Munchkinism | fish flowers (i don't exist!) ><> |\ |\ \ / | | | |\ | > \/ |/| | awflower@midway.uchicago.edu, eidolon@io.com | |< /\ |/| | http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/awflower/index.html | | \ / \ | | ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 17:53:13 -0500 From: unseelie@warwick.net (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Various things: Robert Wolff: >> I'm going to stop writing until/unless I get some positive feedback on >> either one of these stories. I'm sorry...let me feed a little back. I enjoyed 'em both, although I agree that the format of the second seemed more helpful than that of the first. fish: >I have to say that ascribing drugs to Angelic Words doesn't >really sit well with my stomach. It seems to me that there are no angelic or demonic *words*, just angelic and demonic *holders* of words, each exerting their pull on the Symphony. The difference between Gabriel's and Belial's versions of Fire seem to back this up. (Random Thought: Considering the allegations of what went on in the Branch Davidian compound, was one of Gabriel's servitors behind the blaze at Waco in IN? Food for thought.) >Anyone have any thoughts on how this could be >justified (by individual angels or demons)? Well, there's always the "But I'm trying to redeem/corrupt him, really I am." gambit. >How would a Superior react if >he found that you've been working with the other side? As is often the case, it'd probably depend on the ultimate goal. And there's always mitigating circumstances. ANDREALPHUS: "But was she a *cute* Seraph?" yours, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 19:57:49 -0600 From: Richard Godard Subject: Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea >Robert Wolff: >>> I'm going to stop writing until/unless I get some positive feedback on >>> either one of these stories. A note of support to say I prefer the `premise' of adventures to fully described adventures and that I like your second premise better than the first one (not being familiar with Rasta cultuture, Ziggy and all that stuff :) From my past experience with the French version of the game I don't remember much collaboration between Angel & Demon... (though that's up to each GM... the French game came in a box with two books one for Demon and one for Angels and some of the power (~ song) were different for Angel & Demon) About the serial killer, I think that unless it damage Demon properties, Demons might enjoy it, after all the serial killer generate fear and insecurity and also get the attention from the Angel/media/security forces giving the Demons the opportunity to "use" it as a divertion. At 16:53 -0600 2/22/97, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: >fish: >>Anyone have any thoughts on how this could be >>justified (by individual angels or demons)? > >Well, there's always the "But I'm trying to redeem/corrupt him, really I >am." gambit. One problem though is that when you have "direct" contact with the other side you somwahet reveal yourself and could end being tracked/spied/... this could compromize some of your current/future missions/contacts/friends/... Beside there is the problem of trust... would you trust a Demon if you were an Angel? Demon lies to each other, do you expect them to tell the truth to Angel? :) How would you know you don't get manipulated/corrupted by those master of deception? There are already so many plot between Archangel... it's really looking for trouble to flirt with Demons. :) Anyway I think it's up to each GM... I prefer to play competition between each side than collaboration (I like competition between Archangel's servitor too :-) Just my $0.02 Richard ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:03:52 -0500 (EST) From: Don Fnordlioni Subject: Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: > Are the names in common simply coincidence, then? Once upon a time, these Archangels were more involved in mortal affairs, and were more open about their miraculous powers. So, my guess is, they manifested in Earthly vessels, and posed as mere Saints. Saint: Status/4 (Dark Ages only -- being named a Saint now a-days would probably only require Status 2, at best. How many modern, living Saints can Joe Secular name?). > Part of the appeal of IN for me is the chance to experiment with a world > with a single, monotheistic God, for a change. Any other opinions? me too please. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:08:49 -0500 (EST) From: Don Fnordlioni Subject: Re: IN> Continuing On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, fish wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 1997, Hunter Johnson wrote: > Physical attacks made with Small or Ranged Weapons are based on > Precision, but I can't find any Agility attacks either. And this, imo, is just plain dumb. I plan on using Agility to hit, and Strength for damage, just like any sensible RP combat system. I mean, come on, Strength determines: a) How often you hit b) How hard you hit c) How many hits you can take. This is a little much for just one stat. A combat monster's dream, if you ask me. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 97 19:26:21 -0600 (CST) From: kestre1@airmail.net (Andrew Getting) Subject: Re: IN> Michael Beating Lucifer At 09:11 AM 2/22/97 EST, in_nomine-l@lists.io.com wrote: > >On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:20:05 -0800 (PST) Jason Newquist > writes: > >>I personally favor the "Lucifer as Obi Wan Kenobi" view, with Darth >>Vader as Michael. Lucifer says, "If you strike me down, I shall >>become >>more powerful than you can possibly imagine." Yes, this is twisting >>the >>Star Wars mythos around, but the idea of growing stronger from an >>apparent >>defeat is sound, and is certainly how many demons view the situation. >> >>There may even be some truth to the matter. > > >Yeah, sure. Let's look at all the examples from history. Carthage? No. > Napoleon? Nope. Spain. No. Japan and Germany? Well, when Heaven >starts a Marshall plan, I'll believe it (on that day disco will also die >in Hell, the Pope will go Hassidic Jewish, and Michael will marry >Novalis) Count Vladimir Tepes (Dracula) was. Augustus Caesar. Yes, Germany (a couple world wars, remember?). >I may be forgetting something, so please remind me. Of course, it is >your game. BTW why do you think that Evil should be stronger then Good? He's not saying that, he's saying that Lu possibly gained power as a result of his defeat. Kestrel ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:44:11 -0500 From: unseelie@warwick.net (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism The Don provides an insight... >Once upon a time, these Archangels were more involved in mortal affairs, >and were more open about their miraculous powers. > >So, my guess is, they manifested in Earthly vessels, and posed as mere >Saints. Hmm. That'd work. And I am planning on doing more with "angels in humna guise." Let's just say that, for those of you who didn't like Ziggy, the Angel of Cannabis Sativa, you're probably going to *hate* what I'm working on. :) >Saint: Status/4 (Dark Ages only -- being named a Saint now a-days would >probably only require Status 2, at best. How many modern, living Saints >can Joe Secular name?). Wait -- isn't that an oxymoron? I thought being dead was one of the requirements for being a saint. Then again, I've been wrong before. yours, i'll take Religious Trivia for 100, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 97 19:56:49 -0600 (CST) From: kestre1@airmail.net (Andrew Getting) Subject: Re: IN> Saints, Calabim and the joys of monotheism At 12:27 PM 2/22/97 -0500, in_nomine-l@lists.io.com wrote: >Greetings, servitors and superiors. A few thoughts and questions for your >persual. > >1) I confess, I was one of the first ones to infer (and then, imply) that >mortals could, through effort and the gain of Forces, become celestial. >I've since been shown to be wrong. However, this leaves a question open in >my mind. > >The example I'll use is Christopher, whose been mentioned as the Archangel >of Children here on the list. Now, I was under the impression that there >was a Saint Christopher, who was the patron of children. (Or is that St. >Joseph? He's the one with the chewable aspirin.) It was my inference that >somehow St. Christopher became the archangel, and that the same thing >happened to St. Laurence. Are the names in common simply coincidence, then? Not always. Gabriel is also a Catholic saint, and it's traditional for members of the Church to rename themselves, often after an Angel or Saint they idolize. >2) What does it look like to observers when one of the Calabim uses his >resonance on an object? Does the target implode? Decay? Burst into flames? >The Calabite in the introduction mentions what he's thinking about, and the >final result, but nothing about the in-between. I'd say it depends on the individual and the relationship with the Superior. Belial's Calabim probably force spontaneous combustion. Kronos does aging. From there, we can guess on others: Samingan Calabite victims begin rotting, Haagenti's are eaten away from the inside, Baal's may appear beaten and bloody, etc. While this doesn't explain all of them (Nybbas?), it's a start. >3) Maybe it's just my religious upbringing (born Reform Jewish, now >eclectic pagan) but...it seems strange to me that so many people want to >set the paradigm of IN as JCI vs. Old Gods/Cthulu/Ethereal Lords, >considering how many *other* games cover that territory. Part of the appeal >of IN for me is the chance to experiment with a world with a single, >monotheistic God, for a change. Any other opinions? It's not always the case. Janus, for instance, was a Roman god. Asmodeus, Belial, Kronos, and Baal were gods in old religions that were revised to demonhood by Christianity. It's the nature of the beast. Kestrel ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 21:00:52 -0500 From: unseelie@warwick.net (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: Re: IN> 2nd Adventure Idea Robert Godard: >Beside there is the problem of trust... would you trust a Demon if you were >an Angel? Demon lies to each other, do you expect them to tell the truth to >Angel? :) All of which is, of course, simply the party line. Individual angels and demons have the ability to choose their actions and, just as angels can choose to lie, so can demons choose to be truthful. Plus, some of those demons used to be angels -- coworkers and colleagues, even lovers. Those feelings don't necessarily die after the Fall. >How would you know you don't get manipulated/corrupted by those >master of deception? Oh, but how could that happen? You're a bright, reasonably intelligent Celestial with good on your side, there's no *way* that you'd ever fall prey to the blandishments of the Other Side. Even if they tried, you're sure you could see it coming... yours, those who need smileys deserve them, - -J ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 19:32:31 -0800 (PST) From: Jason Newquist Subject: IN> "A Story of Lucifer" On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Don Fnordlioni wrote: > On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Jason Newquist wrote: > > > see in Derek's short story online describing his manner. It's a lesson > > Where's this online story? I'll post the answer here in case anyone else hasn't seen it. It's linked to off the IN homepage: http://www.io.com/sjgames/in-nomine/lucifer-tale.html - ---------------------------------- Jason Newquist, lists@nocturne.org Network Operations, San Jose Netcom Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 00:51:31 -0600 (CST) From: Donald G Bixler Subject: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd adventure idea I tried to send this privately to rwolff@v-wave.com, but got a "Mail Returned: User Unknown" > Well, since I got exactly TWO positive responses {thanks Deathdog and > Raoul for saving me from completely slashing my wrists ;) }directed > towards my last completed adventure idea (Turn on, Tune in, Drop out) > , I guess that people think it's more waste of space than anything > else. However, about FIVE people were kind enough to send me > supportive e-mail on the `premise' itself, before the completed > product. Therefore, I guess all that work was for nothing... people > prefer the premise of an adventure, and want to do the work > themselves. So here goes... I liked the first adventure idea and said so. I didn't read the full adventure since my wife said that she mighgt use it in the upcoming IN campaign. Likewise, I haven't read this one, but am pretty sure it's well written judging by the first adventure. I would like it if you would keep up the work. Oops da Ogre, who wonders if the peolple who refuse to have angels tied to drugs are leaving out Novalis... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 97 02:15:47 -0500 From: sven@ll.mit.edu (Sven Skoog) Subject: Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd adventure idea Yeah; I tend to walk a middle line myself. It's unrealistic to have a Demon Prince devoted to 'Drugs' without a corresponding Archangel (or, if drugs are downplayed in Heaven, perhaps just an Angel) of some equivalent. An 'Archangel of Ecstasy' comes most immediately to mind -- 'ecstasy' possibly including sex, drugs, food binges, what have you. ;) Obviously, this (hypothetical) Archangel would get along very well with Novalis, and be all but lynched by Dominic and Laurence. Whaddya think? ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd adventure idea Author: Donald G Bixler at smtp-post-office Date: 2/23/97 12:51 AM Oops da Ogre, who wonders if the peolple who refuse to have angels tied to drugs are leaving out Novalis... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 02:59:25 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Kinney Subject: Archangels and stuff (was Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd On Sun, 23 Feb 1997, Sven Skoog wrote: > > Yeah; I tend to walk a middle line myself. It's unrealistic to have a > Demon Prince devoted to 'Drugs' without a corresponding Archangel (or, > if drugs are downplayed in Heaven, perhaps just an Angel) of some > equivalent. An 'Archangel of Ecstasy' comes most immediately to mind -- > 'ecstasy' possibly including sex, drugs, food binges, what have you. ;) > We should also keep in mind that "drugs" are not always necessarily bad. Most of the "bad" ones we have today had legitimate medical uses at some point in time; some still do, even. If you must have a "proper" Word for your Archangel, you can always go with Medicine. While on the subject of the higher celestials... I've found another use for that moldy old Fantasy Wargaming book... It touches on these kinds of things, after all, and had a listing of various divine and infernal beings. It even lists Furfur, although I don't remember offhand what he does. Mind you, unless you find it for, like, three bucks or something, I don't recommend buying it just for these lists, but it is handy if you can't find an actual Angelology/Demonology text. :-) Mark Kinney | alberich@iglou.com | http://www.iglou.com/nations/ "The chance in war is equal, and the slayer oft is slain." -- Homer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 09:53:32 -0600 (CST) From: fish Subject: Re: Archangels and stuff (was Re: IN> ATTN Robert Wolff re: IN> 2nd On Sun, 23 Feb 1997, Mark Kinney wrote: > We should also keep in mind that "drugs" are not always necessarily bad. > Most of the "bad" ones we have today had legitimate medical uses at some > point in time; some still do, even. If you must have a "proper" Word for > your Archangel, you can always go with Medicine. Good point. I'll agree that an angel of, say, penicillin would work; I just don't think that there'd be an angel of some addictive and/or harmful substance. I'll leave it open to debate whether or not marijuana falls under that category. > While on the subject of the higher celestials... I've found another use > for that moldy old Fantasy Wargaming book... It touches on these kinds of > things, after all, and had a listing of various divine and infernal > beings. Good Lord. I thought I was the only surviving person in the world who still had a copy of that book. Galloway, right? Yeek. -- fish. | fish flowers (i don't exist!) ><> |\ |\ \ / | | | |\ | > \/ |/| | awflower@midway.uchicago.edu, eidolon@io.com | |< /\ |/| | http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/awflower/index.html | | \ / \ | | ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #35 ****************************** The material here is (C) 1996 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.