From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Thu Dec 2 18:02:44 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 SAA07434 for ; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:02:43 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id RAA17975 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:54:51 -0600 Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:54:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199912022354.RAA17975@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 #1443 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, December 2 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1443 In this digest: Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Enough with the Smarmy Nitpicking! Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Enough with the Smarmy Nitpicking! IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. Re: IN> Malakim Of Creation RE: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. Re: IN> Malakim Re: IN> Vessels Re: IN> Nasty Malakite Trick Re: IN> Words, distinctions. Re: IN> Words, distinctions Re: IN> How do demons figure these things out? Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. Re: IN> Aquiring Dissonance Conditions Re: IN> Gaing force by attribute improvement Re: IN> The Late Great JC Re: IN> Malakim Of Creation Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. Re: IN> Dark Choirs Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement Re: IN> Malakim with a sense of humor IN> Canon query on resonances IN> Gaining force by attribute improvement IN> Repeated use of resonance? Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 14:33:27 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Malakim At 11:47 AM -0800 12/2/99, Ben Glickler wrote: >I disagree further than that. I would not let a Malakite of Eli say, "I >grab the bag of jelly beans -- lemme roll for the power...". That is >preposterous. They are creative fighters. They are not cartoony fighters. (_I'd_ let the Malakite do that -- but then, I've read a comic where the protagonist was cyborged. She (and her target) carried around steel marbles and threw them at people -- nastier than bullets. So maybe the Malakite doesn't do as much damage with a high-speed jellybean -- I wouldn't want to get one in the eye.) >This means you're not going to get genre-defying and mood-destroying >weapons, You have your mood, I'll have mine. I like the "In Nomine INWO" card description of a Malakite with a banana, and the quote, "Oh no, he peeled it! Now he's got _two_ weapons!" Yes, it's funny -- but it's also kind of scary. Imagine coming on the scene of the 'Jelly Bean Murders.' A whole street gang, with little projectiles embedded in their eyes and throats. Forensics reports that those little blood-covered things are... jellybeans. Will you ever look at candy the same way again? 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, 2 Dec 1999 14:12:55 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Enough with the Smarmy Nitpicking! At 2:32 PM +0000 12/2/99, Liam Astley wrote: > >hmm, i can't help but agree with this, though it does feel a little like >i've just been told off by my dad :) David Edelstein: Professional Father Figure. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:32:28 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Heinen Subject: Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Liam Astley wrote: > From: Tim Groth > > Since it masks enough to leave only clues that their not actually human > you > > can't instantly assume that every cute little girl that has 10 essence and > > can take 100 some body hits is a demon of the game. It just means that > > what ever she is it ain't a normal human. > > yeah, but surely the point of the attunement isn't to hide the fact that > it's a demon. it's to convince people that the demon is human. so once they > find out the so-called human has 100 hits, or whatever, the attunements > pretty much useless. sure, they can't be sure that it's a demon, but they'll > know it _isn't_ human. and i think most angels (at least, those briefed on > asmodeus' little tricks) would assume (quite rightly) that it's more likely > to be a demon than an ethereal. and it's not as if they have to worry about > killing an "innocent undead guy" either. But thats not what he is saying. Sure, the players might guess. But the character will only see "human". Even with 100 body hits and 10 essence, no one will think anything but "human". It's a Bal lie that can not be resisted and never fades in their mind. - -Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:37:40 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > I like the "In Nomine INWO" card > description of a Malakite with a banana, and the quote, "Oh no, he > peeled it! Now he's got _two_ weapons!" This is postedon the archives, right? Because I have to go read this Right Now... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 14:46:38 -0500 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Malakim At 2:33 PM -0500 12/2/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >Yes, it's funny -- but it's also kind of scary. Imagine coming on the >scene of the 'Jelly Bean Murders.' A whole street gang, with little >projectiles embedded in their eyes and throats. Forensics reports >that those little blood-covered things are... jellybeans. Will you >ever look at candy the same way again? Trudiel was on a fire escape with a bag of groceries. A motorcycle gang led by a Calabite was tearing through the alleyway below her. Trudiel took out an Egg and got a CD of 4. She cracked the egg and let the innards drop -- intersecting with the helmet visor (full face) of the Calabite in the lead. He lost control and spun out (doing the damage to him in the process) and causing the rest of the gang to wipe out on top of him, since they were riding close quarters. She then descended with a can of Chunky Sirloin Burger Soup and her favorite mug and proceeded to wipe them out. Jelly beans would be just as deadly, I think. The attunement works best when *anything* is fodder, but at the same time there's a certain 'seriousness' to it. It's not that Trudiel can make a Q-Tip a deadly weapon, it's that a Q-Tip rammed through the eye into the socket and into the squishy brain on the other side is deadly. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 14:31:20 -0600 From: "Eeyore" Subject: Re: IN> Enough with the Smarmy Nitpicking! - -----Original Message----- From: Whistling in the Dark To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Cc: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Thursday, December 02, 1999 1:32 PM Subject: Re: IN> Enough with the Smarmy Nitpicking! >At 2:32 PM +0000 12/2/99, Liam Astley wrote: >> >>hmm, i can't help but agree with this, though it does feel a little like >>i've just been told off by my dad :) > >David Edelstein: Professional Father Figure. Then I do *not* want to meet the Mother figure in a dark alley. J. Michael Neal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:25:55 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. I'd always assumed, as EDG pointed out, that the perception roll was to find something useful. After all, if you fail the perception roll, you've got jack, right? It just defies the imagination. Okay, so the Malakite grabs a cotton swab. He rolls, gets a 6 on the check digit. But how the heck can he hurt someone? Does he stick it up both their nostrils? If so, is he just automatically succeeding in grappling the enemy, in order to stuff items up his nose? Does this mean he has his enemy restrained, and can now end the battle? Or does he just move supernaturally-fast, stealing the Ofanite's thunder, and zip in, plug a nose, and zip out? How else can he hurt someone with it? Does he rub it very quickly across their body, causing cotton-burn? Does he ram it into their eye and hopefully impale their brain with a cotton swab? If he fails to kill them, does this mean he missed the brain? Does he push it in their mouth, again either grappling automatically or moving with the speed of an Ofanite, and hope they choke on it? It just leaves a lot of unanswered questions. It also doesn't seem to flow very well with how Malakim seem to be, but as people have said, choose your mood. Others may choose to have Malakim a little more slapsticky and slaphappy, but the dark angel style they seem to embody doesn't jive well with letting 'em kill people with a sunflower seed. I'd assume the wording of Eli's Malakite attunement was just clumsy. Assume you pick an item up *if* you make your roll. This makes the perception roll make more sense, since you're *looking* for the most deadly item around. If you fail, you don't find a thing. If you succeed, you find the *most* deadly thing, as determined by your check digit. > Eric Alfred Burns | Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 12:38:33 -0800 (PST) From: David Barr Subject: Re: IN> Malakim Of Creation The thing i really like abvout the attunement is that it encourages Player creativity, as well as inspiring real fear of Malakim of Creation. I would also point out that there is are Game precedents for this kind of power. In GURPS Martial Arts, there is one style that allows a player to turn anything into a weapon (have not that book on hand, so cannot cite specifics). And in White Wolf Hunter the Reckoning, there is a power that allows the players to do aggravated damage with Anything (the illustration is a man cutting a werewolf in half with a Spoon.) Now, I am not advocating using othe games to set the rules for IN. (I agree with David E. that even using the GURPS IN rules as IN canon is a Very Bad Idea (different thread). But the fact that it happens in other Cinematic games, which IN is, sets a concrete example for how this kind of power (lacking a better generic term) works in other Cinematic setting. Then again, I have never had to be the demon who had to explained why they got sent to hell by an old man armed with a banana.... - -Daiv ===== reply to my home address -> daiv@cruzio.com my mother once said that boy is stranger than a three toed barking frog - -Daiv __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:42:40 -0000 From: Meehan Anthony Subject: RE: IN> Malakim >->From: "Elizabeth McCoy" > > >> I like the "In Nomine INWO" card >> description of a Malakite with a banana, and the quote, "Oh no, he >> peeled it! Now he's got _two_ weapons!" > >This is postedon the archives, right? Because I have to go >read this Right >Now... My Malakim o' Eli has an Oath. "When Dealing with known servitors of Kobal, always use a banana. (That'll show them whats funny)" Starsurfer ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:46:38 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Malakim >From: Whistling in the Dark >> >> "Shut up. We have airbags." >> > >*lol* >i must now convince one of my friends to run an IN game so that i can play a >malk and use that line :) I opened my present campaign with a modified version of the "No Dinero" adventure. At one point, the PCs found themselves in a taxicab (belonging to one of them, a former Kashmiri dissident turned Aghan freedom fighter turned hunted refugee turned New York City cab driver/Soldier of Fire). In a hurry. Chased by demons in celestial form, demons disguised as police, and police. From far downtown up to the Roosevelt Island tramway -- forty blocks, through rush-hour traffic -- and then back downtown to Greenwich (the Strand bookstore, home of a secret Tether of Destiny). With an Ofanite of Fire at the wheel. And a demon's dead vessel in the trunk. And a bound but struggling Norse god wedged in between three PCs in the back seat. At the end of that session, one player had decided this game was not for him... but three others had decided this was *cool*, and have stayed since. Ofanite: "Okay, enough! This route is completely safe." Pause. "Oh, wait. Are you guys immune to fire?" Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:50:13 -0700 From: Tim Groth Subject: Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. I think the Perception roll is to figure out by examining Symphonic themes how the item is best used as a weapon. Thus anythin can be used as a weapon. However things like cotton swabs and jelly beans should have penalties to Power and to their roll to hit, their just not effective. Things like coins and rocks wouldn't have a penalty. While using something like a gravestone (came up once) would give a bonus to the Power. Another option is that if a Malakite picks up something ineffectual (say a starburst wrapper) then they get a penalty to the Perception roll, its just isn't likely that they'll pick up any ways to use it as a weapon. 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: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:07:31 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Martin Subject: Re: IN> Malakim On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Prodigal wrote: [Regarding: INWO card: Malakim of Eli] > This is postedon the archives, right? Because I have to go read this Right > Now... IN INWO is a subdirectory at Sam Kingston's INWO Homebrew site: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/inwo/ Michael Martin "It is no one's privilege to despise another. It is only a hard-won right after long experience." -- Isaac Asimov, "C-Chute" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:10:50 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Vessels Walter Milliken wrote: > > At 21:36 -0500 12/1/99, Azrael wrote: > >1) Do Vessels die from a headshot? > > If they take enough damage from it. (Since IN doesn't have any hit-location > rules in the core rules, that's about all you can go by.) Yah. > > >2) If vessels don't respire, but have to breath, then couldn't they breathe any > >gas if there is suffiecient pressure and suffer no ill effects, like frex > >the vessel dying? > > I believe the intent is that they need oxygen. 'Good air', which means oxygen and no poisons. Well, I guess you _could_ breathe poisonous gasses as well, but the vessle would take damage! > >5)How do multiple attacks with feet work, the explanation is quite convoluted. > > I thought this was in the errata or the FAQ, but I can't find it. Maybe > John answered it here on the list. I don't recall the details well enough > to try to repeat them. I think this got cleared up in the Songbook, but I don't have the details with me. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:16:45 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Nasty Malakite Trick David Edelstein wrote: > >>>As an alternative, I use an optional feature, "Masked Artifact", which works like a Role purchased for the artifact, in effect, hiding it from celestial treasure hunters.<<< > > Hard to Detect: +1 per -2 to the Perception roll. Or +5 to make it > undetectable as an artifact on the corporeal plane. Per the Liber > Reliquarum. There are more detailed rules for detecting artifacts in LR as well. It's worth picking up! Not to mention it had brilliant and witty authors... =) - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:22:34 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Words, distinctions. Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 3:54 PM -0400 12/1/99, Douglas Muir wrote: > >>> Well, IMC I tend to give out 1-2 character points per hour of play. [...] > >> > >>Urgle. I tend to give out one or two points per *adventure*, which is > >>usually 3 or 4 evenings. > > > >Re-urgle. If you're playing weekly, that means it would take a > >character... umm, about three months to earn a single Force, and that's > >assuming he didn't buy anything else. > We don't do gobs of in-character talk (1-2 Ofanim in the party, depending > on who shows up...), but we don't save the universe, either. I shudder > to think what we'd do with 4-8 per session... Any GM running a high-point campaign needs to make certain modifications to the awards rules and whatnot. I _strongly_ recommend the following: * Forces are only grantable by Superiors. Period. Boosting Forces wantonly is a way to make uber-characters almost immediately. * No more than one point spent for ANY Song after each session. * Make characters buy new vessels as the old ones are used up. * Encourage players to dump points into boosting their Roles. Servants and spare vessels are some other good things. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:26:01 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Words, distinctions David Edelstein wrote: > This is not correct. Angels and demons are awarded a Distinction when > their Superior thinks they deserve one, and not before. You can earn a > Distinction while still having only 9 Forces, or you can be a 15-Force > Servitor without a Distinction (although the latter is unlikely, > particularly among demons, since a Superior probably wouldn't let > someone unworthy of a Distinction become that powerful). Hell, Superiors can give 'em to humans, cats, whatever. They usually DON'T, yes, but it's up to the Superior in question. Malphas, I believe, would be a very likely one to give out Distinctions if he thought it would shake up the ranks. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:30:27 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> How do demons figure these things out? Janet Anderson wrote: > In other words, are there ways for demons to get useful information about > angelic weaknesses, such as Cherub attunements, or just information about > what choir they are facing? (Of course a fortunate Malakite can spot > Balseraphs, and I can see Lilim being able to spot Malakim under the right > circumstances, but the middle of a battle does not strike me as "the right > circumstances" for most Lilim.) And what about Malakite oaths? Knowing > them could give a demon a serious edge, but I can think of no attunement > that can tell them this. Angels will almost always have better info because their resonances work that way. They are usually Perception based, while the demons are more Will based. Exceptions exist, of course, but generally that's how it works out. Excepting special artifacts/circumstances, it's pretty hard to noodle many things out of an angel by a demon. Malakite oaths might be tougher than average! OLD Malakites might be famous enough that info is known about them. Ask around... ;) - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 14:31:19 -0700 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. At 01:25 PM 12/2/99 -0700, you wrote: >It just defies the imagination. Okay, so the Malakite grabs a cotton swab. >He rolls, gets a 6 on the check digit. But how the heck can he hurt >someone? Does he stick it up both their nostrils? If so, is he just >automatically succeeding in grappling the enemy, in order to stuff items up >his nose? Does this mean he has his enemy restrained, and can now end the >battle? Or does he just move supernaturally-fast, stealing the Ofanite's >thunder, and zip in, plug a nose, and zip out? How else can he hurt someone >with it? Does he rub it very quickly across their body, causing >cotton-burn? Does he ram it into their eye and hopefully impale their brain >with a cotton swab? If he fails to kill them, does this mean he missed the >brain? Does he push it in their mouth, again either grappling automatically >or moving with the speed of an Ofanite, and hope they choke on it? Ben, I think you might be assuming something that's not true. I am a Malakite of Eli. I'm in the heat of battle, and I happen to grab a ... cotton swab? Hm. I could ... hm. (Check digit: 6) Ah! The best way to use this in combat is to shove it down his throat hopefully he'll choke on it and be out of the way, at least for a while. Unfortunately, getting him to swallow it might be tough, and I don't think I can get in there quickly enough - I think maybe those pencils might be more useful... The fact that our Malakite of Eli /has/ this uberpowerful cotton swab does /not/ mean that he can automatically hit with it. He has to get to a point where he can use it before he can, well, use it. >It just leaves a lot of unanswered questions. It also doesn't seem to flow >very well with how Malakim seem to be, but as people have said, choose your >mood. Others may choose to have Malakim a little more slapsticky and >slaphappy, but the dark angel style they seem to embody doesn't jive well >with letting 'em kill people with a sunflower seed. I don't see why "I can pick up anything and use it as a weapon" necessarily equals "I am a slapstick character". The fact that Malakim of Eli are (possibly) equally deadly with a sword and a clipboard does not mean that they're intrinsically "light" characters. It simply means that they can pick /anything/ up and see how it could be best used as a weapon. (Remember - not that they necessarily /can/ effectively use it as a weapon...) >I'd assume the wording of Eli's Malakite attunement was just clumsy. Assume >you pick an item up *if* you make your roll. This makes the perception roll >make more sense, since you're *looking* for the most deadly item around. If >you fail, you don't find a thing. If you succeed, you find the *most* >deadly thing, as determined by your check digit. Do as you like, it's your game. :) - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:39:27 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Aquiring Dissonance Conditions David Barr wrote: > By the same token, is it possible (in cannon) to give a character > another choir or bands Dissonance conditions? Imagine a Malakite who > could not lie...or a Kyriotate with Oaths... > Possibilities? I am not even thinking it would be, intrinsically, a > punishment. It might just as well be done as a prerequisite for > earning the associated attunements. > Does this work? If you want to do this in your campaign, more power to you. IMO, Superiors can impose Dissonance conditions that _simulate_ those received by other bands/choirs. Rather than being something that springs from their nature, it's an imposed thing. Under these circumstances, it'd almost always be a punishment, though. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:45:01 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> Gaing force by attribute improvement Tim Groth wrote: > However the problem comes with its better to not purchase the final > attribute increase that will gain you a new force because if you loose that > Force in celestial combat you loose the attributes assosiated with them. > Where as if you had stopped when you get to +3 among the attributes with > the assosiated force you could keep the bonus even after loosing all of the > forces. (a character with Strength 10 Agility 8 for instance if reduced to > 0 corporeal forces could still have Yer missing some here. Anyways, though, you are not incorrect. I suggested canon on this that wound its way into the GMG (although others probably came up with the idea independently). Those extra points are nice, and if you get force stripped, they can be useful. But as useful as an extra Force? Probably not. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:47:10 -0500 From: John Karakash Subject: Re: IN> The Late Great JC Jon Compton wrote: > But I have a question, nowhere in the > book does it really mention JC (Jesus Christ), I have looked at > some of the IN web pages and a few people say he is really Eli. > Has there been any official word on what role JC plays in IN? Is he > in fact Eli? If there is no official ruling, what is the general > consensus here? CDaU (canon doubt and uncertainty). Basically it's up to the local GM. We (SJGames, that is), is not going to ever, ever fill in this detail so that GMs can play with the concept on their own. - -- +============================================= + John Karakash - geek, writer, cook + Code mangler for EMC CLARiiON + mib2300 +============================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:36:37 -0500 From: Dan Weaver Subject: Re: IN> Malakim Of Creation Malakim of Creation are an embodiment of what's cool about In Nomine. The ability to destroy the legions of Hell with toenail clippers, potted palms, Super Bouncy Balls, and rubber bands lends a comedic aspect to the titanic struggle between good and evil. The Creation Malakite's lethality with a banana cream pie puts a human face on what would otherwise be incomprehensible to us poor Homo sapiens schmucks. To me In Nomine isn't meant to be a terribly realistic game at all. It's divine slapstick, as comic to us as humanity must seem to God and the angels. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:10:16 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. > Ben, I think you might be assuming something that's not true. It's been known to happen. :-) > The fact that our Malakite of Eli /has/ this uberpowerful cotton swab does > /not/ mean that he can automatically hit with it. He has to get to a point > where he can use it before he can, well, use it. Ah. Point. Since it's GM fiat as to what skill is used, you could decree that "cotton swab fu" defaults to Fighting at -6. This might be a useful mechanism to prevent players from disabling demons with a stryofoam cup. > I don't see why "I can pick up anything and use it as a weapon" necessarily > equals "I am a slapstick character". The fact that Malakim of Eli are One must admit that it leans very strongly in that direction. A serious person would stick to clipboards, chairs, brooms, cords, glass, and things that could legitimately be a weapon in the hands of a mortal. A less serious person would go straight for the grocery store to do battle. Although, if the proper defaults were sensibly enforced... the rule says the Gamemaster should be generous when considering defaults, but it doesn't say they should cast reason to the wind. After suffering several awful defaults in a row, a sensible Malakite would leave the grocery section of the store and head off to the hardware section. > Do as you like, it's your game. :) Curse you, Angel of Amiability! > -EDG Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:43:57 -0500 From: Ehrbar Subject: Re: IN> Dark Choirs > Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:00:06 -0700 > From: Tim Groth > > I've been working on this for a while, its been kinda difficult and I'd > like some feedback. Angels who both avoid dissonance and serve hell...I like 'em. I do think that Dark Chiors would tend to only show up in campaigns with either Low Brightness or Low Contrast (or both). A low contrast, mid-to-low Brightness campaign with both Bright Bands and Dark Chiors could get really interesting -- especially with a mixed group where the servants of Hell are lying about serving Heaven... Oooh... "Hey! He isn't one of Dominic's -- he's a Cherub of Asmodeus!" (said by Joe, a supposed Seraph of Eli) "Okay, lemme resonate him into little bits." (response from a Calabite of Michael) [Michael's Calabim smashes the accused demon] "Wait! He was too a Cherub of Dominic! Joe is a Balseraph!" (said by the Malakite of Eli) "Even better." (Calabite of Michael) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:48:14 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances >Make them wait their turns, seriously. Malakite rolls, you come up with >the deeds. Elohite rolls, you say, "Hang on, lemme finish with the bartender. >Now, your turn." I generally do; that was an example. If you don't come up with this stuff, fast, on the spot, though, they *will* start climbing over each other... And it's a continuing challenge to the GM's imagination. "Hey, that's the third person I've resonated tonight who's had 'sex with a drunk, underage girl' as one of his least honorable deeds." "Hmmm. Something going on around here? Servitor of Lust in the area, maybe?" "Maybe. Or maybe Doug's got something on his mind tonight..." >>Incidentally, I'd like to see a Canon ruling on the Merc resonance and >>Roles. I've been playing it that the Merc gets the skinny on the Role, not >>the underlying celestial. If the Role is skimpy, I give the Merc a >>Perception roll, minus the level of the Role, to notice something funny. >> >>Has this been wrong all along? > >There are a few different ways that's been handled -- it _is_ fuzzy in the >book. (Makes note to fix this in 2/e.) [glows with sense of constructive engagement] One reason I was sure it worked on the Role, not the underlying celestial, was that some otherwise the Merc's resonance would overlap with some attunements. A Merc who touches someone would always know their name, or at least the name most people call them... very similar to the Seraph of Destiny power. Yeah, the Seraph gets *true* names, which makes this attunement everyone's favorite Role-buster (and one that I've strenuously striven to keep out of the hands of my PC Seraph, overachieving little Dominican that he is). But if the Merc resonates to a celestial name instead of a Role-name, it's just about as good. "Well, you don't know this guy's TRUE name. But where he lives, he's generally called Glargh the Eviscerator." "Good enough". >* Mercurian gets the Role to the extent the Role covers, the reality after >that. Mm. Good in theory, hard in practice. Needs you to make snap decisions about how a Role functions for each particular character (hmm, does a Role-2 include hobbies?) >* Mercurian has to beat the Role level with his check digit; if he doesn't, >he gets Role data. If he does, he gets true data. (This does suggest that >he can't beat a Role/6 without being very close or touching the target, >to boost his check digit a la p. 57 (I think that is?), with the CD >modifiers.) Which would be fine with me, actually. Roles are supposed to give some protection, after all. Only problem with this one, as someone else noted, is that it's rather all-or-nothing. But that may not be so bad. >IOW, there's not currently a firm canon on that, but I think either of >those two might be plausible. (If there's one that Really Doesn't Work >in practice, I'd like to hear about it...) Subtracting the Role from the check digit Really Doesn't Work. I foolishly tried this... once. What was I thinking? "He thinks very highly of himself. People around him like and admire him, too." "Well, what about hobbies and stuff?" "You don't know." "Hey, I rolled a 4! Something funny going on here..." Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:51:56 EST From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> The good ol' Humanity attunement In a message dated 12/2/99 10:59:04 AM, esp.horsepie@btinternet.com writes: >though this does beg the question of why some angels would be pummeling >a cute little girl about so much they realise she has 100 body hits and so >can't be human after all :) > > >liam > "Mr. Johnson, can you explain why little Janie had to die?" is the first thing that came to *my* mind. (MiB reference, slightly mangled) Which left me nearly choked on my own laughter, imagining a gamester on the streets of New York City at night, carrying a load of physics texts. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 14:54:28 PST From: "Perry Lloyd" Subject: Re: IN> Malakim with a sense of humor >As I may have mentioned before, I think Malakim are as capable of having a >sense of humor as anyone else. What kind of sense of humor, whether or not >it was expressed (and how), or what they thought was funny would depend on >the Malakite. > >For example: > >Malakim of Dominic wouldn't express a sense of humor very often. I imagine it would be dry, wry perhaps. >Malakim of Eli would (even if they were for some strange reason working for >Dominic). Though I suspect they would laugh mostly at their own private jokes. :) >Malakim of Jordi would probably have really rude senses of humor and would >think human pratfalls and misfortunes funny. I suspect they are not >popular >with many other angels, especially Mercurians and Servitors of Novalis. Violent senses of humor, generated by a dog-eat-dog world. >Malakim of Laurence probably don't have *time* to have a sense of humor. Poor devils. >One thing they would all have in common is that they don't think evil is a >laughing matter. The only funny demon is a dead demon or one you are in >the >process of successfully killing. (There is a story somewhere in the In >Nomine Collection with a demon who is captured by Malakim of Dreams in the >Marches, in which the author describes the Malakim as "amusing" themselves >with the demon. I can see even the most honorable and warm-hearted >Malakite, the sort who would have Oaths about protecting humans and never >harming innocent bystanders, having a blind spot where torturing demons is >concerned -- as long as it's torture with death as its eventual purpose, >because letting the demon live would be dissonant.) Well, judging by the actions of the Mal'akh on pg 99 of the main text, they most certainly have a sense of humor. Apparently one which enjoys the suffering of that which is evil. - -Perry perrylloyd@hotmail.com "A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka Willy Wonda's Chocolate Factory ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:53:14 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: IN> Canon query on resonances Okay, we all know what happens when angels fail a resonance roll... they have to wait for (hours x check digit) to try again with that subject (unless they rolled a 6, in which case they get Resonance-sprain... ouch). But what happens when they succeed with a low check digit? Are they stuck with it forever, or can they try again? If the latter, then how long must they wait? This pops up from time to time; we have a house rule on it, but I'd be interested to hear what the official position is. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:52:04 -0600 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Gaining force by attribute improvement >>>However the problem comes with its better to not purchase the final attribute increase that will gain you a new force because if you loose that Force in celestial combat you loose the attributes assosiated with them. Where as if you had stopped when you get to +3 among the attributes with the assosiated force you could keep the bonus even after loosing all of the forces.<<< But you still lose 4 points off the characteristics for losing the Force. There's zero benefit to keeping a +3 bonus and not buying the fourth bonus (and added Force). - -David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 16:09:19 -0700 From: "Ben Glickler" Subject: IN> Repeated use of resonance? Can an angel, should he roll a low check digit, wait a few minutes and invoke his resonance again on the same human? Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:08:40 -0600 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Eli's Malakite Attunement, and why it needs to be rewritten. From: "Ben Glickler" > I'd always assumed, as EDG pointed out, that the perception roll was to find > something useful. After all, if you fail the perception roll, you've got > jack, right? On the other wing, since Eli's Word is Creation, it could be viewed as the Malakim creating a weapon from a mundane item... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:55:49 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Using Canon, Especially Bad Expanded Choir Resonances At 5:48 PM -0400 12/2/99, Douglas Muir wrote: >>Make them wait their turns, seriously. Malakite rolls, you come up with >>the deeds. Elohite rolls, you say, "Hang on, lemme finish with the bartender. >>Now, your turn." > >I generally do; that was an example. If you don't come up with this stuff, >fast, on the spot, though, they *will* start climbing over each other... > >And it's a continuing challenge to the GM's imagination. Sample Deeds in Servitorum... (It is a challenge -- but at least you have some suggestions there!) Pity someone around here hasn't compiled a huge long laundry list of stuff for Malakite resonances for the INC! (Don't look at me, I make 'em up on the fly and tell people to wait ruthlessly.) >One reason I was sure it worked on the Role, not the underlying celestial, >was that some otherwise the Merc's resonance would overlap with some >attunements. Or be nearly an auto-demon-detector. And what's the joy for a Malakite who just succeeded with a CD 6 then? >>* Mercurian gets the Role to the extent the Role covers, the reality after >>that. > >Mm. Good in theory, hard in practice. Needs you to make snap decisions >about how a Role functions for each particular character (hmm, does a >Role-2 include hobbies?) Or decisions that you write down on paper in advance, perhaps -- what a Role/1 covers, etc. (You _really_ want Liber Servitorum for that sort of thing. >>* Mercurian has to beat the Role level with his check digit; if he doesn't, >>he gets Role data. If he does, he gets true data. (This does suggest that >>he can't beat a Role/6 without being very close or touching the target, >>to boost his check digit a la p. 57 (I think that is?), with the CD >>modifiers.) > >Which would be fine with me, actually. Roles are supposed to give some >protection, after all. > >Only problem with this one, as someone else noted, is that it's rather >all-or-nothing. But that may not be so bad. >Subtracting the Role from the check digit Really Doesn't Work. I foolishly >tried this... once. What was I thinking? > >"He thinks very highly of himself. People around him like and admire him, >too." > >"Well, what about hobbies and stuff?" > >"You don't know." > >"Hey, I rolled a 4! Something funny going on here..." What about supplying Role data up to the CD, and anything above, is the Real Stuff? Does that work better? (It probably won't be noticable unless the "overlap" CD is a minimum of 2-3, though.) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1443 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.