From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Nov 30 01:10:35 1999 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 BAA20036 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:10:35 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id BAA12427 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:06:54 -0600 Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:06:54 -0600 Message-Id: <199911300706.BAA12427@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1436 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Tuesday, November 30 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1436 In this digest: Re: IN> Re: mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> She's like the Wind... Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement. IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Uh, hey. IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances RE: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement. Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Re: mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances RE: IN> Uh, hey. IN> Mercurian resonance Kyrio Resonance (was RE: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement) Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance IN> Expanded Angelic Resonance RE: IN> Uh, hey. Re:IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Mercurian resonance Re: IN> Uh, hey. Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Uh, hey. Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Malakim RE: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance RE: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:49:32 -0500 From: Ben Aldred Subject: Re: IN> Re: mercurian dissonance At 07:57 PM 11/29/99 -0600, you wrote: >>>>I think we can all agree that if a Mercurian is in charge of a Malakite, and he says, "Mal, beat up this human for me," then the Merc will take dissonance... yes?<<< > >No. > I could think of a situation where this might cause dissonance. If the Malakite were not going to the hurt the human beforehand but was bound through an oath or by other means to follow the orders of the merc. I would consider that direct action in that situation. saying otherwise would be similar to saying that the bullets are actually hurting the human. otherwise I wouldn't give the dissonance, even in this situation I might not unless the Merc was either being rather dodgy with the whole nonviolence thing towards humans thing or taking perverse pleasure in it. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:58:48 -0500 From: Ben Aldred Subject: Re: IN> Malakim best example IMHO of the Malakite of Eli attunement is Jackie Chan. He grabs a towel, a ladder or anything that happens to be sitting around and opens up a family size can of whoop ass on whoever is around. BEn ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:06:10 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Malakim >best example IMHO of the Malakite of Eli attunement is Jackie Chan. Yeah! >He grabs a towel, a ladder or anything that happens to be sitting around >and opens up a family size can of whoop ass on whoever is around. Yes, exactly. It's not the most powerful of the Mal attunements, but it may be the coolest. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:15:12 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> Malakim At 11:17 PM -0400 11/29/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >And they can hang out and let their hair down once in a while -- see "The >Seventh Virtue" in the _You are Here_ book The Eighth Virtue. (You are Here, p. 10) [. . . Snippage GM to a Malakite of Eli] Ha-ha-ha-ho-ha-ha-heh-heh-ha-ho. . . Kill him. (And they say us Malakim have no sense of humor, indeed! };;;> ) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centurytel.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur * http://home.centurytel.net/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:24:58 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> She's like the Wind... At 11:40 PM -0400 11/29/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >Brights, feh. Everybody wants to play one, everybody wants to meet one. >Well, they're Very Rare, it's canon, deal. And it is also CANON that GM's are allowed to do whatever the hel. . . Whatever they please. O };;;> CANON exists soley for the purpose of insuring that the game does not stretch the suspenders of disbelief. It is but _one_ point of view meant to keep things tidy, orignized, and relatively understandable by the most people. Personally, I'd make her a Bright. . . Especially if you want her to be reading NEEDS. It'd make more sense, actually. Especially since she promotes both change (WIND), but FREEDOM from responsibilities. Mind you, the only Bright I'd prolly allow in one of my games would happen to be working for Dominique. . . Just to make people's jaw's drop when they found out _what_ she is. Too each their own. O };;;> Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centurytel.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur * http://home.centurytel.net/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:28:22 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement. At 1:35 PM +1100 11/30/99, Leath Sheales wrote: [Snippage about: The Game's Humanity vs. Impudite of Technology's Gizmo Glasses] Going by the _exact_ wording of the Attunement, the _ONLY_ being in creation that can tell the difference is Lucifer. This means kiddies, that not even Asmodeus can tell. . . With maybe the exception of him being attuned to you at the time. . . I'd let the Impudite see 5 Essence (if at that). I love Gamesters. };;;> Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centurytel.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur * http://home.centurytel.net/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:24:33 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance >>>I don't even see this as being outside canon. More of an obvious gloss on canon.<<< Well, you're wrong. As Elizabeth has explained, in detail, numerous times. >>>Can Cherubs order someone else to harm their attuned?<<< No, because Cherubim must protect their attuned. Mercurians are not required to protect humans; they just can't hurt humans themselves. >>>Can a Seraph order someone else to lie for them?<<< Yes, though he'd probably find it deeply offensive and would only do so in an extreme situation. >>>Can a Mal order someone else to break one of his oaths?<<< Yes, though he'd probably find it deeply offensive and would only do so in an extreme situation. >>>This seems to me to be _mis_reading canon. Way too narrowly. What am I missing here?<<< The fact that "Thou shalt not harm humans" is subtly but significantly different from "Thou shalt not allow humans to come to harm." - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:39:20 -0600 From: Shadowstar Subject: Re: IN> Uh, hey. At 10:21 PM -0500 11/29/99, Dan Weaver wrote: >I got the main In Nomine book today and eagerly read through it and so >now I want to play this really nifty game. Good for you! Now, if you'll just purchase all these other suppliments. . . >Unfortunately I'm the only person I know who likes RPGs. [NITPICK] In your area you mean? };;;> (Keep in mind, that the Demon Princess of Nitpicking keeps some of us so hyped up that we start to nitpick ANYTHING) >Are there any online games that accept new characters played by new players, >or are they all closed off? I don't honestly know. I myself am pondering running a Small Group of High-Powered Angels (Read Three PCs, if at that) through something come the new year. . . But other than that. . . I'll keep an ear out. >Oh yeah, one (well, two) other things. I decided I liked a Malakim of >Stone best as a character, mostly for the solidarity, love & unity >street-punk thing thing they have going. So... >a) is it a complete rip-off to have a punk Malakim of Stone? Nope. Be whatever you want to be. I'm certain their are some Malakim of Stone that are perfectly at home at airports selling flowers (it _is_ community building of sorts). . . >b) are Malakim supposed to be totally bereft of humor and the ability to >have a good time when not in the presence of evil, or can they enjoy >themselves when they aren't hip-deep in demon guts? Again depends on the Malakite. Malakim of the Sword will probably always act like they have said sword sheathed someplace uncomfortable. . . Same might be said of Judgement. More than likely there will be a few who break this stereotype. . . Just remember that DARK Humor is an Infernal Word. };;;> >I badly want to have the following conversation before I mash something. > >Demon: Who ARE you? >Me: I'm BATMAN! Nybbas would say it's so passee! Personally I'd say something like this: Demon: "Who ARE you?!?" Me: "I am the rightous vengence of our Lord! I am the baddest -Mother- around, and I will wipe all you infernal scum from the face of this green earth. But you, you can call me Skippy" *wide grin, with that one gold tooth* Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = shadowstar@centurytel.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur * http://home.centurytel.net/shdwstar/in-nomine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:33:45 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement >>>I'm thinking about the Humanity attunement again, and I know that it's supposed to be subtle and powerful (heck, it can even fool the Resonance of the Malakim), but I'm undecided as to whether it's effective against Impudites of Technology.<<< I'd say no, otherwise there are too many different ways the attunement would have to bend the laws of the Symphony. There are various other ways someone can indirectly determine that someone's a celestial (or at least not a normal human), and Humanity can't possibly foil them all. For example, suppose a Kyriotate tries to possess a demon with the Humanity attunement turned on. The Kyrio devotes 5 Forces to taking over the subject, "bounces" (assuming the demon doesn't make his Will roll), and says "Gee, a Soldier or potential Soldier!" When he bounces after using, say, 8 or 9 Forces to try to take possession, he's probably going to suspect he's not dealing with a human. For that matter, since Shedim can't possess celestials period, they'll have the same result when they try and fail to possess someone with Humanity. And before you propose that the Humanity attunement should cause the Kyriotate/Shedite to fail automatically, believing the subject resisted, keep in mind that would mean that Humanity, in addition to its other powers, automatically makes the subject immune to any sort of possession. I'm sure I can think of other examples. Humanity should foil all information-gathering powers, but it can't foil any indirect means of determining how much Essence or how many Forces someone is carrying, or it becomes *enormously* powerful. (Of course, they *might* think that this strange person who seems to be a mortal except that he has over 9 Forces is a big-ass Child of the Grigori, but most will probably suspect Game/Humanity first.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:37:01 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances >>>Yeah, except that the players get all hissy when they think you're picking stuff out because YOU don't like it (as opposed to "house rules", which hardly anyone minds... go figure).<<< Get new players. It's every GM's right to pick stuff out because he doesn't like it. I wouldn't tolerate munchkins who got hissy on me for that reason. (They're the same munchkins that require just about every game supplement to include the should-be-unnecessary "THE GM MAY CHANGE OR IGNORE THIS IF HE DOESN'T LIKE IT" clause.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:45:47 +1100 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: RE: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement. Tafka J wrote: > Going by the _exact_ wording of the Attunement, the _ONLY_ being in > creation that can tell the difference is Lucifer. This means > kiddies, that > not even Asmodeus can tell. . . With maybe the exception of him being > attuned to you at the time. . . Also, *all* Superiors can recognise *all* of the Servitors instantly. So Asmodeus' line of reasoning would probably be "A human who is my servitor. Humanity attunement." Unless of course he gave a non-servitor the attunement (incredibly unlikely, IMO). Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:42:44 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance >>>>I don't even see this as being outside canon. More of an obvious gloss >>>>on canon.<<< > >Well, you're wrong. As Elizabeth has explained, in detail, numerous >times. Somehow I must have missed this particular point. Again, to clarify, we're talking about a Merc ordering a human hurt or killed... not "stepping aside", but ordering that it be done. >>>>This seems to me to be _mis_reading canon. Way too narrowly. What am >>>>I missing here?<<< > >The fact that "Thou shalt not harm humans" is subtly but significantly >different from "Thou shalt not allow humans to come to harm." I recognize the difference, Dave. But I still don't see how this makes "I order you to kill this human for me" a non-dissonant action. That's not "allowing" harm; it's _causing_ harm. Using an agent, yes, but the Merc is still the primary source and cause of the harm. As someone else pointed out, if that ain't dissonant, then a Merc can shoot a human and claim that the bullets were the real cause of the damage... Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:36:36 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: mercurian dissonance At 9:21 PM -0400 11/29/99, Douglas Muir wrote: > >>>>I think we can all agree that if a Mercurian is in charge of a > >>>>Malakite, and he says, "Mal, beat up this human for me," then the Merc > >>>>will take dissonance... yes?<<< > > > >No. > >?! > >I don't even see this as being outside canon. More of an obvious gloss on >canon. > >Can Cherubs order someone else to harm their attuned? No -- that's a direct contravening of the Cherub's "Do Not Betray Thy Attuned" dissonance condition. Telling someone else to harm his attuned is betrayal. A Mercurian stepping back and letting someone else be violent is *not* contravening his dissonance condition. >Can a Seraph order someone else to lie for them? Yes. "Who are you guys, *really?*" Seraph looks at the human, then at the Ofanite. "Answer his question." The Ofanite looks up. "We're government agents, kid!" Seraph looks slightly pained, but then he always does. No dissonance. >Can a Mal order someone else to break one of his oaths? Well, sure. Unless his Oath is of the "Do Not Allow" or "Do Not Suffer Evil" etc. to live variety. If a Malakite has an Oath to "never use a wooden club in combat," and the guy next to him has a baseball bat, he's perfectly fine telling the guy to attack. Even an oath of "never set a fire" doesn't mean he can't ask his friends to build a campfire. It means he never can set one. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:44:25 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Malakim At 11:17 PM -0400 11/29/99, Douglas Muir wrote: > >"I grab it! [makes perception roll, with a check digit of 6] "Woo hoo! >BRIEFCASE OF DEATH!! En garde, demon scum!" > > >Tip: never, ever fight one of these bad boys in a supermarket. Unless you >want to report back to your Prince that your vessel was destroyed by an >angel wielding a deadly bag of potato chips. > >Yeah, maybe a Malakite of Eli. Ohhhh yes. Trudiel, Malakite of Eli in service to Michael. Remember. Abracadabra plus Malakite of Eli Attunement equals bizarre ways to die. The thing to remember about a Malakite of Eli is that in a way, he sees the entire world militantly. Everything is a weapon. Every conversation has a certain edge to it. The Malakite might be at a wild Creationer party, but he's the one who's figuring out how to take out the stereo with punch glasses when Boy George comes on. And never. Ever. Go driving with one. "Hey -- isn't that that Calabite of Fire we were looking fo-- AUGH! What are you doing! Get back on the road! Get back on the road! Get back on th--" "Shut up. We have airbags." - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:45:55 PST From: "Miles 2 Go" Subject: Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances The expanded resonances aren't so bad except that most angels can just run down the list... I resonate, ok, now I use the -2 resonance and resonate again, ok, now I use the -4 resonance and resonate again... And in three rolls you get a disgusting amount of information. Even if you miss a roll, if you don't fail with a 6, under the current rules you can immediately try again. For a simple fix... apply to the penalty to the check digit as well. If you get a zero, you just missed, but if you get a negative check digit, you're resonance is useless as per a failure (6 minus Celestial Forces in hours). This means you don't have a chance of getting a CD of 6 on a -4 table without special bonuses of some sort (probably essence), but that doesn't seem like a disaster to me. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:48:59 +1100 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: RE: IN> Uh, hey. Tafka J wrote: > >Unfortunately I'm the only person I know who likes RPGs. > > [NITPICK] In your area you mean? };;;> [NITPICK OF YOUR NITPICK] Unless you know everyone that he does and can prove that he knows someone who likes RPGs, his statement is valid (and no, I don't think the list counts. He's only a newbie, so he doesn't 'know' us yet). Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:47:58 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Mercurian resonance >>>No, no. Most angels have nonviolent resonances. But the Merc resonance, without the APG expansion, was no better than the Elohite or Malakite resonances, and maybe not quite as good.<<< Which resonance is "better" is purely subjective, of course, but I fail to see how the Mercurian resonance is less useful than the Elohite or Malakite resonance. >>>After all, "What is he feeling, and why?" and "Is he a good guy or a bad guy?" are often handier than "How do people see him?".<<< Often it is. And often "Who does he know, where's he from, what's important in his life, what are his relationships with everyone he knows" is handier than "What's he feeling?" or "Is he a good guy or a bad guy?" >>>And their dissonance conditions are tougher than the Elohim's.<<< Again, subjective. Depends on what you want from a character. Obviously, it's easier to be a combatant if you're an Elohite. But it's easier to be emotional and passionate if you're a Mercurian. >>>Not as tough as the Mals, no, but then they don't get anywhere near the fear and respect that the Malakim do.<<< How is this relevant? Why would Mercurians want to be feared? (Respect tends to be more of an individual thing.) >>>Nor do they have particularly nifty attunements to compensate... some decent ones (Dominic, Michael), but several lame ones (Jordi, Janus). None that make the average player say, "Whoa! I wanna play _that_!"<<< I guess they wouldn't appeal to mini-maxing munchkins much, true enough. But I think every Choir and Band has a few lame attunements. >>>Naw.<<< Mercurian resonates on a demon with a Role/6. Gets a check digit of 3. The Symphony tells him: "The name most people he knows call him is Arrglblax, his geographical origin is HELL, major items of interest are the mortal he's tormenting with nightmares and the artifact he's carrying in his pocket..." Without a house rule, the Mercurian resonance will see right through a Role on a moderately good check digit. (Yes, it's possible for Elohim and Malakim to do the same thing, but except on high check digits, a celestial won't usually be quite such a give-away.) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:01:35 +1100 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: Kyrio Resonance (was RE: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement) David wrte: > For example, suppose a Kyriotate tries to possess a demon with the > Humanity attunement turned on. The Kyrio devotes 5 Forces to taking over > the subject, "bounces" (assuming the demon doesn't make his Will roll), > and says "Gee, a Soldier or potential Soldier!" When he bounces after > using, say, 8 or 9 Forces to try to take possession, he's probably going > to suspect he's not dealing with a human. Here's something. I may have been playing Kyrios wrong all this time. Do they actually have to declare how many forces they are devoting to a particular possession? The way I've always played them is that the Kyrio simply invokes his resonance on the target and, if successful, the required number of forces are taken up. If the target is bigger than first thought, the Kyrio feels the pull and is forced to give up control of other hosts until he controls the new host. He doesn't actually realise how big the thing is until he possesses it. Is that wrong, or is this an area of fuzzy rules? Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:01:30 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance At 12:42 AM -0400 11/30/99, Douglas Muir wrote: > >>>>I don't even see this as being outside canon. More of an obvious gloss > >>>>on canon.<<< > > > >Well, you're wrong. As Elizabeth has explained, in detail, numerous > >times. > >Somehow I must have missed this particular point. Again, to clarify, we're >talking about a Merc ordering a human hurt or killed... not "stepping >aside", but ordering that it be done. Yes. We are. The text of the main book specifically states "wave in the Malakim." Not step back out of the way. Wave them in. Order them in. In Canon this is not dissonant. > >I recognize the difference, Dave. But I still don't see how this makes "I >order you to kill this human for me" a non-dissonant action. That's not >"allowing" harm; it's _causing_ harm. Using an agent, yes, but the Merc is >still the primary source and cause of the harm. > >As someone else pointed out, if that ain't dissonant, then a Merc can shoot >a human and claim that the bullets were the real cause of the damage... Because bullets have no motive. They are a direct expression of the Mercurian's physical action. Ordering someone else to do the deed, while no doubt a painful thing for a Mercurian, transfers the motive to another being. When that being acts on the motive, the Mercurian is a step away from it and safe. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:07:51 -0700 From: Tim Groth Subject: IN> Expanded Angelic Resonance Just my thoughts on the APG's expanded resonances: Seraphim - Just fine, mostly a clarification. Cherubim - Um this gets a little crazy, mostly in the -4 to use one where you get info about the attuned and the nemesis attunement resonance use (can we say path to Djinnhood). I don't think the self-sacrifice is that bad, and while the -2 see if anyone is watching your attuned is not overly powerful its just strange (IMCs I usually replace it with a check if your attuned is going to come to harm in cd hours and eliminate the nemsis/-4 special use). Ofanim - There resonance is great to begin with, and I like the expanded version. It adds more function, but its not unreasonable considering. Elohim - I think of all the expanded resonances there's is the less expanded, but the best fleshed out. It allows them to hone there resonance in, I think that most complaints about the expanded resonances is that their expanded instead of focused. Any re-write of them should run with the resonance as written in the main book and hone it. Malakim - They didn't get an expanded resonance, their already immune to Trauma and cause more fear in demons than any other angel just by virtue of what they are which is good enough. Kyriotates - Um these are a bit unbalanced. The -2 one isn't so bad, but the -4 is just getting a little out of hand (especially if their accessing skills in one host can't they use them like any other knowledge in another host). Mercurians - I think the -4 one makes more sense, its closer to being a focusing of their resonance than the -2 one. A more appropriate sophsticated use would probably be understanding how things came to as they are for the person and stuff like that (which would include what things a person reacts to in order to form trusting relationships). All in all I think the IPG has better resonance expansions (especially the Basleraph one, lie upon lie upon lie upon lie upon lie... sorry I just really love that resonance). I think the difference lies in that the APG had expansions while the IPG had expanded write ups that added depth. I'm a fan of more free form resonance rules (I'll get around to writing it down in full eventually), basicly penalties taken to get a specific resault with the resonance. The more out there from the origional resonance the harder it is. For example a Seraph anaylizing art for the Truths contained within is at about -3, Elohim checking up on the emotions that inspired the same work of art is at -1 (it actually came up once in a campeign). Timothy, Angel of Rambling If you have a hankering for waffles or chicken i know the place for you: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:15:35 -0700 From: Tim Groth Subject: RE: IN> Uh, hey. >Tafka J wrote: > >> >Unfortunately I'm the only person I know who likes RPGs. >> >> [NITPICK] In your area you mean? };;;> > >[NITPICK OF YOUR NITPICK] Unless you know everyone that he does and can >prove that he knows someone who likes RPGs, his statement is valid (and no, >I don't think the list counts. He's only a newbie, so he doesn't 'know' us >yet). Ok this has gone too far, I may not be a powerful angel but the evil of the Demon Princess of Nitpicking is out of control!! We must rally against her terrible influence!!!! And to prevent being squished for being totally off topic how many angels do you think die in a given year for having a mentality like this? Now I'm prepared to be squished for totally different reasons. Timothy, Angel of Rambling If you have a hankering for waffles or chicken i know the place for you: http://d106-h032.rh.rit.edu/~tim/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:20:52 -0500 From: "Gregory Gietzen" Subject: Re:IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance > The text of the main book specifically states "wave in the Malakim." Morover, the main book specifically states this on page 104. Id est, "When negotiations break down, a Mercurian has to know when to step aside and [watch for it!] wave in the sharp knives of the Malakim." Is this sufficient for my very first picked nit? Gregory Balseraph, aspiring to the service of Nitpicking ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:26:45 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Mercurian resonance >>>>Nor do they have particularly nifty attunements to compensate... some >>>>decent ones (Dominic, Michael), but several lame ones (Jordi, Janus). >>>>None that make the average player say, "Whoa! I wanna play _that_!"<<< > >I guess they wouldn't appeal to mini-maxing munchkins much, true enough. >But I think every Choir and Band has a few lame attunements. It's not so much that they have lame ones, as that they don't have any... well, any _cool_ ones. Not talking "mini-maxing munchkins" here. Talking cool. Mal of Creation, Kyrio of Stone or Lightning, Ofanite of Fire, Cherubs of Lightning or War... cool. The ones that *inspire* players. Yeah, any attunement is potentially inspirational. It's true. I've seen players come up with some wild, wild stuff. But... Mercurian of Animals? "Hi, I can talk to chimps." So far, this one has stayed strictly NPC. Maybe my players are just lacking in imagination, but... Mals seem to have the best attunements overall. This is, of course, a largely subjective judgment... but one in which my players, at least, concur. As I've noted before, I'm an isolated IN GM, so if other folks have different takes on this, I'm all ears. >>>>Naw.<<< > >Mercurian resonates on a demon with a Role/6. Gets a check digit of 3. >The Symphony tells him: "The name most people he knows call him is >Arrglblax, his geographical origin is HELL, major items of interest are >the mortal he's tormenting with nightmares and the artifact he's >carrying in his pocket..." > >Without a house rule, the Mercurian resonance will see right through a >Role on a moderately good check digit. ! Well, in that case, I've been using a house rule for a while now. Like the fellow who spoke only prose, I guess I've been doing it without knowing... I've always had Mercs resonate on the Role. Then I give them a Perception roll (rolled secretly, by me), minus the level of the Role, to see if something seems funny to them. It never even occurred to me that Mercs *wouldn't* resonate on the Role. After all, isn't that what Roles are for? It's canon that they can fool the Symphony (sometimes), so they ought to be able to divert a resonance... >(Yes, it's possible for Elohim and Malakim to do the same thing, but >except on high check digits, a celestial won't usually be quite such a >give-away.) Well, I have Elohim and Malakim resonate on the celestial, not his Role... but that made sense to me because Roles are about social interactions, not internal honor or feelings. Is there anything in canon that makes this clear one way or another? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:31:11 -0600 From: Santiago Subject: Re: IN> Uh, hey. >At 10:41 PM 29/11/99 -0400, you wrote: >>On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Dan Weaver wrote: >> > Oh yeah, one (well, two) other things. I decided I liked a Malakim of >> > Stone best as a character, mostly for the solidarity, love & unity >> > street-punk thing thing they have going. So... >> > a) is it a complete rip-off to have a punk Malakim of Stone? >>Nope. It's a fairly common image (I think), but it's not a rip-off. >> > b) are Malakim supposed to be totally bereft of humor and the ability to >> > have a good time when not in the presence of evil, or can they enjoy >> > themselves when they aren't hip-deep in demon guts? I badly want to >> > have the following conversation before I mash something. >> > Demon: Who ARE you? >> > Me: I'm BATMAN! That's what the world needs, more Malakites who know how to have fun, how to slay and murder with style and wit, how to take it in stride when two servitors of dark humor break into your garage and spray paint your red Ferrari Testarossa a nice shade of blue... >Character I've always wanted to play is a Malakim of Flowers .. > > >"I -=REALLY=- don't want to hurt you, but ........" > I've often thought of that myself, though I picture it more as follows: Ofanite of War: "There's the demon--let's kill him!" Malakite of Flowers: "Wait, wait! Okay, you evildoer, repent and ask for redemption, or I'll have to do something I really don't like." Calabite of Death: "Huh?" Malakite of Flowers: "C'mon, just admit to yourself that you're an evil monster, but that you can get better if you just let us help you." Calabite of Death: Malakite of Flowers: "Oww, hey, quit it! That's not nice. This is your final chance--repent or be destroyed!" Calabite of Death: Malakite of Flowers: Ofanite of War: "I don't know why you bother...one of these days you're going to get us in deep trouble." Malakite of Flowers: "Oh, my, I hope the poor guy wasn't deaf. I should probably learn sign language, just in case I meet a deaf demon that really does want to redeem..." Remember kids, to kill an evil, you don't need to kill the evildoer, just get it to stop being evil... - -- Santiago ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:31:45 -0600 From: Santiago Subject: Re: IN> Malakim >Tip: never, ever fight one of these bad boys in a supermarket. Unless you >want to report back to your Prince that your vessel was destroyed by an >angel wielding a deadly bag of potato chips. I dunno...if you report back to Kobal with that story, he'd probably give you a new vessel for it, and then go give the Malakite an attunement, whether he wants it or not... - -- Santiago ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:35:33 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Uh, hey. From: "Chris Rose" > > Character I've always wanted to play is a Malakim of Flowers .. > > > "I -=REALLY=- don't want to hurt you, but ........" > Or maybe "Don't make me angry. You wouldn't liek em when I'm angry." ;;;) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:32:34 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance >The text of the main book specifically states "wave in the Malakim." >Not step back out of the way. Wave them in. Order them in. In >Canon this is not dissonant. Question of interpretation here. I read "wave in the Malakim" as _allowing_ them in, not _commanding_ them in. >>I recognize the difference, Dave. But I still don't see how this makes "I >>order you to kill this human for me" a non-dissonant action. That's not >>"allowing" harm; it's _causing_ harm. Using an agent, yes, but the Merc is >>still the primary source and cause of the harm. >> >>As someone else pointed out, if that ain't dissonant, then a Merc can shoot >>a human and claim that the bullets were the real cause of the damage... > >Because bullets have no motive. They are a direct expression of the >Mercurian's physical action. > >Ordering someone else to do the deed, while no doubt a painful thing >for a Mercurian, transfers the motive to another being. When that >being acts on the motive, the Mercurian is a step away from it and >safe. Um, not necessarily. If the other being is under the Merc's command, and wasn't planning to attack the human anyway, then the _motive_ is coming from the Merc. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:42:13 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim From: "Ben Aldred" > best example IMHO of the Malakite of Eli attunement is Jackie Chan. He > grabs a towel, a ladder or anything that happens to be sitting around and > opens up a family size can of whoop ass on whoever is around. Or Sammo Hong, who used an eraser to kick a guy's butt once. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:47:47 +1100 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: RE: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance Douglas wrote: > Question of interpretation here. I read "wave in the Malakim" as > _allowing_ them in, not _commanding_ them in. Mercurian steps to one side, disgusted look on face. Lifts arm a little, moves hand at wrist, fingers approximately together, in a gesture originating from the Malakite's direction, and ending in the humans direction. Repeats if necessary. Malakite observes direction of movement, searches for target. Draws knives, introduces human to a whole world of pain. I have trouble reading it any other way. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:54:01 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: RE: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance >> Question of interpretation here. I read "wave in the Malakim" as >> _allowing_ them in, not _commanding_ them in. > >Mercurian steps to one side, disgusted look on face. Lifts arm a little, >moves hand at wrist, fingers approximately together, in a gesture >originating from the Malakite's direction, and ending in the humans >direction. Repeats if necessary. Malakite observes direction of movement, >searches for target. Draws knives, introduces human to a whole world of >pain. > >I have trouble reading it any other way. I'm standing in line at the checkout counter. I start looking for my check-card, realize I can't find it, start to dig in my wallet. Realizing this may take a moment, I glance at the person behind me, _wave him ahead of me_ in the line, and keep looking. Am I *ordering* him to go ahead of me... or *allowing* it? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:54:30 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances >Get new players. Hardcore, Dave. Not a Word I'm serving these days. And actually, I'm pretty pleased with the group I've got now. They've got some quirks... hey, we all got some quirks. >It's every GM's right to pick stuff out because he >doesn't like it. I wouldn't tolerate munchkins who got hissy on me for >that reason. (They're the same munchkins that require just about every >game supplement to include the should-be-unnecessary "THE GM MAY CHANGE >OR IGNORE THIS IF HE DOESN'T LIKE IT" clause.) Not munchkins... had one of those, but he left a while back. Rules lawyers. I can't even get too upset with the worst one; he plays a Seraph of Judgment, and he's probably the group's best roleplayer. So it's _in character_ for him to make that little sniffing sound... Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:59:39 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: Mercurian dissonance At 1:32 AM -0400 11/30/99, Douglas Muir wrote: > >Um, not necessarily. If the other being is under the Merc's command, and >wasn't planning to attack the human anyway, then the _motive_ is coming >from the Merc. Two words: Free Will. The Mercurian can state his intent, and even phrase it as an order, but it's not the Mercurian executing it. The Symphony knows Free Will. It's the only way it *can* work. Otherwise, a Seraph could order a Mercurian to beat a man to death and the Mercurian *wouldn't* get dissonance. "Just following orders" doesn't take the responsibility from the person executing the violence. It's simply the way it is. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1436 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.