From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Jan 7 17:03:29 1999 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 RAA25188 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 17:03:29 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id QAA17774 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:51:37 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:51:37 -0600 Message-Id: <199901072251.QAA17774@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 #1085 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, January 7 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1085 In this digest: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> Loki Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Re: IN> INRI Re: IN> Re: IN- Discord and Rites Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Re: IN> about product quality Re: IN> Gabriel's servants IN> Is the flavor text canon? IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Re: IN> Loki Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> Destiny\Fate of Angels\Demons IN> Word Strength and Wordbound Strength Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? IN> Power of Superiors (Re: Gabriel's servants) Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> David vs Martin - the End (we hope!) Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:40:30 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, dahak wrote: > Jormungandr [The Midguard serpent] is described as being of equivalent > power to a superior in Final Trumpet. I'm not too sure of that. I didn't find any references to Jormungandr's status as a superior-like being; some stats are actually given (attack score of 12, 1d10 damage when it hits[1], and so on). The book does not that no weapon but Mjolnir can harm it, but that's a far cry from being a Superior. > Uriel in person failed to kill it. Admittedly due to stupidity rather than > lack of combat power. Stupidity? He cut Jormungandr's HEAD *off*! It's a reasonable assumption that, when you cut something's head off and it stops moving, that it's dead! Granted he had a lack of information (he didn't know it regenerates), but that's hardly stupidity. > Thor killed it. Some PC party's can match Thor's damage output according to > his stats. Thor killed it, because he's the only being that can. Much as werewolves can only be killed by silver, Midgard Serpents can only be killed by Thors. :) Richard Gant [1] 1d10? Where did the decision to use 1d10 for Jormungandr's damage come from? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:41:48 -0400 (EDT) From: gantr@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Loki On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, dahak wrote: > You know of course that makes Loki the son of a giant. > [not unreasonable from the stories about him and some > of his preferences in sexual partners.] > You all remember that the Gregori are giants. > > Which means of course that: > > Loki is one of the children of the Gregori. I like that. I really like that. Richard Gant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my web page: Richard Gant's Gaming Ghetto Currently dedicated to In Nomine, Planescape, and Waste World - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 18:48:37 +0000 From: Peter Witney Subject: Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick At 05:28 PM 1/7/99 , Stacy wrote: [snip] >Ramesh wrote: > >>Nitpicking note: A quanta is the smallest possible unit, so a "quantum >>jump" is the smallest possible jump that is possible. > >And I say: > >True. But *because* it's the smallest possible jump, it's also a jump to >an entirely different level, suddenly, with no possibility of in-between >levels or gradual progression from one to the other. I think that's where >the common usage of "quantum jump/leap" comes from, though it is sometimes >incorrectly used to mean "really big jump" as well. I think people refer to a quantum leap as a big leap, simply because in Physics its conception was a radical jump in thinking, not because of anything to do with its actual size. The 'discovery' was the big thing. Most people wouldn't know what a quantum is, after all, but they know the phrase. I must admit, I also was considering sending a nitpicking note on that phrase, but I restrained myself. Pedantic Pete peter.witney@kobal.demon.co.uk Conjurors offer the audience any card in the pack and always get them to pick the one they want. This is the way we in the civil service get ministers to take decisions. -Sir Humphrey Appleby, KCB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:57:49 -0000 From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> INRI From: MarkDEddy@aol.com > >In a message dated 1/6/99 10:45:14 AM, jhart@btinternet.com writes: > >><...>by the time the gospel writers got to work, the >>myths were very widespread. > >*sigh* >It seems that there is a misconception here about when the Gospels were >written. The Gospel of Mark has a last possible date of composition (if I >recall correctly) of 75AD, even according to the most liberal (i.e., want to >make it later) bible historians. Speaking in a hypothetical sense of how you might want to play around with religion. and stories, I think we can agree that the dates of the gospel writers are definitely debateable. So if you did want to posit a conspiracy theory in which Jesuis was a figurehead, it could be pretty plausible. Remember, this is an era in which people genuinely believed in fortune telling, priests working muiracles and suchlike (OK, maybe they still do, but it was pretty widespread), so the amount of proof required might not be huge. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, that honestly wasn';t my intent. jo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:09:56 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- Discord and Rites At 6:32 PM +0000 1/7/99, Kevin Walsh wrote: >On Wed, Jan 06, 1999 at 08:06:52PM -0500, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>And every note of dissonance is a -1 penalty to your resonance >> roll. >> >I'm fairly certain that, in addition, gaining dissonance blinds one's >resonance for several hours, probably equal to the highest number on the >dissonance roll. That too. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:23:41 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > > >And I think it is canon that once someone achieves a quantum jump in > >ability (celestial to Word-bound for sure, but probably Word-bound to > >Superior also), they don't lose those abilities even if they later > >weaken. Case in point, the "Old Guy" in Night Music, who's very weak > >these days, for a Word-bound. > > Nitpicking note: A quanta is the smallest possible unit, so a "quantum > jump" is the smallest possible jump that is possible. > Anti-nitpick: Not really. Quantum also refers to a reference frame or set of variables. A "quantum jump" actually means a complete shift in whatever you're doing- a "shortening of the way" (1pt reference, I mean, c'mon...) almost. Hmmm... in that case it could be both meanings. ^_^ > Ramesh - -- Brian A.H. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 99 14:12 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> about product quality >"That's an almost virtual certainty -- the notion that the writers would >pick the exact same set of Tethers you did is absurdly improbable." > >I wouldn't be so sure - I mean how may candidates for suitable sites are >there - in any given city. Dozens. Remember, Tethers don't only form at the big, obvious places, nor are all big, obvious places Tethers. And even then, assuming the same places are picked, the author's or GM's viewpoint will bias who they think should own the Tether. For example, you mentioned the London Stock Exchange as a Trade Tether. OK, that's the most obvious answer, but some people might think it would make a better Greed Tether. I could even see an outside argument that it might be a Gluttony Tether (remember that Gluttony covers more than just food -- and stock markets *are* prone to "feeding frenzies" sometimes...). In most possible Tether situations, there's at least one Superior on each side that it might be to. >OK, so you'd posted some stuff. But you didn't mention that in your >post," > >I didn't think I needed to. Sorry, you did, at least in my case. I'm doing well to remember *what's* been posted to this list, never mind who did it. >"and I suspect few of us associated your question with the author of >those London Tether posts. I certainly didn't." > >well, forgive my blatant sarcasm, they do have the same names! :-) Some of us don't remember names well.... There are a *lot* of people on this list, and it's hard to remember what various people are doing in their campaigns. The only ones I tend to associate with particular people are mostly related to Maya's PBEM, and that's because Elizabeth constantly tracks it and mentions the good tidbits to me. >Seriously, I don't expect you to read my posts, but I can't keep >repeating myself just in case people didn't. they were on the list for >everyone. No, but you need to remember that other people don't keep the same context you do, since they have different priorities. This is a general problem with net communication, and one of the reasons for the evolution of the common practice of quoting context in email and Usenet threads. Not that that would have been appropriate here, but it's part of the solution to the same problem of context-retention. >"what does not including explicit, rigid rules for Force levels for high >level NPCs have to do with being "broken"?" > >Nothing. I was making the connection because the thought occurred to me. >I do feel that it is information that should be in the basic rulebook. >Maybe next time around huh! I doubt it -- there are many things that are more important that should be in the main rulebook, before I'd argue for including that. More stuff on humans, for example. Also a bunch of the stuff that appeared in Night Music, and some from the Marches, and various rules clarifications in the APG and IPG. Maybe some of the new rules in the Songbook. There's an endless set of things that *ought* to be included. I know well the problem is deciding what to cut to fit the page count/price target. It's unfortunate that the economic realities intrude here, but intrude they do. >"Fine. Then you'll pay $100 (or local equivalent) for a 500+ page tome >you can barely tote around?" > >No, I'll pay the same price for the same sized book as before - only >this time around the rules will have been more thoroughly checked! I won't argue with you that the main IN rulebook could have used a *lot* better playtesting than the final version got. It could, and it badly needs a revision. I think part of the problem there was the *long* time IN took to get to market. As it was, it was something like two years late, from the announced date of availability. A couple years ago, I think there was even an SJGames T-shirt, that had something on it like "Don't even ASK about In Nomine".... Again, this seems to have been a case of economic reality catching up -- you can't spend forever producing something and never sell it. Sometimes a product goes to market before it should, from the customer's viewpoint, but from the producer's, sometimes that isn't soon enough.... There's no doubt that this is a Bad Thing. All I can say is that, from my experience with them as a customer and playtester, and more lately, author, SJGames is generally very good about trying to Get Things Right. But sometimes even they make compromises -- I can think of a few in the GURPS line, out of many books. The IN core book seems to be another of these cases. Nearly all the ones I know of happened because the book took *far* longer to get to market than originally expected. > I maintain that information >on creating NPC's IS relevant since they themselves are. And the >inclusion of what has amounted to a paragraph of text is not quite 300 >extra pages is it! Believe me, it's not just *one* paragraph. That particular detail you asked for is one, maybe, but there are hundreds of similar details that have equal (or higher) merit. One of the things I've learned as a sometime-author is that the hard part isn't writing the stuff -- it's figuring out how to squeeze the most important bits in, and making the hard decisions on what to leave out. Any of the editors at SJGames (and probably other game companies) will tell you that the draft manuscripts almost *always* run over page budget. There's always one more important thing you want to include.... For SJGames books, what goes in and what stays out is a collaborative decision between the author, editor, and line editor, with input from the playtesters as well (though you hope nothing major is missing by the time you get to playtest!), and sometimes SJ for hard calls. The buyers may not always agree with them on what should have been included -- certainly there has been plenty of feedback on this list about what people think should and should not have been in various book. Certainly I'd disagree with some of the things that were included in the Cycle books. Unfortunately, one person's wasted space is another person's treasure of useful information. You just have to try to do the best you can to make the books valuable enough to most people that they're worth buying. >"and that will be split into dozens of books." > >And that is a big part of the problem. Which is why I applaud SJG for >doing the AAPG/IPG not individual choir or band books! And there's a good reason for that. Too much information can saturate people's interest. It's easier and better to start with too little, and see what people want next. The trick is getting *enough* into the core rules that people will find them interesting and usable. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:25:26 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: > > >What do you call a 'minor' Superior? I don't think any true Superior > >can be called 'minor'- unless you mean a powerful Word-bound with a > >hierarchy under it.... But again, that's IMHO. > > I thought most of the extra Superiors in the supplements were "minor" > Superiors, - which I think means that their Word doesn't have such a > presence in the Symphony when compared to the BIG 26 (27?). > > Ramesh ... I'm sorry, but I doubt any Ethereal God was ever as powerful as Zadkiel. For that matter, Fleurity has to be at /least/ as powerful as Nybbas... Considering how much he's done to both corrupt and spread his Word... and how prevalent it is in 'reality'... - -- Brian A.H. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:15:31 EST From: Samovar3@aol.com Subject: IN> Is the flavor text canon? Since an angry Djinn Princess has repeatedly mentioned it, I know that the vignettes in the book are non-canon. What about the (for lack of a better name) flavor text that accompanies some of the sections? To illustrate what I'm talking about, in the APG (or IPG) under the section dealing with mixed groups of renegade angels and demons, Las Vegas is mentioned as being Mammon's town. Is this "official" or is it just fluff? What about the comments by Superiors in the expanded write-ups? According to Gabriel, Lilith is not cruel which could shake the faith of an angelic Fire servitor which finds a Demon Princess who is not cruel. S. Flanigan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:17:59 -0500 From: werther@hilander.com (...jason schneiderman...) Subject: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] The Archangel Beth wrote: "Keep In Nomine Simple; In Nomine Is Not GURPS." According to the Pyramid chat log with Sean "Dr.Kromm" Punch, this statement has an expiration date - and one in the forseeable future. yours, score one for Kobal, Jason ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 99 14:19 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick >I think people refer to a quantum leap as a big leap, simply because in >Physics its conception was a radical jump in thinking, not because of >anything to do with its actual size. The 'discovery' was the big thing. >Most people wouldn't know what a quantum is, after all, but they know the >phrase. Actually, I took quantum mechanics in college (long ago), so I do know what it means. And it was what I meant (though my phrasing may have implied I was using it loosely) -- a jump in energy level with no intervening continuum of incremental change. I've also been known to use the notion of state or phase change, which is where, I think, Elizabeth picked up that turn of phrase. (Actually, for the technically-inclined, I tend to think of this like the difference between bound and free electrons, or across a band-gap in a semiconductor. Does this satisfy all the nit-pickers...?) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:38:06 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> Loki dahak wrote: > > You know of course that makes Loki the son of a giant. > [not unreasonable from the stories about him and some > of his preferences in sexual partners.] > You all remember that the Gregori are giants. > > Which means of course that: > > Loki is one of the children of the Gregori. Not necessarily. a) You forget the Nephallim, b) There were probably a lot of Ethereal Giants too, c) Not all origin stories out of myth and legend really apply to Ethereals. Especially not /all/ of the creation stories.... Unless each and every part of the world was created separately and then fitted together like an overlapping jigsaw puzzle /and/ God was just created the same way any other Ethereal God was. > > Adam > > Metanoia: That state beyond paranoia, where you are right. > Every one is plotting against you. > > -----Original Message----- > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 20:09:02 EST > From: "Perry Lloyd" > >One way Loki might be alien enough is that he does NOT originate > >in *human* minds. It's canon that the Marches are older than > >humanity, at least as old as anything that dreams. Perhaps Loki > >has been recently *shaped* by humanity's imaginations, but he might > >*originate* far, far further back than that, in some amalgam of > >animal dreams of ambush, aggression, and deceit. > > > >That even fits with his myth, kinda. He's not an Aes by birth, > >but instead he just shows up and becomes Odin's blood brother. > >I believe he's vaguely said to be of Jotun stock, but no specific > >parents were given that I recall, and the Jotuns are, themselves, > >something in the way of personifications of unhuman nature. > > > >Earl - -- Brian A.H. "I am Don Arturo de Los Angeles. I am the greatest reader of all time. I have read over a million books in my lifetime, and their pages flow through my mind like summer days..." Phoenix Clan Purifier*Gaijin*Shugenja*ABC Geeky Shugenja Man*Totoroan L5R(1.1) PX+ S(LA) G++ R Y+ C+ E+ M-- T-- D++ K U+++ L5R(R1.3) GP++ (PR+++ CC++) RP+ GT:! P+ PX/LN+ S++ G+++ R Y+ C++ CG++ U+++ J---- ABC(1.0) PX/ABC++(ic, anyways. =)) S(LA) Y+ A++ D++ BO/OC!N!++++(nosebleed) P+++ U++ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 99 14:28 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. >> Thor killed it. Some PC party's can match Thor's damage output according to >> his stats. > >Thor killed it, because he's the only being that can. Much as werewolves >can only be killed by silver, Midgard Serpents can only be killed by >Thors. :) I remember when this topic came up among the authors. I think the theory was that, as an ethereal entity, it was part of the mythical pattern forming the Midgard Serpent that it was specifically vulnerable to Thor and his hammer, since the mythos that they spring from says he's the one to slay it. Essentially, what Richard said above. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 19:29:06 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 02:17:59PM -0500, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: >> "Keep In Nomine Simple; In Nomine Is Not GURPS." > > According to the Pyramid chat log with Sean "Dr.Kromm" Punch, this > statement has an expiration date - and one in the forseeable future. > Who, precisely, is Sean Punch, and what position does he hold? (And is it Sean or Seán?) Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "In our revolutionary court we are guided not by articles of the law and not by the degree of extenuating circumstances; in the tribunal we must proceed on the basis of considerations of expediency." the Gulag Archipelago, by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:29:25 -0600 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. dahak wrote: > Jormungandr [The Midguard serpent] is described as being of equivalent > power to a superior in Final Trumpet. > Uriel in person failed to kill it. Admittedly due to stupidity rather than > lack of combat power. > Thor killed it. Some PC party's can match Thor's damage output according to > his stats. > > Universe Violation at level 1. > Please reboot megaverse 2000 and try again. > If continued failures occur please contact > skuld.goddess.support@yggsradil.gov.as Not necessarily. If an ethereal is created by human imaginations, they probably have some of the vulnerabilites that humans ascribed to them. It's not an inherent part of the Symphony, so it is possible for Uriel to kill the Serpent even though that's not how Norse myth is written, but it might be easier for Thor to do so than anyone else. In Champions' terms, I'd say that Jormungandr has a x2 BODY vulnerability to attacks by Thor. (No, I'd never let a PC take a disad like that.) Either that, or it's yet another place where the adventure authors of the Revelations Cycle weren't paying attention to what they were doing. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:38:22 -0600 From: Eeyore Subject: Re: IN> Destiny\Fate of Angels\Demons Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > Now, the problem comes if you have someone whose fate is to kick dogs > and instead you force them to become a drug addict and prostitute. > If they haven't kicked any dogs, then no matter how bad their death... > It wasn't fate. This is an example of why I maintain that Destinies/Fates have to be more complex than the game material allows. I find the other two possibilities unsatisfying. Either the universe has no way of actually measuring the moral nature of an action, hence it's perfectly possible to do something worse than one's Fate (by any standard, even the selfish/selfless scale) and not meet it, or the universe is extremely deterministic and it is impossible to get someone to do anything worse than their Fate. (All of this also applies if one says "better than their Destiny). The latter might work if only NPCs are in question, but I'd be very reluctant to ever allow a PC Servitor of Destiny or Fate into a game I run. I tend to think that something along the lines that what the Divine Destiny/Fated Future attunements pick up is the aspect of the individual's Destiny/Fate that applies to their current mood, actions or surroundings. The rest may all be there, but it's lost in the background noise. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:32:33 -0600 (CST) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: IN> Word Strength and Wordbound Strength On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, B.H. wrote: > ... I'm sorry, but I doubt any Ethereal God was ever as powerful as > Zadkiel. For that matter, Fleurity has to be at /least/ as powerful > as Nybbas... Considering how much he's done to both corrupt and > spread his Word... and how prevalent it is in 'reality'... Not really. Nonwithstanding how the word 'drugs' is often used to mean 'illegal drugs,' the fact is that drugs do a lot of good. Anesthetics are drugs, anti-biotics are drugs; much of modern medicine is drug-based. Even many of the drugs that are often abused (e.g. alcohol) are also appropriately used by some people. "Drugs" is a powerful Word, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Fleurity is a powerful Superior, because there are demonstrably other factors. After all, Heaven is led by Laurence (albeit as first among equals), and his Word is "Sword." Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 19:36:46 -0000 From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick - -----Original Message----- From: Walter Milliken > >(Actually, for the technically-inclined, I tend to think of this like >the difference between bound and free electrons, or across a band-gap in >a semiconductor. Does this satisfy all the nit-pickers...?) > No, but it reminds me of one of my nuttier lecturers who used to claim that the tunnel diode proved the existence of God :) jo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 19:41:44 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 07:29:06PM +0000, Kevin Walsh wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 02:17:59PM -0500, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: > >> "Keep In Nomine Simple; In Nomine Is Not GURPS." > > > > According to the Pyramid chat log with Sean "Dr.Kromm" Punch, this > > statement has an expiration date - and one in the forseeable future Well, that was peculiar (that being the appearance of a message of mine with no text of my own added). What I meant to ask was who Sean Punch is? Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "In our revolutionary court we are guided not by articles of the law and not by the degree of extenuating circumstances; in the tribunal we must proceed on the basis of considerations of expediency." the Gulag Archipelago, by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 12:30:09 -0800 From: "B.H." Subject: Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? Samovar3@aol.com wrote: > > Since an angry Djinn Princess has repeatedly mentioned it, I know that the > vignettes in the book are non-canon. What about the (for lack of a better *blink blink* Say what? I thought the vignettes were descriptions of scenes that happened. Sure, what someone says in the description might not be absolute truth, but you're telling me the vignettes and/or stories are completely false? > S. Flanigan - -- Brian A.H. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 99 15:20 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] >Who, precisely, is Sean Punch, and what position does he hold? He's the GURPS Line Editor. >(And is it Sean or Seán?) I have no idea. I've always assumed it's just Sean. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Jan 99 15:25 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? >Since an angry Djinn Princess has repeatedly mentioned it, I know that the >vignettes in the book are non-canon. Semi-non-canon. I.e., if there are serious problems with making canon sensibly fit existing stories, the vignettes lose. But strong effort is made to avoid conflicts with the existing vignettes. And new vignettes are most definitely not supposed to conflict with existing canon! > What about the (for lack of a better >name) flavor text that accompanies some of the sections? To illustrate what >I'm talking about, in the APG (or IPG) under the section dealing with mixed >groups of renegade angels and demons, Las Vegas is mentioned as being Mammon's >town. Is this "official" or is it just fluff? I think this stuff is considered official canon, though there has been some trouble with such "throw-away lines" already. Elizabeth is the one who makes definitive answers on such things, though. > What about the comments by >Superiors in the expanded write-ups? According to Gabriel, Lilith is not >cruel which could shake the faith of an angelic Fire servitor which finds a >Demon Princess who is not cruel. Those are canon, as far as I know, though they are all subject to the viewpoints of the people saying them. Even Superiors can be mistaken or misled on occassion.... - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:49:58 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Power of Superiors (Re: Gabriel's servants) At 11:25 AM -0800 1/7/99, B.H. wrote: >Ramesh Satkurunath wrote: >> I thought most of the extra Superiors in the supplements were "minor" >> Superiors, - which I think means that their Word doesn't have such a >> presence in the Symphony when compared to the BIG 26 (27?). >> >> Ramesh >... I'm sorry, but I doubt any Ethereal God was ever as powerful as >Zadkiel. Feel free to doubt it, but the Ethereal gods will tell you that they were. And that once, Yaweh was only as powerful as they... > For that matter, Fleurity has to be at /least/ as powerful >as Nybbas... Considering how much he's done to both corrupt and >spread his Word... and how prevalent it is in 'reality'... He's young. He may get to the big-leagues eventually, but for the now, he's younger than Nybbas (IIRC), and Nybbas' Word isn't often-illegal! - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:49:24 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. At 1:40 PM -0400 1/7/99, gantr@NKU.EDU wrote: >Richard Gant >[1] 1d10? Where did the decision to use 1d10 for Jormungandr's damage >come from? Blessed and bedamned if I know. Errata, here we come... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:56:16 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Is the flavor text canon? At 2:15 PM -0500 1/7/99, Samovar3@aol.com wrote: >Since an angry Djinn Princess has repeatedly mentioned it, I know that the >vignettes in the book are non-canon. What about the (for lack of a better >name) flavor text that accompanies some of the sections? They're more likely to be canon... Unless they contradict existing material. >To illustrate what >I'm talking about, in the APG (or IPG) under the section dealing with mixed >groups of renegade angels and demons, Las Vegas is mentioned as being Mammon's >town. Is this "official" or is it just fluff? Deutercanonical, I think the term is? Since there's nothing else contradicting it, I'm inclined to let it stand as-is, along with the comment about San Francisco being owned by angels, which was in FotM, IIRC. >What about the comments by >Superiors in the expanded write-ups? Those are supposed to be what they'd say about the Superior in question. Occasionally, it may or may not be what they actually think, which is something of a flaw that I am trying to be alert to. That said, they're canon, but can be ignored or mutated for every GM. As usual for anything. >According to Gabriel, Lilith is not cruel which could shake the >faith of an angelic Fire servitor which finds a Demon Princess >who is not cruel. Or it could just be Lilith shielding (to block Gabriel??), Gabriel rambling around a concept that only she understands, or that Lilith is simply, frighteningly, amoral in a way that Fire's burning cannot touch. I wouldn't expect any Fire Servitor to be able to tell at all, though -- that shielding trick which is making it to deutercanonical. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:09:18 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Ironic post of the day [SPOILERS] At 2:17 PM -0500 1/7/99, ...jason schneiderman... wrote: >The Archangel Beth wrote: > >"Keep In Nomine Simple; In Nomine Is Not GURPS." > >According to the Pyramid chat log with Sean "Dr.Kromm" Punch, The GURPS Line Editor, for those who don't know of Kromm. The first SJ Games LE, I believe, and therefore I get to look up at him with big shimmery anime eyes, that he be my Role Model. >this >statement has an expiration date - and one in the forseeable future. Heh. Actually, In Nomine Is Not GURPS. In Nomine won't *be* GURPS, either -- if you buy an In Nomine book, you get IN mechanics, not GURPS. But if you buy a GURPS book, well... Someday you may get GURPS mechanics and fluffy white wings and horns. (Probably not the fluffy white wings and the horns all together, though with the ArchDean, you never can tell.) (INING does not equal GININ. At some point, GIIN will be true enough... And if you have a question for how something works, there's a decent chance that you can find the incredibly nitpicky GURPS-style description of what it does or does not do, if you look in this odd thing that I'm currently calling IN 1.5 ed.) But, to return to seriousness, INING, and IN mechanics are not, if I can help it, going to turn into GURPS-complexity mechanics. So if you want GURPS mechanics, you'll have to acquire a different book... O;> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:56:17 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. At 1:29 PM -0600 1/7/99, Eeyore wrote: > but it might be >easier for Thor to do so than anyone else. In Champions' terms, I'd say that >Jormungandr has a x2 BODY vulnerability to attacks by Thor. (No, I'd never let >a PC take a disad like that.) Either that, or it's yet another place where the >adventure authors of the Revelations Cycle weren't paying attention to what >they were doing. It's that Thor is destined/fated/whatever to kill Jormungandr, deliberately. That did get discussed, and I thought it made it into the book... - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:46:15 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> David vs Martin - the End (we hope!) Not that I'm not enjoying this little grudge match immensely, (I am), but if I may make a suggestion. Both of you step back, count to ten, and then never mention this topic again. My personal opinion: Mr. Arnold can seem a little whiny (perhaps not intentionally) but not unreasonably so. David, you have a point, but let it go, man. The rest of us don't really mind him that much. At least I don't. I'd like to apologize to everyone for wasting our bandwidth on such a silly non-In Nomine subject. Thank you very much, you're a beautiful audience, Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 17:04:06 EST From: BillionSix@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants In a message dated 1/7/99 1:18:57 PM Central Standard Time, lugh@cats.ucsc.edu writes: > ... I'm sorry, but I doubt any Ethereal God was ever as powerful as > Zadkiel. For that matter, Fleurity has to be at /least/ as powerful > as Nybbas... Considering how much he's done to both corrupt and > spread his Word... and how prevalent it is in 'reality'... > -- Beg to differ. I grant you that Fleurty is very powerful. But let's face it. Nybbas is a major factor in almost everybody's life. I don't abuse drugs. Most of my friends don't abuse drugs. But everyone I know is exposed to the media and influenced by it to some degree. Brian A. Rogers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 09:58:51 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants Brian wrote: > Beg to differ. I grant you that Fleurty is very powerful. But let's face it. > Nybbas is a major factor in almost everybody's life. I don't abuse drugs. Most > of my friends don't abuse drugs. But everyone I know is exposed to the media > and influenced by it to some degree. Ever taken Aspirin? That's a drug. Cough medicine? Another drug. The chemicals that we think of as 'good' are often still drugs. Sure, they're not immediately evil, but neither is all of television, movies, newspapers, magazines, and they all come under "Media" and increase Nybbas' power. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 21:52:35 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> Gabriel's servants warning slight Final trumpet spoiler. dahak wrote on 07 January 1999 >Jormungandr [The Midguard serpent] is described as being of equivalent >power to a superior in Final Trumpet. >Uriel in person failed to kill it. Admittedly due to stupidity rather than >lack of combat power. >Thor killed it. Some PC party's can match Thor's damage output according to >his stats. > >Universe Violation at level 1. >Please reboot megaverse 2000 and try again. >If continued failures occur please contact >skuld.goddess.support@yggsradil.gov.as Come on in a game with Destinies and Fates, surely you can believe in Thor fulfilling his prophecy and being the one who can do so. Ramesh ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 21:30:30 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Stacy Stroud wrote on 07 January 1999 >In response to: > >>>And I think it is canon that once someone achieves a quantum jump in >>>ability (celestial to Word-bound for sure, but probably Word-bound to >>>Superior also), they don't lose those abilities even if they later >>>weaken. Case in point, the "Old Guy" in Night Music, who's very weak >>>these days, for a Word-bound. > >Ramesh wrote: > >>Nitpicking note: A quanta is the smallest possible unit, so a "quantum >>jump" is the smallest possible jump that is possible. > >And I say: > >True. But *because* it's the smallest possible jump, it's also a jump to >an entirely different level, suddenly, with no possibility of in-between >levels or gradual progression from one to the other. I think that's where >the common usage of "quantum jump/leap" comes from, though it is sometimes >incorrectly used to mean "really big jump" as well. > >A better physics term, also occasionally used by Elizabeth et al. for the >change from normal celestial to Superior, is "state change." I.E., it was >*this*, with *these* properties, and now it's this other thing entirely, >with different properties. Hmmm, okay. Ramesh ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 22:02:19 -0000 From: "Ramesh Satkurunath" Subject: Re: IN> "Quantum" nitpick Peter Witney wrote on 07 January >I must admit, I also was considering sending a nitpicking note on that >phrase, but I restrained myself. > >Pedantic Pete Don't resist, nitpicking isn't *evil*, no really it isn't. BAW HA HA HA HA HA Ramesh ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1085 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.