From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue May 12 19:39:46 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA13905 for ; Tue, 12 May 1998 19:39:46 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id TAA19704 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 12 May 1998 19:35:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:35:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199805130035.TAA19704@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 #775 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, May 12 1998 Volume 01 : Number 775 In this digest: Re: IN> Writing Canon Re: IN> Ceilings and Superiors IN> Rites Re: IN> Ceilings and Superiors Re: IN> Stat limits -- Saminga Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) Re: IN> Stat limits Re: IN> What's the best source of info... Re: IN> Stat limits Re: IN> What's the best source of info... Re: IN> What's the best source of info... Re: IN> Stat limits IN> Re: IN- Statistics for Superiors (Take 2) - Rather long IN> Etheriel words IN> Re: IN- Ceilings and Superiors [none] Re: IN> Stat limits IN> Re: Rites Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Re: IN> Etheriel words Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions Cool! Graveyard Greg's choir revealed! (was Re: IN> Name for the Songbook) Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) Re: IN> Rites Re: IN> Statistics for Superiors (Take 2, Part 2) Re: IN> Statistics for Superiors (Take 2) - Rather long Re: IN> Comics (Re: Writing Canon) IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #774 IN> Re: Statistics for Superiors (Take 2, Part 2) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:25:17 -0400 From: John Karakash - LUCENT ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Writing Canon Walter Milliken wrote: > > [David:] > >Some got cut by SJ because he didn't like them (like the B'lixteroth, which > >I did like, actually, but oh well), some got cut by me because I had to cut > >something and I had to make editorial decisions about which items would add > >greater value to the game. > > And I think you did a good job, for the record -- I was mostly pointing > out that editors can *appear* to be arbitrary and cut "good" stuff, > simply because it's necessary. An editor's lot is not a happy one.... True! And think of all the time and effort it requires to go to the board and get your darts back after making the cuts. ;) <== note smiley! (Actually, they play pin-the-tail-on-the-rejected-ideas.) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:40:42 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Ceilings and Superiors At 9:42 AM -0700 5/12/98, Kim Foster wrote: >At 11:34 AM 5/12/98 EDT, you wrote: >>>I have another question on this 'superiors needing at least 18 forces' thing. >>>Does anyone really think Saminga has Intelligence 12? ;) >> >>He may be an exception, or it may just be that Saminga doesn't bother to >>*use* his intelligence for anything but research into making bigger and >>better undead.... >> >>The problem with giving him a lower stat is that it will encourage PCs >>to use Ethereal Charm or similar things on him, and expect it to work. >>Which it probably shouldn't. > >I'm new to this game and probably shouldn't comment but the idea of stating >superiors sort of worries me. Don't worry -- for *exactly* the reasons you state, any "statting" of Superiors will be *utterly* non-canon. There may be some concepts tucked in here and there (more likely, they'll be in the background, just there to keep *authors* straight, and will never appear in print), but the comments about absolute stats for Superiors are unofficial. Even Saminga -- it's known that he's dumb, but if you try to Ethereal-Charm him, he'll just blink at you and, if the GM rules he notices, squish you like a bug. Some pre-Superiors may be statted -- Furfur, for example -- but even those won't be hard-and-fast rules, and once they hit Superior, they get that quantum jump/state-change/whatever you want to call it that makes them *qualitatively* different. But some people like to quantify Superiors. It's not canon, but I only stomp non-canon when it seems to be masquerading as canon. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:28:56 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: IN> Rites On Tue, 12 May 1998 crossbyte@juno.com wrote: > As for a few quick questions...what are the rites? Rites are actions you can undertake to gain Essence. A word-bound angel acquires a couple of Rites through his connection to his Word, and can develop more. He can grant these Rites to others. Most Celestials have a couple of Rites from their Archangel or Demon Prince. If you serve through another Word-bound angel, you may also get Rites from him. Other Word-bounds *can* grant you their Rites, but this isn't that common (less common than being taught Songs or skills, more common than being granted an attunement.) There's currently a minor discussion going on about why Superiors don't hand out Rites more often than they do. I think it's simply that a Rite, like an Attunement, creates something of a permanent relationship. Superiors are busy people, and while granting someone a Rite does encourage them to further your word, it does mean that that person is now one more thing you need to keep track of. If you're just saying "thank you" and aren't planning to cultivate this person further, it's easier to just give him a minor artifact, teach him a skill or a song, etc. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 13:35 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Ceilings and Superiors [Kim Foster:] >I'm new to this game and probably shouldn't comment but the idea of stating >superiors sort of worries me. Giving things "stats" in my gaming experience >tends to spark something in some players. This is exactly why it's official In Nomine that they *won't* be quantified. My comment was more about the sort of unofficial concepts that have been kicking around here recently. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:40:42 -0400 From: John Karakash - LUCENT ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Stat limits -- Saminga The discussion about stat limits and Saminga in particular has stirred my lethargic thought process (pauses to shake a few maggots out of ear). Ahh, much better. My take for all AA/DPs is that their Forces and attributes are simply an asterix. The old rules for the PCs don't really apply since they are a different sort of beast. Let's examine why Saminga seems so dumb, yet has a '12+' Intelligence. Saminga is focused: When you spend all your time thinking about dead things, you might be slightly naive when dealing with living ones. Saminga is arrogant: He really, really doesn't think anyone can touch him with a 10-foot thighbone. One acquaintace of mine is fiendishly intelligent, according to standardized tests, but consistently fails to update his worldview when cold reality intrudes. Saminga is alien: Can _you_ look at a dead body and think of 50 different ways to make it your slave? Well he can, and in classic idiot-savant fashion, proceeds to do so while not noticing other things we find obvious. Better to say his thought processes simply work differently from ours, rather than call him stupid. Mind you, _all_ of these things apply to all the other Superiors to one degree or another. Eli might think the rest of the other AAs are wrong-headed to one degree or another because they aren't in the groove. Michael gets annoyed by Yves' seeming non-activity when it's _obvious_ that immediate action is necessary. In the case of Saminga, all three traits are magnified to an astounding degree. Be warned, though: If you get his attention or annoy him unduly, you might find out exact how cunning and cruel his '12+' intelligence really is. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 13:37 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) >I'd like to see more In Nomine Fiction from the ArchBeth, myself, but not >excerpts from the novels. They are more a set of connected short stories than a single novel, though they're beginning to look like they might be put together that way. In any case, it's a moot point until the IN fiction rights issues are settled. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:16:23 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Stat limits On Tue, 12 May 1998, Sean McCarthy wrote: > *** Below is something that might remotely be a No Dinero spoiler*** > > > Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > > > > Just a minor nit - Odin is the head of the Aesir, and in practice the > > Superior of Thor and Loki. (Even though Loki is actually of Giant > > descent.) > > So to your mind, would only Odin have been Superior level? I like to > think that in their prime, several of the Aesir might have been > tether-consecrating, servitor-creating scary folks. Thor's defeat, > after all, was probably just the result of Divine Intervention. ;) I didn't think enough before using the term "Superior" about Odin - I just meant that he's their boss. :) I'm not sure about their power level. If you go by the old sagas they can be anything from incredibly powerful - Thor lifting the Midgard Serpent and drinking enough of the sea to make the surface lower comes to mind - to around soldier-level, but with some really cool Relics. :) > New idea...can Ethereals have Words? Even to some lesser degree? Or > would being God of Thunder simply imply that being your main area of > focus without any special status in the Symphony? Hmmm... I think they could have some kind of connection to the Symphony, but not at the basic level that a Word implies. Thor isn't Thunder in the way an Angel/Demon of Thunder would be - he does a lot of other things as well. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! "Jag har känsla för feeling" - Dom Dummaste ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:28:39 +0100 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> What's the best source of info... On Tue, May 12, 1998 at 11:57:00AM -0400, Walter Milliken wrote: > >Well, that depends. Some of the 9 Force Celestials I've made could just > >about fight their way out of a paper bag. > > Yes, but all that happens to them is that they go into Trauma for a > while, and then need a new vessel. And the Role is gone, and they may well be deployed elsewhere when they return, if they return. A dead human is *dead* and, unless > the GM makes them into a Saint, isn't coming back. True, but losing a Vessel isn't necessarily a trivial problem for Celestials either, especially demons. (And if they go to > Hell, they're pretty much toasted.) > Yes, but who's asking them to go to Hell? Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "If you let it get too far it would be the end of everything. You would have bicycles wanting votes and they would get seats on the County Council and make the roads far worse than they are for their own ulterior motivation." The Third Policeman, by Flann O'Brien. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:33:51 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Stat limits At 11:30 12/05/98 EDT, you wrote: >>Ahh, OK. I assumed they _did_ tend to grant every rite they knew to their >>own servitors. Maybe not as a deliberate act, it was just one of the >>by-products of being created by a specific superior. >This doesn't quite match up with the canon version of the redemption >process, where you get Rites first, and only later do you pick up the >Choir attunement. Also, Rites are granted much more casually to other >Superiors' Servitors than attunements are, so they're clearly a >different sort of thing. There's also the problem with redeemed demons >retaining their former DP's Rites. I find the rites thing very confusing, as given by canon; it seems that unlike forces, attributes, discords, geases, skills and attunements, rites cannot be removed by a superior? (Because if they could, I'd expect an archangel to remove demonic rites from a newly redeemed angel). Or do you think they can be removed by the superior who granted the rite in the first place? I suspect that creating a new angel from pristine forces is qualitatively difference from cleaning up the forces of a redeeming demon, which might explain why all newly created angels have the superior's choir attunement but newly redeemed ones don't. I have no idea why they get the rites automatically -- maybe that happens whenever a celestial changes superior? > >>Is there a canon rule somewhere about how >>many rites a starting character should have? > >Not explicitly, but I believe all the Superiors are set up to allow up >to 3 additional Essence per day from Rites Well some of them have rites which grant more essence than that (ie. Dominic's 3-pointer), but I see your point. I find it very unclear, at present. And I don't think the canon ruling that redeemed demons keep their old rites helped at all ;) jo "In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing." - -- Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 14:39 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> What's the best source of info... >> >Well, that depends. Some of the 9 Force Celestials I've made could just >> >about fight their way out of a paper bag. >> >> Yes, but all that happens to them is that they go into Trauma for a >> while, and then need a new vessel. > >And the Role is gone, and they may well be deployed elsewhere when they >return, if they return. But that's easily under the GM's control. (If there's a GM out there who can't control his Superiors, I don't wanna know about it....) I'm not saying "death" isn't a problem for celestials, but the basic point is still sound: a "killed" celestial PC can be back in the action fairly quickly, but a dead human PC is pretty much *gone* from the game. >A dead human is *dead* and, unless >> the GM makes them into a Saint, isn't coming back. > >True, but losing a Vessel isn't necessarily a trivial problem for >Celestials either, especially demons. But it's a lot more easily handled than a dead human -- that's time for an entirely new character. I'm not saying it's a good idea for *any* PC to get killed, but celestial characters can handle a level of risk that their human counterparts generally can't. And the damage levels for IN combat are generally geared toward that. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:36:39 +0100 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> What's the best source of info... At 17:28 12/05/98 +0100, you wrote: >On Tue, May 12, 1998 at 11:57:00AM -0400, Walter Milliken wrote: >> >Well, that depends. Some of the 9 Force Celestials I've made could just >> >about fight their way out of a paper bag. >> >> Yes, but all that happens to them is that they go into Trauma for a >> while, and then need a new vessel. > >And the Role is gone, and they may well be deployed elsewhere when they >return, if they return. > *cough* I assume some of those 9-force demonic celestials had pretty decent willpower for using their resonances though? In which case the fact that they weren't set up for corporeal combat wouldn't matter. They could still fairly easily deal with low-willed mortals; armed or not ;) jo "In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing." - -- Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 15:00 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Stat limits >I find the rites thing very confusing, as given by canon; it seems that >unlike forces, attributes, discords, geases, skills and attunements, rites >cannot be removed by a superior? (Because if they could, I'd expect an >archangel to remove demonic rites from a newly redeemed angel). Or do you >think they can be removed by the superior who granted the rite in the first >place? SJ's model for Rites is that they're like having the Superior give you his phone number -- it's basically a piece of knowledge, not some change to your structure. But apparently the "number" is tuned to the recipient, so you can't teach another Servitor a Rite you know. I *think* the canon answer is that Rites can only be removed by the granting Superior, essentially by ignoring the "call", or disconnecting the "number" given to the caller. There's also the question of whether a Superior *would* remove a demonic Rite during redemption, even if they could. It should be enough for an angel that it's forbidden to use demonic Rites, why should the Superior waste Essence saving a Servitor from temptation? If they're that likely to be tempted, they're going to be in trouble, anyway.... >I suspect that creating a new angel from pristine forces is qualitatively >difference from cleaning up the forces of a redeeming demon, which might >explain why all newly created angels have the superior's choir attunement >but newly redeemed ones don't. My take on this is that the newly-redeemed angel is "unaligned", sort of like an Outcast, but with several differences. They are not yet tied to a specific Superior's Word, and may get given to a different Superior to serve, if that makes sense to the Council. Essentially, they're "in service to" their Superior until they get the Choir attunement. > I have no idea why they get the rites >automatically -- maybe that happens whenever a celestial changes superior? I think that's probably the case. If someone's serving you, you want to make sure they've got the tools for the job, which includes Essence, when really needed. > And I don't think the canon ruling that redeemed demons keep their >old rites helped at all ;) I tend to agree with you, but that was one of the constraints, and it was in the core book, so there was considerable reluctance to tamper with it. And it doesn't really cause much game effect, except give a nice little temptation to redeemed angelic characters, which is all well and good, as far as I'm concerned. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:16:29 PDT From: "Bartholomew Hammerly" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Statistics for Superiors (Take 2) - Rather long OK, I have a possible fix for the ongoing Saminga problem. Boost his Ethereal Forces as high as you wish (although I too resist quantifying Superiors), and give him the Discord "Dumb as a post". As many levels as you please. >From: Walter Milliken >I looked at it, but it seems more aimed at *playing* Superiors, which, >while a valid concept, isn't the intended direction of IN as I >understand it. I also think it may bring Superiors too far down in >power, but I'd have to think about it in more detail. My own attempts >at Superior mechanics have also been *much* looser, since I haven't been >trying to really quantify them beyond rough order-of-magnitude sorts of >things. Even that is probably too detailed for canonization. > >The other reaction I had to the proposed mechanics is that they're a bit >too complex for a game intended to be rules-light. That's fine if you >want it, but I wouldn't expect anything that complex to ever make it >into canon. (Except the disturbance rules, which just about everyone >wants to fix....) Bart Hammerly Calabim of Fire (we don't all have words) "Time is the fire in which we burn." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:21:00 PDT From: "Bartholomew Hammerly" Subject: IN> Etheriel words Here's my take on words for the Gods. They are their own words. A god gains power and essence by promoting him/her self. Fewer Odin worshippers means less power. Any comment, for or against, is welcome. Bart Hammerly Calabim of Fire "Time is the fire in which we burn." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:27:19 PDT From: "Bartholomew Hammerly" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Ceilings and Superiors Ah, !@#$. I mispelled ethereal in my last post. Don't shoot me, I'm already dead. >From: Kim Foster >>>I have another question on this 'superiors needing at least 18 forces' thing. > >I'm new to this game and probably shouldn't comment but the idea of stating >superiors sort of worries me. Giving things "stats" in my gaming experience >tends to spark something in some players. The old "if it has hit points, we >can kill it" mentality.l I never like seeing things like Gods given game >stats even if they were high enough to make them "unbeatable" Good for you, Kim. I agree completely. It's probably one of the reasons D&D unquantified their Gods. Too many players were trying to kill them for the experience. (no, I will not degenerate into a AD&D flame. Must be strong, must be strong.) > >This isn't meant as an attack on anyone. > >I know violence doesn't solve all problems... > But it sure feels good! > Felicia:DS3:Vampire Savior Bart Hammerly Calabim of Fire "Time is the fire in which we burn." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:41:34 PDT From: "Bartholomew Hammerly" Subject: [none] A comment about rites: I always assumed that a starting character has no rites, can't buy rites, can't get rites unless he/she does a good job and gets a kudo ("May I have some more, please."). However, this can be a problem for the starting character whose background is that of an old angel. An old angel may have lost some forces, been stripped of attunements, and maybe even had skills stripped from their memory, but is it likely that they have had all of their rites struck away? Or how about the new angel/demon who wants a daily boost to daily/nightly energy? My solution? Rites cost three character points during creation. To buy a rite later (the only thing other than distinctions and words you can't "buy") the player had better have a good reason why he/she deserves that rite. And of course rites can be gifted, just like anything else. Words and distinctions? Don't even think about trying to buy those, you silly goose! Bart Hammerly Calabim of Fire "Time is the fire in which we burn." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:03:40 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Stat limits At 7:33 PM +0100 5/12/98, Jo Hart wrote: >At 11:30 12/05/98 EDT, you wrote: >>This doesn't quite match up with the canon version of the redemption >>process, where you get Rites first, and only later do you pick up the >>Choir attunement. Also, Rites are granted much more casually to other >>Superiors' Servitors than attunements are, so they're clearly a >>different sort of thing. There's also the problem with redeemed demons >>retaining their former DP's Rites. > >I find the rites thing very confusing, as given by canon; it seems that >unlike forces, attributes, discords, geases, skills and attunements, rites >cannot be removed by a superior? They can -- but either the subject needs to be his Servitor, give permission, or maybe both. (Fuzzy Canon!) >(Because if they could, I'd expect an >archangel to remove demonic rites from a newly redeemed angel). If they can't resist temptation, then better to find out fast... And/or a Prince can hand the Rite *back*, requiring it to be thrown away. Again. >Or do you think they can be removed by the superior who granted >the rite in the first place? That, too. >I suspect that creating a new angel from pristine forces is qualitatively >difference from cleaning up the forces of a redeeming demon, which might >explain why all newly created angels have the superior's choir attunement >but newly redeemed ones don't. I have no idea why they get the rites >automatically -- maybe that happens whenever a celestial changes superior? Rites probably generate vague Essence for the Superior and generally get the celestial thinking the right way. It's a connection to the Word that doesn't do very much problematic if the new angel happens to Yo-yo quickly. (Choir Attunements can be rather nasty, powerful things. Judgment hates it when an Ofanite of Jean goes wonky.) A newly-created angel comes with much less "baggage" in the form of previous bad habits. They don't *need* to prove that they aren't going to be idiots and get Outcast/Fall the instant they're allowed out of Heaven again. (Redeemed sometimes try to talk their "friends" into going topside as well. This rarely works.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:12:13 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Re: Rites At 12:41 PM -0700 5/12/98, Bartholomew Hammerly wrote: >A comment about rites: > >I always assumed that a starting character has no rites, can't buy >rites, can't get rites unless he/she does a good job and gets a kudo >("May I have some more, please."). Fascinating... Hm. Yes, the angelic desc for those is, indeed, unclear. The Demon Prince one, though, on p. IN157, is much more clear. "Once attuned to the Word of your dark Prince, there are certain things which bring you fresh Essence. [Rites.] All demons of a given Prince share in his basic Rites." I think the *canon* view is that the common Rites, in the main book, are given to all Servitors of a Superior. Other Rites fall under the "Each [Superior] has other, arcane Rites which he can grant to favored underlings" concept -- they aren't automatic, but are common bennies. The Rites in the expanded writeups fall into that catagory. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. However, if you're having fun paying for them, that's certainly a valid solution! - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:50:49 -0500 From: "David C. Shadle" Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions > KRONOS: The man who played Dr Dark from "Something Wicked This Way Comes" His character was damn cool > NYBBAS: Ted Turner ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 16:06 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Etheriel words [Bart:] >Here's my take on words for the Gods. They are their own words. A god >gains power and essence by promoting him/her self. Fewer Odin >worshippers means less power. Any comment, for or against, is welcome. That seems like a plausible point of view. It probably doesn't make them Word-bound in the sense that celestials are, though. Odin being "Word-bound" to "Odin" doesn't really have much meaning, beyond, perhaps, the ability to tap Essence directed at what humans think of by that name. I know Elizabeth has the notion of Ethereal spirits (like the gods) attaching themselves to some human concept and feeding off it, which I guess supports this model. (This idea is, as far as I know, non-canon, though it's not inconsistent with it, either, I believe.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:44:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) - ---Walter Milliken wrote: > > >I'd like to see more In Nomine Fiction from the ArchBeth, myself, but not > >excerpts from the novels. > > They are more a set of connected short stories than a single novel, > though they're beginning to look like they might be put together that > way. In any case, it's a moot point until the IN fiction rights issues > are settled. > > > ---Walter > Very true...I wait with worms in my mouth... Yes, I wait with "baited breath"! LOL! Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:47:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: IN>Demon Prince Auditions - ---Simon Hailes wrote: > >Baal-Billy Zane (sorry but he was so cool in Demon Knight, and The Phantom > too!) > Yay! Billy Zane! > Belial-Laurence Fishburne, an all around good actor although I've never > seen him play a bad guy so I'm hoping he will do a good job. > > Kobal-Ouch, one wrong step here and you'll all be howling for my blood! but > I went ahead with Dennis Leary since a number of you suggested him. > I'm out fer yer blood, dude! LOL! I still think Steve Martin would have been a good choice, but oh well! > Next in line for the casting, Kronos,Malphas and Nybbas. Oh yeah, by the > way, can this not turn in to an argument about Babylon 5 this time. I mean > it may be a good show and all but I've got a movie to make! > Simon, Working hard to bring about In Nomine the Movie > > > > > > > > Kronos--Patrick Stewart Malphas--Robert DeNiro (why not? He's already played the devil!) Nybbas--CONAN O'BRIAN!!! Graveyard Greg _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:19:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Cool! Graveyard Greg's choir revealed! (was Re: IN> Name for the Songbook) - ---MarkDEddy wrote: > > > In a message dated 5/11/98 2:37:33 PM, Graveyard Greg wrote: > > >LOL! I have been counter-recommended..Wouldn't it be wild if they DID > >use "Hymns of the Symphony"? > > > >I can just see it now... > > > >G.G.: Hey look! They took my suggestion! > > > >Innocent Bystander: Didn't you say you hated that idea? > > > >G.G.: GRRRRRRRRR! (fwaps Innocent Bystander with a large trout) > > > >Wow! That would be cool...especially the trout part! ;) > > Not another Malakite of Eli! :) > > Mark > And thus, Mark has helped me discover my choir! THANKS, DUDE!!! Graveyard Greg - --Malakite of Creation, Angel of Comic Books _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:15:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Graveyard Greg Subject: Re: Fans of the Writings of Archangel Beth (was Re: IN> Writing Canon) - ---MarkDEddy wrote: > I'd like to see more In Nomine Fiction from the ArchBeth, myself, but not > excerpts from the novels. I understand that it is very difficult to comply > with the copyright rules for submission, and I want to be able to *buy* the > Elizabeth McCoy In Nomine novels. > > Remember, folks, you need to think about what you're asking here... > > Mark(Married to a librarian author...) > Yah, I can be happy with short stories....a few paragraphs...And I would buy In Nomine novels, so tell them to hurry! :) Graveyard Greg - --Malakite of Creation, Angel of Comic Books _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 15:56:48 -0400 From: crossbyte@juno.com Subject: Re: IN> Rites >There's currently a minor discussion going on about why Superiors >don't >hand out Rites more often than they do. I think it's simply that a >Rite, >like an Attunement, creates something of a permanent relationship. >Superiors are busy people, and while granting someone a Rite does >encourage them to further your word, it does mean that that person is >now one more thing you need to keep track of. If you're just saying >"thank you" and aren't planning to cultivate this person further, it's easier >to just give him a minor artifact, teach him a skill or a song, etc. Hmmm.... I would see it this way: A Word-bound superior recieves certain rites pertainig to his Word, as a result of the incarnation. Some of those basic rites are automatically passed on to his servitors, as they also are dedicated to helping him in his work pertaining to the word. Other rites the Superior has may not be transferable easily. Rites the Superior learned under another Superior( when he was young), or from personal experience would obviously build a repitoire of rites that would seldom match another angel. Then again, I'm coming from a completely different POV. I do not see angels as "Rebelling" against their superiors (Lucifer's sin was that of pride. Rebellion is also pride...) so Angel Superiors would not worry about insubordination as the devils would. In fact, sometimes SJ's interpretation of Hell's activities is similar to what I believe heaven is Like: God's Divine will rules over all. Heaven and Hell are Monarchys, or Despotisms, (and hell has a bit of anarchy) but not democracy. Just my $.04 (Inflation) ...The wild truth, reeling but erect. - -G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy ____________________________ http://www.mrmark.com/forums/virtualireland/ http://www.angelfire.com/nj/RIMworld/ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:29:21 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> Statistics for Superiors (Take 2, Part 2) Kevin Walsh (the nitpicker) wrote: > (Saminga was ranked 21st. Everyone above him has higher Word Forces. On a related note, IMG Eli is the most powerful of all the Superiors. His Word is Creation, which pretty much makes him the Archangel of Everything. He even claims destructive creation through his Malakim. Every time Vapula or Jean make a new device, they support Eli. Whenever Baal or Michael come up with a new tactic, they've helped Eli. Even Saminga (in his own twisted way) helps Eli every time he creates undead. IMO, Eli could wipe out all the other Archangels without much trouble and take out Hell without raising a sweat. He's as powerful as anything and he's gone rogue on Earth. No wonder both Heaven and Hell are worried... Just a little perspective on my IN world. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:39:07 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> Statistics for Superiors (Take 2) - Rather long Walter wrote: > I looked at it, but it seems more aimed at *playing* Superiors, which, > while a valid concept, isn't the intended direction of IN as I > understand it. I also think it may bring Superiors too far down in > power, but I'd have to think about it in more detail. My own attempts > at Superior mechanics have also been *much* looser, since I haven't been > trying to really quantify them beyond rough order-of-magnitude sorts of > things. Even that is probably too detailed for canonization. I tend to picture Superiors as surpassing the Corporeal, Ethereal, Celestial boundaries. IMG, Superiors are a big swirly mass of loose Forces which they can mould anyway they need to at a given time. So imagine your Superior with dozens of Forces focusing a few on you when you need to talk to them. Makes you realise how big they are. Leath, Elohite of Eli, Angel of Large Swirly Masses. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 01:48:19 -0500 (CDT) From: Shadowcat Subject: Re: IN> Comics (Re: Writing Canon) On Mon, 11 May 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > (Me, I want In Nomine XXXenophile... Seraphim in Celtic Knots!) > Alright, now that I have HIS image in my head... What are the IN stats for Petite Morte? Or demoness from the Family Curse what band is she, or...? Shadowcat > > --Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking > http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > > All cats may look upon a king. No comment on the Queen ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 98 19:31:33 -0400 From: David Wood Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #774 Quoth "Pee Kitty" then "Walter Milliken" in_nomine-digest on 5/12/98 1:36 PM... >>This is very, VERY good. I like it a LOT. I hope the canon-meisters on the >>list take a good, long look at it. While it might not fit their views >>perfectly, I would be very surprised if there wasn't a LOT of stuff in >>there that they could use. >I looked at it, but it seems more aimed at *playing* Superiors, which, >while a valid concept, isn't the intended direction of IN as I >understand it. I also think it may bring Superiors too far down in >power, but I'd have to think about it in more detail. I'm kind of bothered by it too. And I think I can sum it up in two words: "Deities and Demigods." The *very* first thing that crossed my mind upon seeing numbers next to the Superiors' names was to look at Novalis' stats, and think what a munchkin playing a servitor of Michael would think. Call me paranoid, but it came out something like "Kewl! I could *kill* her! How many EPs is she worth?" Now I'm not saying it *will* happen, but introducing numbers for superiors means that certain players not so much interested in roleplaying and more interested in big numbers will have *goals* to shoot for and can leave that icky roleplaying in the dirt altogether. This scenario also assumes a GM lacking two brain cells to rub together. Then again, if he's playing with munchkins by choice... - --David http://www.bluecrab.org/members/dwood ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:18:24 -0700 From: Drake Subject: IN> Re: Statistics for Superiors (Take 2, Part 2) Um, hiya... After looking at the responce to Saminga, I realized I uh, made a few mistakes on my list, such as giving Saminga 4 Cel, and 10 Eth, when I meant to do it the other way around.. I've also decided to have no Superior with fewer then 6 forces in any one area.. > > Heya, > > Well going with the number of Forces I figured for Superiors and given > the Word Force, I have been going about the task of giving Force levels > to the Superiors.. and have a while back, me and 2 guys I know discussed > about the relative power levels of the Superiors, this is what I have > come up with so far. > > Superior Corporeal Ethereal Celestial Word Total > Lucifer 12 12 12 24 60 > Yves 6 14 13 21 54 > Kronos 7 14 12 18 51 > Michael 13 12 13 12 50 > Asmodeus 11 12 11 15 49 > Baal 12 12 12 12 48 > David 13 11 12 12 48 > Eli 7 12 10 18 47 > Gabriel 12 11 12 12 47 > Dominic 10 12 11 11 44 > Blandine 6 14 11 11 42 > Kobal 8 12 10 11 41 > Malphas 10 10 10 11 41 > Beleth 6 13 10 11 40 > Jean 7 13 8 11 39 > Belial 11 6 11 10 38 > Jordi 11 7 10 9 37 > Janus, Valefor 10 9 9 9 37 > Laurence 9 6 9 12 36 > Andrealphas 8 8 8 9 35 > Saminga 7 6 9 12 34 > Haagenti 10 6 9 8 33 > Marc 6 10 8 8 32 > Vapula 6 12 6 8 32 > Novalis 6 9 8 8 31 > Khalid 9 6 8 7 30 > Nybbas 6 9 8 7 30 > Lilith 6 6 7 10 29 (Her Word is linked to > creating the Lilim) > Litheroy 6 8 7 7 28 > Mammon 6 7 7 7 27 > Zadkiel 6 7 6 7 26 > Fleurity 6 7 6 6 25 > Alaemon 6 6 7 6 25 > Christopher 6 6 6 6 24 > Furfur 6 4 5 5 20 > Amon-Nahashel "Drake" Malakite of War, in service to Laurence ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #775 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.