From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Sep 6 23:59:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24427 for ; Sun, 6 Sep 1998 23:59:55 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id XAA21596 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 6 Sep 1998 23:52:50 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 23:52:50 -0500 Message-Id: <199809070452.XAA21596@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 #939 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Sunday, September 6 1998 Volume 01 : Number 939 In this digest: Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Changing Sides IN> Re: IN- Balseraph of Fate / Malakite Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Changing Sides RE: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> Changing Sides Re: IN> A new way to compute Disturbance? IN> When an Archangel Falls... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 14:51:04 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides Eeyore wrote: > Is it canon that there is no Heaven or Hell in their future? IIRC, canon is that all undead acquire their unnatural vitality by having their soul fused into their body. The result is that, when the body finally dies, the soul is also destroyed. Undead are typically suckered into this by not having the mechanics explained clearly to them, or by persuading themselves that they will never physically die. True immortality of the soul is non-canonical. If course, it's your particular game... Canon does not say (that I recall) if a soul can be separated out again and un-undead-ed. Canon *does* say that Superiors can do things lesser beings cannot, and normal rules don't apply to them. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 98 15:09 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides >> I think the canon answer is, to some extent, than it simply doesn't >> happen very much -- remember that the personal qualifications for >> becoming a mummy (or vampire) are such that the person would have to >> make a *really* big psychological turnaround to reach the state of >> wanting to switch sides. (One exception to this is the Coffin of >> Undeath in the Liber Reliquarum, which can turn an unwilling victim into >> an undead.) > >I suppose I need to see more of a write-up on what it takes to become one of the >undead, beyond some demonic Superior deciding to make him one. I'm mostly working here from the short discussion of undead in the core rules. I'm still not clear myself on how anyone but Saminga makes undead (or why they'd bother). > The goofball >vampire in Night Music, for instance, doesn't strike me as a hardened fanatic of >evil. Yeah, well, a lot of the example characters are pretty weird, and not necessarily good matches to rules/background canon. That was mostly an editorial problem, which has hopefully been fixed.... >> I believe the official answer on that was that, like Soldiers, they >> *can* serve either side, more or less at will. But there's nothing that >> can be done about their state -- when they die, that's it. No Heaven. >> No Hell. Just *gone*. > >Is it canon that there is no Heaven or Hell in their future? I believe so -- their souls simply dissolve back into component Forces on physical death. (This happens to some humans, anyway, according to the core rules.) > Or might they pass >automatically on to (usually) the lower levels of Hell? I prefer the idea that >souls never completely cease to exist. That's a decidedly non-canon viewpoint, as I understand it, though it probably won't conflict with canon very much. > Then again, did the soul pass on during >whatever ritual turned the human into the undead? I believe (from the core rules section on undead) that the soul is supposed to be irrevocably linked with the body in the case of undead, so that when the body is destroyed, so is the soul. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 15:16:36 -0400 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides At 2:21 PM -0400 9/4/98, Eeyore wrote: >Is it canon that there is no Heaven or Hell in their future? Or might >they pass >automatically on to (usually) the lower levels of Hell? I prefer the idea >that >souls never completely cease to exist. Then again, did the soul pass on >during >whatever ritual turned the human into the undead? This will require some >thinking on my part quite aside from any canon answer. It's Cannon, in the section that discusses undead of the core book. page 193: "Should the undead vessel be destroyed, the soul is destroyed as well." It also means that there's many fewer reasons for an Undead to repent: He's /not/ going to Hell, and nothing can change that. There's no final reward he can aspire to, either. But if he kills himself, his enemies will never get their hands on him. So, in my estimation, it's one of the perks of undead status, considering the kind of stock material that normally gets the offer. - -- Nana Yaw Ofori nofori@pop3.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 15:11:26 EST From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: IN> Re: IN- Balseraph of Fate / Malakite >> Got a question for ya. I've a Balseraph of Fate IMC and he's emulating >> the Resonance of a Malakite. My questions are: >> >> (1) Should his celestial form be that of a Malakite or that of a >> Balseraph? > >Oooh. Good question. I'd make him look like a Balseraph, with Malakite >features. An evil-looking midnight black serpent with wings and six >eyes. Oooohhh... I like. >:) Heh, heh, heh... >> (2) When his corporeal vessel is slain, should he suffer trauma? > >I'd say yes, unless the immunity to trauma is part of the Malakim >resonance (I think it's just an extra ability, but I could be very >wrong). Currently, I've ruled that Kronos has decided to grant him temporary Immunity to Trauma, to keep up appearances, of course. :) >> As a final question, what problems do you see me as a GM having to face >> with a Balseraph pretending to be Malakite? > >The Balseraph getting torn apart by his former comrades when he is >discovered. :) > >Richard Gant Yeah, that'd be it. :) *I'm* looking forward to it. :) - -Perry, Kyriotate of Flowers serving Creation and sometimes Tanniael, Archangel of Tea. Perry M. Lloyd (spook_number_six@hotmail.com) "Remember, false hope is still hope." -Dilbert ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 15:43:49 -0500 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides Walter Milliken wrote: > Yeah, well, a lot of the example characters are pretty weird, and not > necessarily good matches to rules/background canon. That was mostly an > editorial problem, which has hopefully been fixed.... Along those lines, now that there _is_ a strong hand in charge of things, is there any thought being given to un-canonizing some of the goofier stuff? Like the character I mentioned, for one. > > Or might they pass > >automatically on to (usually) the lower levels of Hell? I prefer the idea that > >souls never completely cease to exist. > > That's a decidedly non-canon viewpoint, as I understand it, though it > probably won't conflict with canon very much. Probably not. As far as I can tell, those characters still involved in the War can't tell the difference between these two events. So, even if those of us playing the game know the answer, those to whom it really matters don't. So any undead who have repented might give it a shot. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 98 16:51 EDT From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides >Along those lines, now that there _is_ a strong hand in charge of things, is there >any thought being given to un-canonizing some of the goofier stuff? Like the >character I mentioned, for one. If it can be done with simple errata, yes. More substantial changes are harder. >> > Or might they pass >> >automatically on to (usually) the lower levels of Hell? I prefer the idea that >> >souls never completely cease to exist. >> >> That's a decidedly non-canon viewpoint, as I understand it, though it >> probably won't conflict with canon very much. > >Probably not. As far as I can tell, those characters still involved in the War can't >tell the difference between these two events. So, even if those of us playing the >game know the answer, those to whom it really matters don't. So any undead who have >repented might give it a shot. That's about right, though unlike the upper Heavens, people *do* go into the lower Hells and come out on occasion (DPs, at least, I think). Of course, there's also some entertainment value in the notion of a repentant undead who works with angels, trying to make up for his past, knowing that he's not going to get anything out of it except eventual (or quick) death and dissolution. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 17:03:18 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides Walter Milliken wrote: > That's about right, though unlike the upper Heavens, people *do* > go into the lower Hells and come out on occasion (DPs, at least, > I think). I thought Archangels occasionally ascended to the Upper Heavens but never spoke about what happened there. I forget the reference. APG? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 14:19:48 -0700 From: "Steven Feldon (Exchange)" Subject: RE: IN> Changing Sides Walter Milliken wrote: > That's about right, though unlike the upper Heavens, people *do* > go into the lower Hells and come out on occasion (DPs, at least, > I think). I thought Archangels occasionally ascended to the Upper Heavens but never spoke about what happened there. I forget the reference. APG? Earl Heaven and Hell 65 actually, but it's been errataed. P. 65. In the second paragraph under The Higher Heavens, change the fourth sentence to read ``The Archangels have not been there since the Fall, and do not speak of how it was.'' ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 17:43:52 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Changing Sides At 2:51 PM -0500 9/4/98, Earl Wajenberg wrote: >Eeyore wrote: > >> Is it canon that there is no Heaven or Hell in their future? > >IIRC, canon is that all undead acquire their unnatural >vitality by having their soul fused into their body. The >result is that, when the body finally dies, the soul is >also destroyed. Yup. >Undead are typically suckered into this >by not having the mechanics explained clearly to them, or >by persuading themselves that they will never physically die. Or they say, "Lemme get this straight -- I live forever, I get cool powers, I do what I want, and I *DON'T* go to Hell to be a demonic playtoy afterwards? COOL!" - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 19:51:43 -0400 From: Nana Yaw Ofori Subject: Re: IN> A new way to compute Disturbance? At 3:19 PM -0400 9/2/98, John Karakash - Lucent ASCC wrote: >Kevin Walsh wrote: >> As an aside, if you absolutely must drop a nuke, get someone else to do >> it. The disturbance is massive, even in a relatively small town. I >> believe we worked out that the echoes from one incident lasted for over a >> year under the existing disturbance rules, and were worldwide. (Thank God >> it wasn't my character who did it.) I'm not sure if it could have been >> heard on the moon, but it would be interesting to work out. A million-point Disturbance? Hell yeah. Even a CelF-1, Perception 1 celestial autosuceeds to a distance of 568 million miles. Hear it on the moon? You could hear this sucker from Jupiter! ===== ><{{"> =================================================== <"}}>< ====== Nana-Yaw "The Fish" Ofori, Freelance Soldier of Heck, presenty serving Ashley, Calabite Captain of Fire, the Demon of Fuses 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." ======= <"}}>< ====== ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 23:50:59 -0500 From: Shadowstar Subject: IN> When an Archangel Falls... It's bound to happen sometime. Everyone is sick to death of Dominic as Bal. Gabriel as Demon Princess is a nice idea, but cooked a little overdone. Michael is also a likely suspect to start a new War in Heaven... Which got me thinking. Which Angelic Superior would make a surprising canadite for the ST/GM sadistic little plots? Tonight I got to answer that question. For my campaign, one Archangel is in the process of falling. Better yet, Lilith has placed and invoked a Geas on one of the PC's (a Malakim) to either bring this AA back into Heaven's graces, or help bring about final death. Marc has tripped, and it won't be long before the Demon Prince of the Art of the Deal decides to wreck havoc on the world's economy... ...Surprise, surprise. Though, I found it amusing the Grey-Lilim of the group ICly thought that Jean to have been the one to have taken the plunge first... ...The group is well on their way to Paranoia land. *teeheehee* - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centuryinter.net # Balseraph Marquis of Fate, Demon of Delusions of Granduer ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #939 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.