From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Aug 13 17:38:42 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06610 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:38:42 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id RAA01446 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:38:15 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:38:15 -0500 Message-Id: <199808132238.RAA01446@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #913 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Thursday, August 13 1998 Volume 01 : Number 913 In this digest: Re: IN> Loose Forces? [FotM Spoilers] Re: IN> Malakites and burning villages Re: IN> Malakites and burning villages Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Granting Words (Re: Lost Words?) Re: IN> _Fall of the Malakim_ Re: IN> In Nomine Song Book now available for playtest Re: IN> Dissonance question Re: IN> Fall of the Malakim [Spoilers Ahead!] Re: IN> More FotM grumbles Re: IN> Dissonance question Re: IN> Dissonance question Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Lilim power Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) Re: IN> More FotM grumbles Re: IN> Angelic Hearts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 13:45 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Loose Forces? [FotM Spoilers] >I recently bought Fall of the Malakim, and just had a quick glance >through the playtest of the Songbook, and am puzzled by a new >development - "Loose Forces". > >Are these two books the first to mention "loose forces"? Actually I think they're mentioned somewhere in the core book, where it's talking about Superiors creating new celestials. >Some thoughts: > >1. The idea of "Loose Forces" seems imply that Superiors at least, and >possibly celestials in general, can numerically quantify(*) forces in a >person (in particular, six force vs five force humans). This, I think is >a good thing - although I like a non-quantifiable sense of essence. This has been my interpretation. Forces are quantized so much that it's hard to believe the quantization wouldn't be noticed. In particular, Kyrios and Shedim are very sensitive to numbers of Forces in their hosts. >2. For those gamesters who want to have mechanics for Archangels, >perhaps they can accumulate "loose forces" much like normal celestials >accumulate essence. You'd need a suitable force:essence conversion. The >number of forces an Archangel generates per day could be related to the >strength of their word (I'd be surprised if this idea hasn't been >thought of before). I don't think it's been developed to this degree, but I believe similar ideas have come up in discussions about Superiors. My own current take on it is that picking loose forces out of the Symphony takes a significant period of concentration and possibly a lot of Essence. Word-strength may play a role in how many loose forces you can pick up -- only those that are related somehow to your Word, perhaps. >3. Whether or not you want mechanics as described in 2, Superiors can >create Angels/Demons from these "loose forces". Why then, are constructs >considered so dangerous? Because human created ones do not disturb the >symphony? (I might read the bit about constructs again). I don't know the answer to that, unless it's the notion of *humans* being able to create new beings -- that may *really* bother celestials. Note the reaction of many strongly-religious people to the notion of humans creating life artificially.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 13:52 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Malakites and burning villages > So do I; but with the exception of Jordi, I don't believe angels actively >support the death of innocent humans. The actions of the Host should be >terrying, yes - the massacre of 37 Hellsworn and their demonic superiors >should be horrible to watch, if you're human - but the killings have a >reason, and a good one. The massacre of every person in a mall just >because one of them happens to be a demon, and you can't find him, is just >mindless violence. Actually, I know that Derek was thinking that other AAs would do this -- the example he gave was Judgment servitors blowing up a building full of people to get an Outcast... and that Dominic would *approve* of this. Frankly, that's going too far for me, but I think it helps explain some of the tone in the core book. Remember that human deaths are only a phase-change to celestials; either the humans go to Heaven or Hell, or they get recycled back to the corporeal. The main problem with killing humans is that it's *noisy*. However, Destiny and Fate servitors will worry about killing humans *at the wrong time*, Mercurians and Impudites will shy away from it at all, and various other Words may have specific viewpoints, especially in particular instances. But killing humans may not be considered all that bad, otherwise. > And, besides, it is too munchkinistic. It's too easy a solution. Depends on what you mean by "easy" -- the aftermath probably doesn't qualify as "easy".... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 13:57 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Malakites and burning villages > Malakites are supposed to punish the guilty; Uh, no, they're supposed to destroy evil -- entirely different thing. As far as I can tell, only Gabriel's and Dominic's servitors are specifically interested in punishing people. (And Habbalah, of course, but they just enjoy it.) > The wicked >are punished, the rightous defended - that's what the angelic host is all >about. Maybe in standard Christian theology, but not necessarily in In Nomine. IN angels are concerned most with ensuring that specific aspects of the Symphony grow in the right directions. There's some overlap with your viewpoint above, but it's not really the same thing at all, which is part of what's so interesting about the game. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 14:28:54 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) Walter Milliken wrote: > Personally, I'd prefer this be left as Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. Ditto, actually. > > These are > >unique circumstances. Who knows what kinds of flaws Max's Heart has > >developed over those tortuous years? I'd wager that no angel, Malakite > >or not, has *ever* accumulated so much Discord (33 levels!) without > >being destroyed. Perhaps it hasn't cracked as an Outcast's Heart cracks, > >but structural weaknesses could very well exist. > > In talking to Elizabeth last night, I learned that some material that > was cut (I think because of the APG stuff on Malakim) supported this > notion. This part of it probably should have been added into FotM. Agreed. > There's any number of little mysteries in FotM that could have been > cleared up. Unfortunately, I think answering them all would have driven > the page budget *way* over. Unfortunately, not answering them leaves a large blind spot. It would be a particular problem if a campaign for which the adventure is run had the PCs establish themselves in LA for some time before its events. This would improve the role-playing aspects of the adventure, but it's hard to tell what sorts of things Malphas and Kobal are up to in setting up their plot. An adventure of this epic a scale and as filled with tragedy as it is has more impact if it has some build up within a campaign. This is where wanting to know how the Demonic Duo found out about Pendrake's construct comes in. If the characters are around during that period, they may pick up a clue or two that something is up. Perhaps they unwittingly throw a spanner into the works that the DD has to work around. As it is written, Fall of the Malakim has no dynamic element to it. It's like the GM might as well stand up and read the plot to the players raher than game it out. > Sacrificing the PCs (somewhat) to eradicate those who had evaded > Judgment for so long (i.e., Lucifer & co.) is the sort of hard choice I > can see Dominic making. It will be painful for him, but he lives with a > *lot* of pain, I think. I can see this, I guess, though I'm still of the opinion that Dominic is going to take dissonance doing it. If he wants to suck it up for a good cause, so be it. I'd love to hear the closing argument he uses to get others to go along with him. He must have Dan Webster craft it for him, assuming that Webster's previous client list hasn't gotten him sent in the other direction. > Probably true. Though any number of people have griped here on the > amount of space used by adventures so far.... Depends on what I get. Fall of the Malakim is the first adventure published for IN that deserves a whole lot of space. The Demon Prince of Rock and Roll could be a lot of fun to run or play, but it is basically a gag plotline. The adventures in The Marches and Heaven & Hell were pretty much throwaways that mostly seem to be in there because, well, we ought to have a scenario in here. > The problem here is that it wouldn't have happened at all. SJGames has > found in the past that adventure books simply don't sell well enough to > cover the effort of making them. I believe this is one of the reasons > for the format of the Cycle books. I don't really know what sales are like at the different companies, but I think SJG may be miscalculating on this one. I can see why adventure books don't sell very well for GURPS, but IN may be a different market. The adventure books for Call of Cthulhu seem to do pretty well. It helps that Chaosium has taken the quality level of their adventure products to a level that no one else in the industry approaches, but this is an approach that I think In Nomine could try. And I'd probably pick up at least one novel that the company decided to use to get more of a following. The fiction in the game books has been among the best I've ever seen in a gaming product. I know, I know; daming with faint praise. Still, I'd give it a try if it came out. But, in the current format there just isn't room for what is being tried. FotM attempts three major accomplishments: expanded write-ups, establishing a city, and a major adventure. This is at least one thing too many. None of those things gets the attention it needs. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 14:51:42 -0500 From: The Bard Subject: IN> Gates of hell I was reading Heavan and Hell last night and I got to the part about the two an Servants of Dominic posted at the gates of hell. Well one is a Malikim. This set with me wrong because he can't suffer and evil to live. He should be killing anything that walks through the door. Does he try to kill any demon that tries to get in or out. If so I say the Ol' Light bringer post some powerful Calabim at the gates of Heavan. Sincerly Bard Demon of canon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:10:37 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell The Bard wrote: > I was reading Heavan and Hell last night and I got to the part about > the two an Servants of Dominic posted at the gates of hell. Well one > is a Malikim. This set with me wrong because he can't suffer and evil > to live. 1) The people streaming past are all dead, and most or all of the demons he sees are without corporeal vessels and thus dead, or not alive anyway, in the physical sense. The physical sense would seem to be enough; no one seems to think Malakim are obliged to soul-kill every demon they encounter. 2) I think the complete oath is "suffer an evil to live when it is his choice." I presume this Malakite is under orders from Dominic to stay at his post and screen the incoming souls. Thus he is relieved of choice. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 15:14:33 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, The Bard wrote: > I was reading Heavan and Hell last night and I got to the part about the > two an Servants of Dominic posted at the gates of hell. Well one is a > Malikim. This set with me wrong because he can't suffer and evil to > live. He can do so if he's ordered to by his Superior. > He should be killing anything that walks through the door. Does he try > to kill any demon that tries to get in or out. No; he makes sure that no human souls enter Hell unless they deserve to, and doesn't kill demons unless they interfere with that duty. > If so I say the Ol' Light bringer post some > powerful Calabim at the gates of Heavan. If Lucifer tries, Laurence or Michael will come out and kill it. If Lucifer sends a Calabim powerful enough to hold off one Archangel, several Archangels will gang up on it. Heaven has the advantage here because angels cooperate better than demons; Lucifer himself couldn't hold out if Laurence, Michael, David, and Janus sallied out together against him. And if that's what it took to chase away a demon standing at the gate of Heaven, that's what they'd do. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:34:48 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Granting Words (Re: Lost Words?) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 10:03 AM -0500 8/6/98, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > >CaelinR@aol.com wrote: > > > >> Pondering #2: What is so special about Lucifer that allows him to > >> grant words? > > > >Anyway, can't DPs grant Words at the sub-Prince level? > > Nope. (Not in canon, anyway.) > > >I mean, does the Demon of Practical Jokes get his Word from Kobal or > >from Lucifer? > > Lucifer. (Kobal talks Lucifer into it.) > > >And can't individual AAs grant sub-Archangel Words to servitors? > > I don't think so. Yup, yup, yup. Lucifer, the Seraphim Council and God are the only ones that grant Words of whatever level. > *Perhaps* the Princes could get together in an Infernal Council -- but > #1: they don't cooperate that well and > #2: Lucifer has reserved Word-binding to himself alone (IPG, p. 11), > so anyone trying to start this will be answering questions to the > Game... If ol' Lucy didn't just rub them out immediately... you need a good example every millenia or so to keep people in their place. ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:40:14 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> _Fall of the Malakim_ Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > > At 12:08 PM -0400 8/6/98, Twila Oxley Price wrote: > > >A few too many typos for my peace of mind, as well. It took long > >enough, and they are the kind that spellcheckers could easily get -- > >so why didn't they? > > Blest and bedamned if I know! Send me a list, could you? (Of > course, I've read that thing some umpty times and probably wouldn't > have noted a typo if it had come up and gnawed on my toes . . . > Oh, so that's why my feet look chewed on.) A pitiful wailing rends the night... "I want my copy!" And to make it worse, I saw copies, dozens of them, at GenCon but none of them were my copy. Phooey! [I'm sure mine is on the way, but that only whets my appetite to a fever pitch!] - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:49:59 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine Song Book now available for playtest David Edelstein wrote: > The In Nomine Song Book playtest files are now online. Visit > http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/login/playtest/ to access them. > > The discussion board for it will be activated on Friday. > > You have to be a subscriber to Pyramid to get them, of course. (If you > aren't a subscriber, why not? It's a measly $15/year.) > > Now's your chance to have some actual input on an upcoming In Nomine > supplement. As the editor of the Songbook (and the guy who wrote the > majority of it), I will be very interested in your comments. Those comments > belong on the Pyramid playtest board, of course -- NOT here! What he said! I'm sure Beth will be VERY displeased if confidential stuff is spread on this mailing list. Don't do it and save yourself a LOT of heartache. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:54:31 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Dissonance question Doug Muir wrote: > You can pick holes in this example, of course. But the question still > remains. Can an angel get Dissonance for "generically evil" actions? > > My vote is yes... at least sometimes, when the action is *clearly* evil. > After all, being "good" is part of all angels' nature... it's the common > substrate of all the Choirs. But canon, I think, is silent on this > point. In my campaign, I give dissonance for exactly three things (not including weirdo special cases). A celestial violating their own nature, violating the Word of their Superior (either in letter or in essence) or violating the mandate of heaven. The last category is what you are talking about here and it's pretty tricky to judge. In the above examples, I would be inclined NOT to give out dissonance if the character were clearly supporting their Word or their mission and slap some on them otherwise. I think this one belongs with the individual GMs... since God disappeared the 'mandate of heaven' has been unclear and individual AA and angels have had to work out stuff for themselves. - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Aug 98 9:38:20 PDT From: nick jost Subject: Re: IN> Fall of the Malakim [Spoilers Ahead!] I haven't bought the book, but, if the Malakim does fall, what's the point? I hate when a game sets something up and then breaks it down for a story. Malakim can't fall. I like that. I like an exception to the rule. It makes Malakim characters different and special. Nick ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Aug 98 10:22:35 PDT From: nick jost Subject: Re: IN> More FotM grumbles So now the question is, will FotM be decalared an uncannonical heretic work? Based on: o Cannon is consistant o FotM is not consistant with cannon Nick ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:02:22 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Dissonance question Emily Dresner wrote: > And as for a Bright Lilim, I would think there was an accounting done up > front during the debriefing after redemption, so there are no surprises > and no gotchas. If there is something hanging off of her that is > extremely dangerous and cannot be removed or purchased (like say, for > instance, a Geas/5 owed to Malphas himself), then the price she pays for > redemption is permentant retirement in Heaven. She's played the game, and > she's won, and now she gets to collect her prize and spend eternity > sitting by the pool sipping Mai Tais. I dunno about that. The fact that the Other Side no longer has a Lilim is nice, but Lilim are more useful than for sitting around and looking pretty. Redeeming an angel is a GREAT effort... much more than merely destroying one. AAs expect to get their investment back. Most Bright Lilim are sent back to the trenches with a (spoken or unspoken) goal of getting rid of those pesky Geasa/hooks or making darn sure that they don't cause a problem to heaven. Sure, it might not be their primary mission on Earth, but it's in there somewhere! - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:05:18 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Dissonance question Emily Dresner wrote: > (I love this for, say, Fate. An infinite series of bookshelves, filling > cabinets, and meeting rooms, all confined in a finite space, opening up > at predetermined points to various random points in Hell, and once > inside, you can NEVER ESCAPE because you're trapped for an infinite > amount of time in eternally recursing stacks of paper.) I think this is where Dilbert lives... expect that description only touch on the surface of their 'Mission statement'. ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:06:34 -0500 From: The Bard Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell > Lucifer himself couldn't hold out if > Laurence, Michael, David, and Janus sallied out together against him. And > if that's what it took to chase away a demon standing at the gate of > Heaven, that's what they'd do. But if thats what it takes to win the war. Nah we got better things to do. Thay would not come out themselves thay would send a group of servants. If thay can't ban together to win the war why would thay for this for this. And don't give me that "It is a direct assalt on heavan" it is not because it is just out side as long as thay don't go in it should be cool. "Hay man I can stand anywhere I want." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:12:19 -0400 From: "Matthew D. Gandy" Subject: Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) I apologize beforehand for much snippage and, in some cases, small commentary, but my main argument is below: Eeyore wrote: > Walter Milliken wrote: > > > Personally, I'd prefer this be left as Canon Doubt and Uncertainty. > > Ditto, actually. I also agree, but I have this gripe: I think it is wrong to develop something into an important, potentially canon-altering story, *then* slap it onto the CDaU list. For example, I would be extremely peeved to see an adventure that heavily involved Janus and Valefor, made further *strong* insinuations that they are allied (or even the same celestial)--part of the condemnation of the PCs at the end of FotM is due to Janus' "sources" saying the Fallen Malakim bit is infernal rhetoric--and then slap the Janus/Valefor dilemma on the CDaU list. > > > These are > > >unique circumstances. Who knows what kinds of flaws Max's Heart has > > >developed over those tortuous years? I'd wager that no angel, Malakite > > >or not, has *ever* accumulated so much Discord (33 levels!) without > > >being destroyed. Perhaps it hasn't cracked as an Outcast's Heart cracks, > > >but structural weaknesses could very well exist. > > > > In talking to Elizabeth last night, I learned that some material that > > was cut (I think because of the APG stuff on Malakim) supported this > > notion. This part of it probably should have been added into FotM. > > Agreed. I agree again, but I am worried about the *little* things that seem to be escaping from the books, or getting cut without realizing until later they're important. I know it's difficult to coordinate amongst several writers for the various sections of the books, but perhaps more strongly defined goals or questions-to-be-answered in the planning stages would help. > > There's any number of little mysteries in FotM that could have been > > cleared up. Unfortunately, I think answering them all would have driven > > the page budget *way* over. > > Unfortunately, not answering them leaves a large blind spot. It would be a > particular problem if a campaign for which the adventure is run had the PCs > establish themselves in LA for some time before its events. This would > improve the role-playing aspects of the adventure, but it's hard to tell what > sorts of things Malphas and Kobal are up to in setting up their plot. An > adventure of this epic a scale and as filled with tragedy as it is has more > impact if it has some build up within a campaign. This is where wanting to > know how the Demonic Duo found out about Pendrake's construct comes in. If > the characters are around during that period, they may pick up a clue or two > that something is up. Perhaps they unwittingly throw a spanner into the > works that the DD has to work around. As it is written, Fall of the Malakim > has no dynamic element to it. It's like the GM might as well stand up and > read the plot to the players raher than game it out. > > > Probably true. Though any number of people have griped here on the > > amount of space used by adventures so far.... > > Depends on what I get. Fall of the Malakim is the first adventure published > for IN that deserves a whole lot of space. The Demon Prince of Rock and Roll > could be a lot of fun to run or play, but it is basically a gag plotline. > The adventures in The Marches and Heaven & Hell were pretty much throwaways > that mostly seem to be in there because, well, we ought to have a scenario in > here. > > > The problem here is that it wouldn't have happened at all. SJGames has > > found in the past that adventure books simply don't sell well enough to > > cover the effort of making them. I believe this is one of the reasons > > for the format of the Cycle books. > > I don't really know what sales are like at the different companies, but I > think SJG may be miscalculating on this one. I can see why adventure books > don't sell very well for GURPS, but IN may be a different market. The > adventure books for Call of Cthulhu seem to do pretty well. It helps that > Chaosium has taken the quality level of their adventure products to a level > that no one else in the industry approaches, but this is an approach that I > think In Nomine could try. And I'd probably pick up at least one novel that > the company decided to use to get more of a following. The fiction in the > game books has been among the best I've ever seen in a gaming product. I > know, I know; daming with faint praise. Still, I'd give it a try if it came > out. > > But, in the current format there just isn't room for what is being tried. > FotM attempts three major accomplishments: expanded write-ups, establishing a > city, and a major adventure. This is at least one thing too many. None of > those things gets the attention it needs. Here is the heart of the matter: there are going to be differing opinions about the Cycle books. The core books are relatively straightforward: an Angel book, a Demon book, an Artifacts book, a Song book, a Tether book, etc. The Cycle books, on the other hand, are slaves to many masters. They must present expanded Superior writeups (rather than do a core book on each Superior, or a collection of Superiors--The War Party book, for instance), background information not covered in a core book (Saints, Sorcerers and Undead--oh my!--although the idea of a Human Player's Guide seems to be picking up steam), settings (Austin, the Marches, LA, etc.), and adventures (I'm sure I've missed some). Oh, and there are several overarcing ideas that are played with and resolved within the confines of each Cycle. Can't forget that--it moves the whole IN universe *forward*--without it, it's a stagnant setting. A possible solution to the woes plaguing FotM (and other Cycle books) would be to *divide* them into two separate areas. Have a settings and adventure book--LA, with all of its locations and NPCs, with "The Premiere" and "Fall of the Malakim" given the space they need (24 extra pages become available if pages 8 through 31 go into another book). Have a background book--the Marches, the nature of dreamscapes, the Far Marches and their denizens, expanded rules for Ethereals, how to get from the ethereal to the corporeal or celestial and back, etc.--or a Superiors book (again, a War Party (Michael, Laurence, etc.) book, an Outsiders book (Eli, Gabriel, Jordi, etc.). Important Cycle material could go into either--LA can be the starting ground for Armageddon, or important bits about the Children of the Grigori can go into a background book. From a sales perspective, it's a tough call. I personally believe it is my duty, a gamer's duty, in a sense, to support SJGames as much as I can with my voting dollar, since I think they put out some great games. So I buy *all* the IN books, regardless. For now. Should they seriously disappoint, I'd still pick them up for a while, hoping they would get their act together in the meantime. As for other people, I know that many gamers pick and choose the supplements that are released, based on how much of what they want is in it (Do I need these Superiors? Am I going to use the Marches as a setting heavily?). So SJG has to use the "scattershot" approach of having a little of everything in the Cycle books, hoping *something* there entices gamers to buy it. I disapprove of this method, but I understand the mentality of it. I think it would be more useful to concentrate related information into the same book, rather than sprinkle here and there--yes, David and Lilith were important Superiors to include in FotM, but they're absence wouldn't have destroyed the setting or the adventures. Some people won't buy the concentrated books, or buy approximately the same amount (again, picking and choosing) as they do with the Cycle book. But let's face it--the cross-referencing is turning into a nightmare. Where was that bit about Blandine? In her Marches writeup? The core book? The APG? I know concentration is impossible as well, to an extent, but it seems worthwhile to overdo somethings slightly, rather than sacrifice important things to page count. I heard Paris was going to be included in Final Trumpet, but has been dropped. It makes me ask how important it is, and what we miss without it. Don't get me wrong--I want the Cycles to continue--I just think a good rethink might be just the ticket in the lull between Cycles, so that the next year works even better than this one did, and we aren't faced with the possibility of buying repacking old stuff a ways down the road. But I'm sure I've ranted enough. :) - -Matthew D. "Demiurge" Gandy still looking for the face I had before the world was made ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:14:06 -0500 From: The Bard Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell > 1) The people streaming past are all dead, and most or all of > the demons he sees are without corporeal vessels and thus dead, > or not alive anyway, in the physical sense. The physical sense > would seem to be enough; no one seems to think Malakim are obliged > to soul-kill every demon they encounter. Your second reason I could buy but this I must disagree. Evan PC know these soals are not dead and thay will regenirate vessals and be back on earth soon. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:49:02 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> Lilim power Walter Milliken wrote: > Actually, a much stickier case would be a Lilim with a Role as a nurse > -- she resonates the family of people with severe illnesses, who are > almost certain to be desperate for their loved one to recover, and uses > the Corporeal Song of Healing/6 to cure them. However, I'd again say > she'd have to visibly be the cause of the cure; otherwise the potential > victims will merely think it was modern medicine that did the cure, and > wouldn't feel any debt to the Lilim. As long as it wasn't part of her job, I'd go with you on that. Lilim get geases for doing things that aren't already covered by another agreement. If you are a nurse, it's your JOB to help people get better. Now, if that pretty candystriper happens to wave a big bag of mojo over a sick person... ;) > > > (And just how many geases can a lilim pick up from any one action on > >her part? If it was something a lot of people needed...?) > > If she's clever, probably a fair number, though the canon on the > Haagenti attunement implies that a degree of personal involvement is > required. (This doesn't seem to be in the FAQ, though I think John > ruled a while back that a Lilim of Haagenti can't simply cook a banquet > and hook everyone who eats it.) Yup. There's an individual aspect to hooking up a Geas. You can make a banquet for 5 people, let's say, but you have to invoke the Haagenti Lilim attunement five times if you want to grab everyone. Mind you, this isn't really that difficult! Just gotta spend five times as much effort and time in the kitchen. Heh. (My favorite character is a Lilim of Haagenti... wanna come over for dinner?) OTOH, I'd let a clever single action apply to multiple people in terms of favors as long as the resonance was applied to every person. For example, leaving a jewelry store unlocked might be a GREAT thing for a local street gang. Some of them might have a greater need than others and some might not care. And, of course, the Lilim could fail on certain ones. Remember that the favor in this case is mitigated in that each gang member doesn't get access to the whole store; just how much they could personally grab and were allowed to keep by the head of the gang. > That's all quite consistent with how I perceive Bright Lilim psychology, > but I'd still allow them to create Geases if they wanted -- they just > aren't all that likely to, except where it's needed for some reason > (i.e., to get a demon to do something). It's also useful for tracking people (most Lilim have Songs for this). - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:56:51 -0400 From: John Karakash - Lucent ASCC Subject: Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) Walter Milliken wrote: > > > It is unknown if Blandine is aware of the nature of > >Mira's Geas, or that it is owed to her former boss, just as it is > >unknown (or at least unmentioned) whether or not Cherubim (perhaps even > >Blandine herself) are attuned to Mira. > > I would expect that Blandine (and Dominic, at the least!) would know who > the Geas is owned to -- redeemed demons are debriefed heavily. Except the Geasa owed to Lilith herself which can be transferred to others and might be _anywhere_. Darn it. ;) - -- ___________________________________________________ / \ | John Karakash - Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs | | (919)380-4629 MIB2300 | | | | The power to tax involves the power to destroy. | | -Chief Justice Marshall | \___________________________________________________/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 18:16 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> More FotM grumbles >So now the question is, will FotM be decalared an uncannonical heretic work? > >Based on: >o Cannon is consistant >o FotM is not consistant with cannon Actually, it's not particularly inconsistent with canon, except the bit in the APG about breaking Hearts. And it will be the APG that loses that battle, I'm pretty sure. Most of the other problems seem to be more of the "how did *that* happen?" or "Superior would have to be stupid to do *that*" varieties. These aren't issues of canon as much as of personal opinion. Which isn't to say they're not important, or relevant, but they're not really canon issues, per se. These are more flaws in the presentation of the adventure, in that there apparently isn't enough explanation of what's going on for readers to understand what happened, how it happened, or why it happened -- at least enough to buy into the plot line. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:14:04 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Angelic Hearts At 10:19 PM -0500 8/11/98, Eeyore wrote: >Our beloved line editor writes: > >"Others note that most Hearts can't be shattered by others... Yes, >this took an artifact specially made by the Prince of Factions, who >knows quite a lot about fractures... " > >I have two very serious problems with this response. The first is that >the statement in the APG contains no wiggle room. I will quote again, >slightly more fully. "Only the angel's own actions can cause the final >destruction of his Heart. Until an Outcast falls, his Heart is sacred >and inviolable, even to his Superior." There is no ambiguity in this >statement. It does not admit the possibility of, "...but Malphas knows >a lot about fractures, so he can create an artifact that can do it." Count up all the Discord that Max had. How many times over would he have Fallen, if he had not been Virtue? (Also, I have just realized that some of the material that would have made this much more obvious was cut for space reasons, being deemed to be too close to material in the APG -- with the *exception* of some commentary about what happens to a Heart if you pile up that much Discord. Pardon me while I go over and curse fit to make a Shedite blush.) Also, there are no Archangels I know of who have a Word which is *dedicated* to severing bonds (such as that between an angel and his Archangel, or, conceivably, an angel and his Heart). No one can lift a Geas-hook, either -- except Lilith, who knows them better than any others. No one can stand up to Lucifer in single combat -- except Michael. Think INWO. The Superiors can sometimes manage "impossible" things because of the strength of their Words. They break the rules, though only in that small area where their Word *is* the rules. And yes, this is a one-of-a-kind relic (and a one-shot, I believe -- I think he wanted it back so the proof would be missing), that Malphas took a nice long time crafting. Possibly as long as Max has been in LA. At 9:13 PM -0500 8/12/98, Eeyore wrote: >Walter Milliken wrote: > >[...] this situation is not going to compel her >to bring the artifact back and get killed. (I've been thinking that this may have been Mira remembering (foolishly, but do all PCs act rationally?) when she was a Lilim and abusing her in such a way would have gotten Mother annoyed. In fact, it may be that Mother *is* a little put out, when she finds out...) >Actually, I think even the task >of destroying Max's Heart might be a Level 6, because in the not too >unlikely chance that she gets caught, Dominic is going to insist that >she executed. This depends on your Dominic. If she'd escaped and gone and reported herself to Blandine or Judgment, then the Geas would have been *wasted*. (If anything, Max *needed* some attention -- that situation was Bad.) She would have fulfilled the Geas, no dissonance, no Geas, informed people so maybe Max would get some help, and Max gets a new Heart, and what's the harm? [With *my* Dom...] She probably would have gotten a lecture, maybe been "grounded" somewhere for a while, and basically gotten wrist-slapped. Of course, it didn't happen like that, which shows the folly of second-guessing Princes and what they're going to do. Of other course, there's the bit in the main book about how *nice* and *reasonable* Malphas is. "No hard feelings, dear. Just this one little favor, and you're free to go. It's a politics thing. If I can do this, then Someone Important will owe me a bet, you know how it is." - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #913 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.