From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Aug 13 19:18:32 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 TAA14012 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 19:18:32 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id TAA03623 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 19:03:20 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 19:03:20 -0500 Message-Id: <199808140003.TAA03623@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 #914 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 914 In this digest: IN> Geased Folk in Heaven (Re: Dissonance question) Re: IN> Why not take Dissonance to escape Geas? Re: IN> Dissonance question Re: IN> More FotM grumbles Re: IN> Dominic's Resonance (FotM Spoiler) Re: IN> Angelic Players' Guide (FotM spoiler) IN> Spooking Shedim (Re: Malakites and burning villages) Re: IN> Loose Forces? [FotM Spoilers] Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) IN> Humanity Attunement (Re: Demon Conception) Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) IN> over page counts RE: IN> Angelic Hearts Re: IN> over page counts Re: IN> Dissonance question Re: IN> Dominic's Resonance (FotM Spoiler) IN> Thanks Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Gates of hell Re: IN> Gates of hell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:47:56 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Geased Folk in Heaven (Re: Dissonance question) At 10:25 AM -0400 8/12/98, Emily Dresner wrote: >(How a Lilim with an active Geasa can go anywhere in Heaven without being >asked anything is beyond me. Actually, I'd been figuring that an invoked Geas and an unspecified promise-Geas (like Lilith's, yadda) looked the same. (Okay, so I made an invoked one turn gold in my Movie Trailer. That wasn't canon...) Mind you, she'd be stuck with saying "This is the Geas I owe to Malphas," but she's said that before... (And hiding in Heaven doesn't help -- Celestial Tongues...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:15:44 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Why not take Dissonance to escape Geas? At 11:20 PM -0500 8/11/98, Eeyore wrote: >If this is the case, then no Archangel in his or her right mind would set a >Bright Lilim loose to face the world with a significant geas owed to an >infernal, particularly a DP. It's a situation that truly will always end in >tears. No matter how risky, they'll strip the geases from the Bright. Maybe kill the Bright, versus maybe the Prince will waste the Geas somehow that you can deal with afterwards... Blandine didn't want to betray the trust of her Servitor. (Cherubim, yeesh.) Hey, at least in LA there wasn't much Mira could do that was *really* bad (they thought). She didn't know anything crucial, she wasn't part of any vital plans... She was showing that Lilim *do* survive Redemption, that Lilim *aren't* all given over to the "little dictator and his sword," and a number of other things that contradict demonic propaganda. Even if she'd died, she'd have shown that Brights do exist... And LA is practically Lilim-Central. Mira's a walking advertisement -- and worth more for that exposure, probably, than for risking her life Geas-stripping. >> (Also note that in the FotM situation, there was only *one* path >> that would have brought her dissonance -- resisting the Geas. The >> rest was *bad*, it was *wrong*, it was *rude* even. But it wasn't >> dissonant.) > >Which shows the deficiency of using dissonance as the primary (if not only) >measuring stick for an angel's morality. Morality, yup, true. But as Walter and Jo point out later, Morality isn't necessarily the yardstick to measure an angel's angelicness. At 12:37 PM +0100 8/12/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >If the situation were properly >> role-played (assuming Mira were a PC) I would never condemn her to Fall, >> no matter how much dissonance she picked up in resisting the geas. >> >Nor should you. IIRC, violating a Geas doesn't cause dissonance rolls, >even though it causes dissonance. IIRC, once the Geas has been fulfilled, the dissonance fades, yes. (Though if you make any *other* dissonance rolls during that time, it adds to them!) If a Geas becomes impossible, you get to keep the dissonance (plus a final one), and then roll. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:39:20 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Dissonance question At 3:06 AM +0100 8/13/98, Jo Hart wrote: >At 19:49 12/08/98 EDT, you wrote: > >>>Yep. I agree. Once you have agreed, you give up your right to resist >>>whatever the lilim decides to ask for. >> >>We actually use this in our game -- if you actually *admit* that you owe >>a Lilim, she gets a full Geas on you, not just a "hook" that may or may >>not work. So the sneaky little demons often try to get you to admit >>it.... > >Fine by me :) I like that as a house rule. Can the lilim trick someone into >doing this when she hasn't done anything for them at all? :) (I'd say yes, >actually...) Since it's basically the Promises resonance trick from the IPG, then yup... You can promise her something, and if you don't resist... >[...] You don't have to walk up to someone and hand them >$40,000 with an IOU attached, you could just fake a letter from the >national lottery or a deceased aunt or some vaguely believable excuse, It's quite possible that the favor not only needs to come from the Lilim, but you could say that it needs to come from her *openly*, for the hook to take effect, if the GM feels Lilim are getting out of hand. (The other thing the GM can do to Lilim is make sure that they get Needs they can't possibly fulfill (tough for those Generous Discord Lilim, but hey). One "angel-trap"/"Lilim-trap" is the Need for the Lilim to be redeemed, usually found in angels.) >(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...?) (She has to have seen the Need in each of them...) >I actually think that working such that only Brights have the need sensing >ability could explain a lot about their psychology. As I've seen it, the Brights can still take a hook or enforce a Geas, but they rarely *want* to. They may do favors and then blow the hooks away (or never claim them, or whatever the GM & player like for SFX), so that they can't turn them into Geases later. (As a note, my Renegade accidentally got a hook on an Elohite NPC (see "angel-trap," above) and instantly ran to him to apologize and vanish the hook. You see, he'd been wanting her to understand selflessness better than she did before, so when she did -- she no longer wanted the hook.) (That's why my Lilim call such things "traps" -- because if they can fulfill the Need, they would no longer *want* the hook...) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:39:41 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> More FotM grumbles At 12:55 PM -0400 8/12/98, York H. Dobyns wrote: >o The excuse that the APG describes things angels believe, rather than the >underlying reality of the game-world, has been used to explain Malphas' >ability to create an artifact that would shatter a Heart in Heaven. If >this is so, though, Maximilian's sentence becomes impossible. The final >segments of the APG I just errata'ed the last sentence of p. 117, if anyone cares. (And, to rant and rave, APG passed without any Line Editor whatsoever. My best tweaks were to remove some of the check-digit tables. If I'd been truly in the saddle, the APG would have been.... much different.) >o The description of Malakim *in the core rules* makes it clear that your >Superior's orders take precedence over your oaths, or at least over the >"Suffer not an evil to live" oath due to its phrasing. Maximilian has no >business taking dissonance for failing to fight the demons of LA; he has >been explicitly *ordered* not to do so, and the core rules explicitly >declare that this does not cause dissonance. For that oath. You will notice he has others which cause him trouble and do not have that handy loophole of "when it's your choice." (And he *wants* to kill the demons, oh yes, so that stresses him.) [Yes, I was aware that if he'd been ordered to stay, the standard Living Evil oath would be overruled by the orders. That's why he has the other oaths.] >What I want to know is, why does her Superior -- a Cherub >Archangel, after all -- not hold her as an attunement, or direct one of >the more powerful Cherubs in her service to do so, with the specific >intent of rescuing her whenever her Geas gets called in? [...] There was probably a Judgment Cherub attuned to her as a subject of inquiry. (And if he didn't tweak his resonance at just the right time, then he didn't know she was in danger until Malphas started stripping Forces.) Me, I think Mira didn't realize what she was doing, entirely. #1: Malphas is Very Friendly, and #2: she could easily have thought that he was trying to get her kicked out by Heaven (and she was *sure* this wouldn't make her Archangel *that* mad with her). Or, heck use Ethereal Song of Charm to reduce her Intelligence for a moment, I don't know... (Brights have that 'Everything is nice' stage; obviously Mira didn't survive long enough for that to wear off.) >Now, this has been a somewhat iffy matter in other supplements, but it's >never been as blatant as in this case. How does the demonic hierarchy >*know* when a new celestial arrives? Go back a few days and look at the "how to bust a Role" discussion, probably. (I figure that they don't catch people *immediately*, but have enough people watching here and there that they catch people *eventually*, after months or years, and then they get vicious. And the more angels who know each other -- one of the times when angelic group mentality is bad -- the more get caught in the sweep. Ditto human Soldiers of God who know the angels.) And it's easy enough to hit someone and see if it causes disturbance, if he's been foiling you. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:38:43 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Dominic's Resonance (FotM Spoiler) At 9:09 PM -0500 8/12/98, Eeyore wrote: >I'll start this post out by saying that I can't find any reference to a >resonance not working as well if a Demon Prince is involved. It's a future reference, which I could have sworn I've made before, but I *thought* I stuck that in there as a close-to-house-rule. I think there *has* been some consensus that TRUTH has to peter out somewhere. Generally, a Seraph can't get a TRUTH that isn't connected to the person speaking. If you get Joe Schmoe to say, "I don't know who Jane Deer is! I don't know where she lives!" and Joe Schmoe has never even *met* Jane, then the TRUTH is not, "He tells the truth and the Truth is she's at x street." The TRUTH is, "He tells the Truth. He does not know who she is or where she lives." Also note the tactics in Evading Seraphim (APG, p. 25 -- "I don't care to answer that" is one way to evade, and you don't necessary get *WHY* they don't care to do so). One good reason to say that Superiors can't always get obscene check digits on what other Superiors are doing is that otherwise one could question little demonling captives about, "What are Baal's plans?" and when it answered, Michael would say, "And the TRUTH is..." Feh. Makes no sense. Must be something about being a Superior that makes it harder to read 'em. Since nobody knows what happened to *Max*, no Superior Seraphim can tell whether Max is alive, dead, Fallen, or what. They might be able to tell that the destroyed "Malakim" were a fake and a construct, respectively, but that doesn't tell them where *Max* went. And there's some stuff in FT which the GM can use to suggest that the Outcasting is a ploy by Yves. >I'm not sure that the construct would be covered. (I'm still curious >about how Malphas and Kobal found out about it. Pendrake Carmichael's >write-up is explicit that only he and Hopscotch know anything at all. And Malphas is in cozy with Hopscotch. p. 51, FotM. >Or is Dominic so distraught that the moment he finds out that they think >the fakes were fake, he immediately drops the hammer without asking any >more questions? Possibly, too. He's none too stable at the moment. ("Malakim Falling! It's Lucifer and Asmodeus all over again!") And yesssss, this might be a punishment that's greater than the crime. And he may have to make amends later. And then there's the point that Dominic is war-faction... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:36:15 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Angelic Players' Guide (FotM spoiler) At 9:23 PM -0500 8/12/98, Eeyore wrote: >Well, my first problem with Mira being able to break Maximilien's Heart >seems to have been decided in favor of the APG being pretty unreliable. >If this is the case, would the Powers That Be at least consider doing an >errata list for it? For my $18.00, it'd be nice to know which parts are >reliable. There *is* an errata list. But, for my part, the things I'm sizzling on my back burner are: The whole Falling chapter, especially the bits with Elohim and Malakim. Many (if not all) of the Expanded Resonance Check Digit Tables. Mercurians. Some of the Malakite stuff (they didn't attack Hitler because they were ordered to let human Free Will be free, IMO). Some of the Angelic History (errata I sent in a while back and need to find again because it's obviously not been put up yet). Some throwaway lines here and there which come up and bite me when I've forgotten them. When they're well done (crispy, even!), then, well... At 1:14 PM -0400 8/13/98, Emily Dresner wrote: >Well, Beth's comments on the Falling section of the APG are always very >interesting, detailed, and filled with helpful commentary. :) :) :) Em has heard me discuss this in private, yes. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:53:58 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Spooking Shedim (Re: Malakites and burning villages) At 12:35 PM +0300 8/13/98, Yossi Gurvitz wrote: >At 02:51 13/08/98 , you wrote: > >>You want the best way to catch the Shedite in the room full of people? >> Have the Malakite break something, out of sight, so that the other >>people won't see it. [...] > IMO, the disturbance from a Song or a broken item is very low - few >celestials will notice it, unless they're (again, IMO) within a few hundred >meters. The really good way is to use Thunder. The person who's left functioning afterwards is the one who made his Will roll -- probably the demon... (You want troublesome Shedim? Shedim of Death in the police morgue. With the Zombi attunement.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:09:09 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Loose Forces? [FotM Spoilers] At 5:17 AM -0700 8/13/98, David Streeter wrote: >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"? As such, yes, I think so. >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. Kyriotates can spot humans with Soldier-potential. Which is "potential for a 6th Force" at base. >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). Mostly, yes, I think. That and that they can be tough to kill if they go rogue. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:29:44 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) At 1:35 PM -0400 8/13/98, Walter Milliken wrote: >> Max's true nature by the end of the adventure is unknown. [...] > >I believe this question will be answered. Yes. >> How does Kobal get ahold of his vessel (or one approximating it)? > >As far as I know, there's nothing to prevent a Superior from duplicating >the vessel of someone else. However, as I recall, it's actually Max's >vessel in this case. Elizabeth will have to answer this question -- I >don't remember the answer well enough to attempt it. There *is* an >explanation, though I missed it myself the first time around and asked >her the same question. There is an explanation. It is in FT. It is *BLATENTLY* in FT. It is so explicitly in FT that I can't talk about it. >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. [Of fragile Hearts] Yes. There was too much overlap (and inconsistant overlap) between APG and the rest of that section (and more space was needed), and that section had been around long enough that it was *obvious* Max had a more fragile Heart than most. Excuse me while I destroy some demonling servitors. >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. This is the major problem, yes. The page budget. (I had a really nice box for Lilith, too, which was 150 words over. Chopchop.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:08:39 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Humanity Attunement (Re: Demon Conception) At 9:23 AM -0400 8/13/98, Neel Krishnaswami wrote: >Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >> >>At 12:51 PM +0100 8/12/98, Kevin Walsh wrote: >> >>>I'm not sure about the use of Humanity. You have to pay Essence every day >>>in order to maintain the human state (IIRC), and don't get any Essence >>>while doing so. >> >>It's not clear if you can't be *fed* daily Essence, though, by >>someone else. (Gamesters get 2 per day, and Humanity only needs 1.) > >This statement implies that humans can have Rites. Wha? No, it doesn't. It implies that humans can be "fed" Essence by celestials or other humans who have conscious control over their Essence. (I.e., by those who know how to transfer Essence.) >(I had only seen undead have them in the book, and wasn't clear >if that generalized to real humans.) Normal humans can have Rites. That's in Night Music. >o Does the essence spent on maintaining Humanity cause a disturbance? Probably. 1 whole note of disturbance. > If so, how does that jibe with someone who gets a "6" on the disturbance > detection check digit -- which would normally reveal what the Essence > was spent on? It reveals... "This Essence was spent on an Attunement." >o How does Humanity and the Seraph resonance interact? If a seraph asks a > demon with Humanity active whether he's a demon, and the demon says "no", > then what will the seraph realize at each check digit? The demon *is* a human... For the moment. Since only Lucifer can tell the difference, I'd say that the Seraph is going to be lucky to even get a *suspicious* reading (like, "But it's only part-time"). Of course, a smart Gamester won't put this to the test. If a Seraph asks, "Are you a demon?" the Gamester says, "Excuse me? Have you taken your Prozac today?" Now, if the Gamester says something about whether he is or is not working for Hell, that's a different story. Someone could easily figure that he's Hellsworn. Yes, it's powerful (though it does keep the demon from using Songs and other cute demon tricks, and exposes them to the Marches at night ). The GM has to do a certain amount of fudging to make it work right. [And then there's the Lilim who rolled a 666 when lying to the Revelations Ofanite about being a human. Except she's a proto-Renegade. She got turned into a 9-Force human, would have been for 48 hours, except she later got a 111...] - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:35:25 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell At 2:51 PM -0500 8/13/98, 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 Malikite. >This set with me wrong because he can't suffer an evil to live. Of His Own Choice. Dominic has obviously ordered him to suffer evil to live. Explicitly. (Of course, the Malakite there is probably just counting the seconds till he gets to cut loose.) (And no, Max was not getting dissonance for that Oath. It was the others. "Never allow the name of Heaven to be dishonored," say. Or the one that got him a tail -- "Protect fellow servants of God." (He was standing by and letting the Seraph face a powerful Bal, without helping...)) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 18:34 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> FotM's supposed Flaws (Spoilers aplenty!) >> > 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. Unfortunately, more discussion would get into spoilers for Final Trumpet, which I can't do. I think I'll defer further comment on this issue until people have seen FT -- whatever happens with this, will be in there, not FotM. > 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. To the best of my knowledge, that particular question *is* on the list to be resolved, and will *not* be CDaU. We really need a way to mark which items in the books are really CDaU, and which are points of future expansion. >> > 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. Speaking from experience, there's another problem -- after you've seen N revisions of something, it's a little hard to be clear on whether everything in the N+1st revision is internally consistent, especially if you've read stuff that was later cut. This sort of problem is much easier to spot on a "cold" reading, which, unfortunately, everyone but the authors is now doing.... I will add that FotM has definitely been through N revisions (which partly explains its lateness). Also, the adventure was the last piece completed (except for the art), giving it the least time for final changes. Even so, the major flaws in FotM, from the complaints I've seen here, have mostly to do with unclarity in the adventure events, and with character motivations (esp. related to why their Superiors sent Max and Mira to LA). [lots of interesting comments on product concepts cut, and yes, we've been thinking about some similar ideas] > 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. Elizabeth and I have been thinking about exactly these issues -- there are a whole bunch of ideas floating around that may get picked up, that aren't part of the Cycle concept. There are serious marketing questions about what way to go -- with the industry in the bad shape it's in, there's not much room for error. The Cycle books don't seem to be particularly popular as a concept, so the concept may need to be revamped, or abandoned for another approach, such as more "core" books. I'm a bit iffy on whether the Cycles are a good idea or not, myself. Though Elizabeth and I do have some ideas for future Cycles.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 15:46:59 -0700 (PDT) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: IN> over page counts On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [snip] > >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. > This is the major problem, yes. The page budget. (I had a really nice > box for Lilith, too, which was 150 words over. Chopchop.) it's nice to see that there are other considerations that get made that we don't see in the final product of a book, but in cases like the above, is there any reason why we the buyers can't be given the information either in a future supplement or online? -=|horsefly|=- "Back off, preacher, I don't care if it's Sunday. I ain't no angel, but I never felt better!" --FREEDOM, Alice Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 19:02:58 -0400 From: ixDragons Subject: RE: IN> Angelic Hearts - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDC6ED.43CD03A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I wonder if that's how Angels fall? - -----Original Message----- From: Akira [SMTP:akira@sprint.ca] Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 1:55 PM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: Re: IN> Angelic Hearts Right or wrong is completely subjective - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDC6ED.43CD03A0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjoXAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAyAEAAAEAAAAQAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAATwAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAGluX25vbWluZS1sQGxp c3RzLmlvLmNvbQBTTVRQAGluX25vbWluZS1sQGxpc3RzLmlvLmNvbQAAHgACMAEAAAAFAAAAU01U UAAAAAAeAAMwAQAAABkAAABpbl9ub21pbmUtbEBsaXN0cy5pby5jb20AAAAAAwAVDAEAAAADAP4P BgAAAB4AATABAAAAGwAAACdpbl9ub21pbmUtbEBsaXN0cy5pby5jb20nAAACAQswAQAAAB4AAABT TVRQOklOX05PTUlORS1MQExJU1RTLklPLkNPTQAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAAeAPZfAQAAABkA AABpbl9ub21pbmUtbEBsaXN0cy5pby5jb20AAAAAAgH3XwEAAABPAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZnW4A 3QEPVAIAAAAAaW5fbm9taW5lLWxAbGlzdHMuaW8uY29tAFNNVFAAaW5fbm9taW5lLWxAbGlzdHMu aW8uY29tAAADAP1fAQAAAAMA/18AAAAAAgH2DwEAAAAEAAAAAAAAAtljAQSAAQAXAAAAUkU6IElO PiBBbmdlbGljIEhlYXJ0cwAgBwEFgAMADgAAAM4HCAANABMAAgA6AAQAPQEBIIADAA4AAADOBwgA DQATAAIABgAEAAkBAQmAAQAhAAAAMTREMDBCOEJBNzMyRDIxMUE4NUU0NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAAzwYB A5AGAMgEAAAhAAAACwACAAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAA AAAAQAA5AIDXK4MOx70BHgBwAAEAAAAXAAAAUkU6IElOPiBBbmdlbGljIEhlYXJ0cwAAAgFxAAEA AAAWAAAAAb3HDoLxiwvQFTKnEdKoXkRFU1QAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAA ABkAAABpeGRyYWdvbnNAbWluZHNwcmluZy5jb20AAAAAAwAGEELNPUoDAAcQyAAAAB4ACBABAAAA ZQAAAElXT05ERVJJRlRIQVRTSE9XQU5HRUxTRkFMTD8tLS0tLU9SSUdJTkFMTUVTU0FHRS0tLS0t RlJPTTpBS0lSQVNNVFA6QUtJUkFAU1BSSU5UQ0FTRU5UOldFRE5FU0RBWSxBVUcAAAAAAgEJEAEA AAClAQAAoQEAAFYCAABMWkZ138JCAQMACgByY3BnMTI1FjIA+Atgbg4QMDMznQH3IAKkA+MCAGNo CsDgc2V0MCAHEwKDAFChEHZwcnEyEXZ9CoDZCMggOwlvDjA1AoAKgWx1YwBQCwNjEhILxCBYSSB3 AiAEgSAGkCCSdBEAdCcEIGhvB+BSQQ8gZWwEIGYHQGx+PwqiCoQKgRaQAUASwG8KdAWQdBIEMTYg LfUbkk8FEGcLgAdABdAHkPxzYRjgG5MZhhqkGnELE0EapmktMTQ0AUBsjmkfMwzQHzNiIEYDYQo6 DINiEWFraXJhACBbU01UUDphGSFiQHMSwAuAdC5jfGFdGYUgYAZgAjAgx1eFCYBuB5BkYXksEXBw dWd1cwVADiAlADEoOTk4JYA6FZAgUDJNIxdUbyDHC4BfbmcDcAuAHNBsQB+AJWBzOC5pbyLQA3Aj GHViRmoa0SDHUmU6F0BOxj4YtA3gIEhlCsAowH8dPx5LC8UZlAGRB/AcAGj7BUAFsXcDYA8gF9AE ICkhRwtQEUAY8Hkgcyn0aVx2ZQrjCoATgQAyUAAAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAAADAIAQ/////0AA BzBg4m5kDse9AUAACDBg4m5kDse9AQsAAIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAAAwAC gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAEIUAAAAAAAADAAWACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA tw0AAB4AJYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABAAAADguMAADACaACCAGAAAAAADA AAAAAAAARgAAAAABhQAAAAAAAAsAL4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAA6FAAAAAAAAAwAwgAgg BgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAEYUAAAAAAAADADKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAYhQAAAAAA AB4AQYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADaFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeAEKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAA AAAARgAAAAA3hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgBDgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAOIUAAAEAAAAB AAAAAAAAAB4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AACw6g== - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDC6ED.43CD03A0-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 19:15 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> over page counts >> This is the major problem, yes. The page budget. (I had a really nice >> box for Lilith, too, which was 150 words over. Chopchop.) > it's nice to see that there are other considerations that get made >that we don't see in the final product of a book, but in cases like the >above, is there any reason why we the buyers can't be given the >information either in a future supplement or online? Sometimes book out-takes are published in Pyramid. Not usually for stuff this small, though. Maybe SJGames would allow it to be put up on the INC web site.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:18:29 -0700 (PDT) From: -=|horsefly|=- Subject: Re: IN> Dissonance question On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: [much useful stuff snipped] > (That's why my Lilim call such things "traps" -- because if they can > fulfill the Need, they would no longer *want* the hook...) maybe i'm not getting enough sleep, maybe i'm too selfish right now, or maybe it's been too long since i read all the Lilim relevent sections of IN, but i can't wrap my brain around the above point. would you mind explaining further? -=|horsefly|=- "Back off, preacher, I don't care if it's Sunday. I ain't no angel, but I never felt better!" --FREEDOM, Alice Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:29:11 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Dominic's Resonance (FotM Spoiler) Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 9:09 PM -0500 8/12/98, Eeyore wrote: > >I'll start this post out by saying that I can't find any reference to a > >resonance not working as well if a Demon Prince is involved. > > It's a future reference, which I could have sworn I've made before, > but I *thought* I stuck that in there as a close-to-house-rule. > > > > Since nobody knows what happened to *Max*, no Superior Seraphim > can tell whether Max is alive, dead, Fallen, or what. They might > be able to tell that the destroyed "Malakim" were a fake and a > construct, respectively, but that doesn't tell them where *Max* > went. I agree with the bits I edited out explaining why there need to be limits on what a Seraph's resonance can pick up, even for Dominic; in fact, I agree heartily. But this answer makes me want to jump up and down shouting at the top of my lungs. The Aftermath section says that Angelic PCs will not be believed if they say that what they found in LA were fakes. Exactly how this jibes with Janus saying that the fakes were an infernal plot, I'm not sure, but it does say so. But it nowhere mentions that the angels are being Outcast because they claim to know what has happened to Maximilien; quite the opposite, actually. And the only reason that they will have no evidence that they really were fakes is because Dominic's resonance is obscured by the presence of Demon Princes. And it turns out that this rule is published. . . nowhere. A key moment in this adventure apparently hinges on a house rule. At this point, I know about this bit of canon. Everyone else reading this post knows about it, too. But I'd bet that only a small percentage of those playing In Nomine subscribe to this list, or have even been to the IN website. What's a GM who is not in the know supposed to do if this whole bit blows up in his face and he doesn't know how the writers of the adventure avoided this problem? As someone else said, it's a bit of a problem that key rules are scattered throughout all of the books, sometimes leaving you in the lurch if you don't happen to own that particular one. But if rules are going to be relied upon that haven't even made it that far, there is a real problem. Even relying on the FAQ isn't sufficient. This rule needs to be published somewhere if it's going to turn out to be important. > And Malphas is in cozy with Hopscotch. p. 51, FotM. Ah, missed that part. I spent too much time looking at Pendrake's write-up and not enough with Hopscotch. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 18:34:14 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: IN> Thanks As the discussion of Fall of the Malakim goes on, I would like to publicly thank those involved for answering my bitching, and particularly Walter Milliken and Archangel Beth. I have a lot of problems with FotM, and I've been very vocal about it. I'll continue to be, and I'm sure it will happen again. (What, you think I got hung with the tag "Eeyore" by accident?) But it is nice to know that someone is listening. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 16:37:49 -0700 From: Gryph Clarke Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell The people streaming past are all dead, my friend. They're the souls of people which, according to Canon, do NOT go back Earthside as demons. They hang out and are miserable in Hell. Why would the Malakim want to kill human souls? I don't think he's that bored. Also, the books state that a couple of demons have messed with Daniel and Hutriel and have been quite sorry they did so. And, to stuff in an answer to another comment you made, I rather think that Lucifer standing at Heaven's gate would prompt Michael to unlimber his axe. He'd probably love to have a rematch and stretch himself. To ask a question of the group that I'm sure is answered somewhere that I've overlooked...which IS the Malakim? Daniel or Hutriel? - - Gryph The Bard wrote: > > 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 16:38:17 -0700 From: Gryph Clarke Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell The people streaming past are all dead, my friend. They're the souls of people which, according to Canon, do NOT go back Earthside as demons. They hang out and are miserable in Hell. Why would the Malakim want to kill human souls? I don't think he's that bored. Also, the books state that a couple of demons have messed with Daniel and Hutriel and have been quite sorry they did so. And, to stuff in an answer to another comment you made, I rather think that Lucifer standing at Heaven's gate would prompt Michael to unlimber his axe. He'd probably love to have a rematch and stretch himself. To ask a question of the group that I'm sure is answered somewhere that I've overlooked...which IS the Malakim? Daniel or Hutriel? - - Gryph The Bard wrote: > > 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 19:34:03 -0400 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: Re: IN> Gates of hell At 5:14 PM -0400 8/13/98, The Bard wrote: >> 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. I;d say many Malakim would willingly carry it that far, it's just very, very difficult to Soul-Kill a Demon who isn't willing to stand there and fight you to the Death. > >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. Demons don't stream in through the Gates of Hell. Demons arriving and leaving Hell depart and Arrive near their Hearts, near the Hearts of the people they followed, or at the endpoint of a Tether. Most Demons who are in Hell don't have Vessels, and thus, will not be on Earth soon. Those with Vessels often already are on Earth, and not milling around collecting Souls from the Soul Yards. I know, this is a bit contrary to Marcus's little speech in the IPG, I'm assuming that means that sometime after he Fell, he was ordered to the Soul Yards of Hades for some reason or another. Humans who have died appear at the Gates of Hell. They're dead permanetly, and they're not getting out except in pieces, barring rare cases. Most of the Demons coming to collect them have no Vessels, and aren't getting out either. That, and the Malakim are ordered to keep scanning the peole as they pass through the gates, an activity that probably takes up all their free time. Their activity ,ensuring that the innocent are not punished unfairly, is more important than slaying the souls of the Dead and Demons. The Dead are being punished for what they did, and most of te Demons are incarcerated in Hell. ===== ><{{"> =================================================== <"}}>< ====== Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Trudy, Impudite Captain of Gluttony, the Demon of Popcorn nofori@pop3.utoledo.edu | Homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh maltesh@usa.net | In Nomine: http://members.tripod.com/~maltesh/T317 ===== ><{{"> ============ "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #914 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.