From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jun 6 07:39:43 2000 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 HAA28355 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 07:39:43 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id HAA17232 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 07:34:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 07:34:56 -0500 Message-Id: <200006061234.HAA17232@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 #1661 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, June 6 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1661 In this digest: IN> Having fun with Words Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny IN> A momment of thought Re: IN> Uriel's ultimate fate/destiny Re: IN> Uriel's ultimate fate Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny IN> Human to Demon (Re: Karl Marx in Heaven/Hell) Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny Re: IN> Laurence and Baladine sitting in a tree Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Having fun with Words Re: IN> Having fun with Words Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Having fun with Words Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Having fun with Words Re: IN> Next Playtest? IN> The Malakim Conclave (Seed) Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Dark Fiction (Re: Love amongst Superiors) Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Love amongst Superiors (Sorry that it's long...) IN> Ofanim of the Sword and the Mercurian of the Sword Attunement Re: IN> Ofanim of the Sword and the Mercurian of the Sword Attunement Re: IN> Next Playtest? IN> Oannes? Re: IN> Next Playtest? Re: IN> Oannes? IN> [ADMIN] Take it to email! (Re: Next Playtest?) Re: IN> Love amongst Superiors (Sorry that it's long...) Re: IN> Writing for Pyramid Re: IN> Writing for Pyramid ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 19:13:02 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Having fun with Words I was curious if we might take this Michael angle (in my game "War" covers everything that is related to war including anger, revenge, victory, skill, prayer in battle, pacifism , and the like) while Lawrence has everything weapon related including programs/beliefs when used to specifically strike out at something. This got me thinking about creating a big list of words for In Nomine... Major Moderate Minor words that Heaven/Hell might give. I mean what qualifies as a minor word....exactly in Heaven-is Forgetfulness a Minor word? This is the Big Group here. I think it would be interesting to examine this and plop out some ideas. Like a big angelic "classifieds" - -Charlemagne Oh and just so you note-in my game our Shedim of Saminga before he fell angered at J.F.K. made a deal with a Renegade Kyrioite to be Oswald, the guy on the knoll, the Cop, and some bodygaurds too. Covered it up nice too... ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 2000 16:20:32 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny On Mon, 05 June 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >Judgement does not equal Justice. > > > In _In Nomine_, it does, for some value of Justice. Look at the > Dissonance Conditions of Judgment. > Being true "for some values" is not the same as equalling. However, never did I say that Judgement -could not- be just (indeed, I pointed out those same Dissonance conditions later in the letter), simply that it did not -have- to be. > >Or Temperance. > Only if you're one of the "Mercy faction" of Judgment. I sometimes wonder if it would be harder to play one of those that it would to play a Malakite of Flowers. - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 19:25:06 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> A momment of thought >It's like that Pastor -- you may not agree with a word he says, but >he's there when you need him anyhow. And that's something I can >respect. Well just to say something here my friend...Our church recently loss it's priest of a eighteen years. He was not especially well loved by a great number of parties and he died of a stroke coupled with alheizmers. I remember him as the most caring man I ever met...and very tall (He was 7ft and as I went to Catholic grade school school he was like a giant). Twas his care for the children of the school that led me to decide to become a minister myself (I'm Presbyterian by trade-nondenominational by truth)...and ultimately to find my connection to the Almighty (I won't cite everyone else who helped-take too long). Hearing about his death and the circumstances around him...I gained new insight into just how much he had to put up with as a priest of the Catholic Church. How much he was hated indeed by quite a few in the community. I guess the point of this article is (other than to sort through childhood memories) and make it In nomine related.... Jobs will always call you away and force you to make sacrafices...yet the clergy is for a great deal not just a profession but "who they are" and thus we view them as a symbol growing up amongst a select few others as our heroes. Firemen, police, sportsmen....astronauts. While we may find them to men in true life with just a very special calling, the wonder never entirely wears off. A note I guess for anyone who wishes to be a servitor of Christopher...and realize the power behind what Laurence speaks of in his honor bound institution. - -Charlemagne Sudden desire to do an homage game with a Catholic school and an honorable priest... ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 2000 16:41:30 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's ultimate fate/destiny On Mon, 05 June 2000, "Charles Phipps" wrote: > Basically the theories for Uriel I've seen so far is. > > 1:) The Once and Future King: Uriel as it has been suggested (thank you very > much) is just on ice til Armageddon or a similar time when he will be needed > anew. Uriel may be being sleeping, learning new things, being rewoven into > something more lethal, or something along those lines. Pining for the fjords? ;) > Motivations by God for this: Unrelated to the whole Jihad deal-it was just > time, Uriel had proven himself the supreme warrior of Heaven, Uriel's part > in Armageddon was the most important of them all and he'd proven himself > reckless and in need of training by the older powers that Yves is only the > least of.... I'll address this in Endgame. I think you'll like it... > Problems with this: None, however realizing God's motives is the important > part Ain't that the Truth.... > 4:) Imprisonment: Pretty much God was Po'ed he went after them and has bound > Uriel in a magic tower or whatevers up in Heaven perhaps being forced to see > exactly the depth of his crime, chained like Lucifer is in the Bible....he's > none to happy. One of my players came up with a funny illustration for what happened to Uriel: he was put in front of a chalkboard, infinite in length, and made to write "I will not purify Creation without permission" for eternity. ;) - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:47:29 PDT From: "Daniel Gallagher" Subject: Re: IN> Uriel's ultimate fate Well, when In Nomine was still in playtest, I remember complaining about how there were too many archangels and how Uriel and Raphael were missing. I soon receved a reply saying that they weren't sticking to Cathlic cannon and that I shouldn worry because Uriel would be appear in an upcomming book. I don't know if this still holds for it was a long time ago but I realy hope so. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 2000 16:59:32 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny On Sun, 04 June 2000, "Aaron Medwin" wrote: > > Would anyone be interested in seeing my Endgame writeup? > > I certainly would. What happens at the End is interesting, which is why I [snip] > Dark Victory was also entertaining, for similar reasons. By all means, > please share it. Y'know, when I originally asked if people wanted to hear my ideas, I envisioned a neat little writeup that described what happened in little vignettes. One email, maybe two, something I could toss off on a weekend. Oy. I have just been hit by God's Own Inspiration Mallet. I haven't been able to stop thinking about Endgame -all day-, and the ideas just keep flowing... So this may take longer than I thought. If I'm going to do something like this, I want to do it -right-. I plan to start on it tonight, and I don't know when the beast will be finished. Heck, if it's good enough I may even solicit it to Pyramid. (Beth, what are the rules for Pyramid submissions regarding articles previously published, in whole or in part? I mean, I'd love to get input from the listmembers regarding the project by selectively quoting parts of the story, but I don't want that to invalidate any chance of getting it published. A private reply will be fine, thanks.) I'll let y'all know iof anything changes. - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 2000 17:44:46 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny On Mon, 05 June 2000, "Charles Phipps" wrote: > > >Afraid I don't get the reference. > > Neither does Yves. > When Eli heard it...he just laughed and smirked. > Having figured it out a long time ago. *sigh* So are you going to tell us, or just be cryptic? > Forgive me if I wonder if Dissonance: Fanaticism will not be as readily > noticible as normal. You're forgiven. Remember, Dominic hangs out with Laurence, of all people. If Dom started acting funny, I think his Malakite buddy would tell him. I also think Dom checks himself for Dissonance and Discord on a regular basis. Just to make sure. > >It's not supposed to. Justice, last I checked, was Judgement tempered with > Grace. Dominic Judges, and if >he's wrong, God intercedes. > > That's a dangerous notion but an understandable one. Dangerous in what way? > I half suspect God is sick of his angels nodding and agreeing without > understanding. Humans do it, too. Worse, they often do it without -thinking-. - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:24:35 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Human to Demon (Re: Karl Marx in Heaven/Hell) At 3:29 PM -0400 6/5/00, Charles Phipps wrote: [...[ >Well personally I don't believe any humans have ever suceeded in working >their way up to being a demon. Humans can't become demons. The best that happens, a Prince rips the Ethereal Forces out of the human and glues them onto a demonling, causing the result of a demon who has some (usually a bit vague and/or damaged) memories of being a human. But the human soul who thus donates the Forces is dead and destroyed and not coming back. This has been a message from the Servitors of Revelation, in search of a better tomorrow through telling the truth when demons tell lies. (You see, demons _say_ that humans can become demons... Makes a lovely lie...) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:36:17 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Dominic and Destiny At 4:59 PM -0700 6/5/00, Casca wrote: >(Beth, what are the rules for Pyramid submissions regarding articles >previously published, in whole or in part? Blest and bedamned if I know off the top of my head. Ask Steven Marsh, the Pyramid editor, what _he_ thinks. I just know that if it's very long, I'd far rather that you post a URL, and maybe a short teaser or two, than the whole blessed thing... >selectively quoting parts of the story, but I don't want that to invalidate any >chance of getting it published. A private reply will be fine, thanks.) It's a question that comes up often enough -- I'll answer hwere. O:> Oh, first place to look would be: www.sjgames.com/general/guidelines/writers And then the Pyramid link. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:29:53 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Laurence and Baladine sitting in a tree At 3:59 PM -0400 6/5/00, Charles Phipps wrote: >>Huh? I'm not parsing that... > >Basically translated I'm saying in In Nomine you don't have to look at >anything written by a human scholar about the divine with a grain of salt. Um, right. I think that's what I was saying too. That even Laurence knows that the bible can be in error. >However as an authority figure we can't relate to him very well alot either >or want to call him friend. Who's this "we" kemosabe? O:> (Go on, look at Superiors 1...) >The question thus however is does he believe that angelic "sex" is sex in >the earthly sense or does he believe it is a sacred bond for one person and >one person alone. A-yup. >>(Sort of a "if sex is for procreation, does procreation = sex?" >>question.) > >>On Earth, you mean? Nope. In Heaven -- if one takes the "do sex for procreation only" (i.e., no birth control) as an Earthly command, then one has to decide how it _relates_ to a celestial being in Heaven. Which is something I'd probably wind up toying all over the place with in a personal campaign, and saying zilch about in canon. Heh. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:06:13 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? Andrew Hackard wrote: > You know, I'm starting to have real problems with these misstatements of > what I was saying. :-) Then be more clear. > Seriously, I'm not asking people to review stuff they hate just so I can > clip a quote for the Web site. I'm not even asking people to review stuff > they *like* just so I can clip a quote for the Web site. What I *am* asking > is that, if they are so moved to write a review, that they post a pointer > (or, hell, just e-mail me directly) so I can check it out. This is a very fine line, and IMO, you are crossing it. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:13:25 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? Douglas Muir wrote: > 3) Motes, beams, and eyes, Dave. I well recall your getting > distinctly huffy when I posted a review of the CPG that was less than > adulatory. Absolutely untrue. I got huffy when you said that the CPG was "mostly just reprinted material," which is simply not correct. I said nothing about anything you might have said that was less than adulatory about the _quality_ of the contents. And making a comment on the list hardly counts as "posting a review" in any case. You seem to have a problem with making accurate statements. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:06:42 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> Having fun with Words > This got me thinking about creating a big list of words for In Nomine... I suggest that you buy the GMG. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:26:52 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Having fun with Words At 10:06 PM -0500 6/5/00, David Rodemaker wrote: > > This got me thinking about creating a big list of words for In Nomine... > >I suggest that you buy the GMG. Bwah? Look, I love the GMG, and yes it has good rules for Words.... But wouldn't a Dictionary and Thesaurus be better choices? Or the Gustav Angel reference? I mean, you don't need *much* to know what's a good Angelic Word, and almost *anything* makes a good Demonic 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: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:43:17 -0400 From: Jason Schneiderman Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? >A review should be a review, period. If it's a GOOD review, great. But >repeatedly urging fans to write (good) reviews ("and don't forget your >sound bites which will look real purdy in our advertisements!") strikes >me as just a little bit sleazy. If it's sleazy, David, it's not entirely uncommon. When I used to work for one of the Major Industry Magazines that Still Runs Reviews, we were required to place a 'pull quote' in each review - something to put in very large type in a contrasting color so that the skimmer's eye would catch it. Jason Schneiderman, Balseraph of the Media, former Demon of Game Review * * * * * "I'm addicted to stress that's the way that I get things done if I'm not under pressure then I sleep too long and I hang around like a bum and I think I'm going nowhere and that makes me nervous..." Jason Schneiderman jadasc@ma.ultranet.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:44:16 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> Having fun with Words > At 10:06 PM -0500 6/5/00, David Rodemaker wrote: > > > This got me thinking about creating a big list of words for In Nomine... > > > >I suggest that you buy the GMG. > > Bwah? > > Look, I love the GMG, and yes it has good rules for Words.... > > But wouldn't a Dictionary and Thesaurus be better choices? Or the > Gustav Angel reference? I mean, you don't need *much* to know what's > a good Angelic Word, and almost *anything* makes a good Demonic one. Yes, but from the *rest* of his post it doesn't sound like he has read the GMG. "What qualifies as a Minor Word?" And he only listed three Word catagories... The Gustav is excellent. But does suffer from the differences from RW angelic lore and IN celestial lore. Sometimes it doesn't really translate but it is a great place to start. Grabbing an encyclopedia or thesaurus would work almost better I think. Hmmm... nice idea BTW. The APG had a good list of angelic Words as I recall under each choir, can't remember if the IPG did though. There AA Beth, I *finally* came up with a reason to suggest the APG to someone. Now Phillip, buy one copy of the GMG, and an individual copy of the APG for each Choir. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:48:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, David Edelstein wrote: > Douglas Muir wrote: > > 3) Motes, beams, and eyes, Dave. I well recall your getting > > distinctly huffy when I posted a review of the CPG that was less than > > adulatory. > > > Absolutely untrue. I got huffy when you said that the CPG was "mostly > just reprinted material," which is simply not correct. I said nothing > about anything you might have said that was less than adulatory about > the _quality_ of the contents. My impression then and since was that you were, in general, disgruntled with my low rating, though the reprinted material question was the specific issue that you raised. > And making a comment on the list hardly counts as "posting a review" in > any case. IIRC I posted it to one of the gaming NGs. If you want to try digging it up on deja, it would be under my old hotmail address, dated within a week or so after I sent it to the list, and with "In Nomine" somewhere in the header. > You seem to have a problem with making accurate statements. Not as far as I know. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:14:13 -0500 From: "Kiara S. Legner" Subject: Re: IN> Having fun with Words > >I suggest that you buy the GMG. >Bwah? >Look, I love the GMG, and yes it has good rules for Words.... >But wouldn't a Dictionary and Thesaurus be better choices? Or the >Gustav Angel reference? I mean, you don't need *much* to know what's >a good Angelic Word, and almost *anything* makes a good Demonic one. As regards, I believe, the concept of Major/Minor Words... Regards, Ki ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 00:03:39 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? At 11:43 PM -0400 6/5/00, Jason Schneiderman wrote: > >A review should be a review, period. If it's a GOOD review, great. But > >repeatedly urging fans to write (good) reviews ("and don't forget your > >sound bites which will look real purdy in our advertisements!") strikes > >me as just a little bit sleazy. > >If it's sleazy, David, it's not entirely uncommon. When I used to work for >one of the Major Industry Magazines that Still Runs Reviews, we were >required to place a 'pull quote' in each review - something to put in very >large type in a contrasting color so that the skimmer's eye would catch it. It's actually a pretty common practice in reviewing regardless. Another way of putting it is "a summation." If it can be a good soundbite, good enough. But it's something that the reader goes away with. This can be positive, or negative (Ebert's "Watching Battlefield Earth, I realized I was watching the punchline for every bad movie joke for years to come" is a pullquote, albeit one the company won't put on their movie poster.) It's also called "writing an entertaining review." Honestly, I don't think Hackard's comments were all that out of place. If anything, it highlights a part of modern publishing, and that should be of interest to anyone looking to break into it, *especially* if they're looking beyond RPGs. (You want sleazy? Look into self-publication sometimes. About the only way to make money is to Sell Sell Sell! Including sending lots of comps to lots of Reviewers in hopes one or three of them will review the book positively, so you can load your back cover with it.) - -- 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, 5 Jun 2000 21:18:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: IN> The Malakim Conclave (Seed) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:43:14 -0400 From: "Yeager, Alex" Subject: IN> The Malakim Conclave (Seed) >This is the intro/setup for a scenario I used for >last year's con season. Cute as all hell (pardon the pun). I liked it. You know, it occurs to me that the two AAs most likely to be contacted by the Other Side on the problem would be Dominic or Novalis. Seeing as neither AA's Malakim are thought of all that highly by their Choirmates, and seeing as both AA's have gotten the warning by highly unofficial, verboten means, and seeing as revealing their unofficial contacts will cause too many problems later on, I see no other logical course of action but to send out a mixed Judgement/Flowers team to handle the situation quietly*. Morgan (FAW) Kyriotate of Destiny Petitioner for the Word of Strange Bedfellows *Yes, I just said "mixed Judgement/Flowers team" with a straight face**. **Barely. ;) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:48:41 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? Whistling in the Dark wrote: > (You want sleazy? Look into self-publication sometimes. About the > only way to make money is to Sell Sell Sell! Including sending lots > of comps to lots of Reviewers in hopes one or three of them will > review the book positively, so you can load your back cover with it.) Well, speaking as a small publisher and someone who deals with self-publishers, it doesn't _have_ to be sleazy. You push the book to buyers because you believe in the book's worth. And sending comps to reviewers is something that _all_ publishers do, big or small. Postive pullquotes have a definite postive effect on a book's selling profile. Look at how hard Pagan market Delta Green - and how many positive pullquotes they have on the books. (And now, for some IN content. If I were in Andrew's place, I'd be doing just this - sending copies of IN to major industry names or reviwers, looking for marketable pullquotes. Pushing that angle here isn't really as handy, because there aren't many recognizable industry figures or writers on this list.) - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia (honestly not a particularly sleazy person.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:39:13 -0500 From: "Tafka J." Subject: Re: IN> Dark Fiction (Re: Love amongst Superiors) At 1:43 PM -0400 06/05/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 12:57 PM -0400 6/5/00, Mason Kramer wrote: >>I very much agree. It's also not for squeemish adults. (Beth, you're sick as >>all get-out. I mean that in the best possible way.) Yes, she is. Mind, that's not really a _bad_ thing to be. };;;> > _Thank_ you! It's not often I get to show off my >Inner Shedite... Well, not as often as I'd like. That's why you must keep Bon-Bons on hand, to feed the Inner Shedite. Lest it turn against _you_! (Bwah, now my evil-evil-evil Muse is considering writing Dark-Fiction involving a Shedite of Lust, and a Certain Numinous Corpus [Hint: It's not the 'ornemental' varient either]. I'll let your imaginations figure it out.) Be seeing you, - - Tafka J. = tafkaj@thrifty.net # Balseraph of Fate, Marquis of Delusions of Grandeur ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 00:34:30 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? At 2:48 PM +1000 6/6/00, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > > > (You want sleazy? Look into self-publication sometimes. About the > > only way to make money is to Sell Sell Sell! Including sending lots > > of comps to lots of Reviewers in hopes one or three of them will > > review the book positively, so you can load your back cover with it.) > >Well, speaking as a small publisher and someone who deals with >self-publishers, it doesn't _have_ to be sleazy. You push the book to >buyers because you believe in the book's worth. Oh, I guess I know that. I'm just cynical as I calculate costs. (And for poetry, no less, so I'm already looking at making no money at all. But you have to *try,* or what's the point of Self-Publishing?) >(And now, for some IN content. If I were in Andrew's place, I'd be >doing just this - sending copies of IN to major industry names or >reviwers, looking for marketable pullquotes. Pushing that angle here >isn't really as handy, because there aren't many recognizable industry >figures or writers on this list.) Absolutely. Pushing for the buzz at all angles. - -- 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, 05 Jun 2000 21:46:03 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Love amongst Superiors (Sorry that it's long...) >From: Maurice Lane >>Neat little double-bind we've stuck ourselves in here, >eh? Of course, if you just dump Paul completely >(something that I do in my own personal theology), >then Laurence is in the clear for judicious >tension-relief I don't think you can just dump Paul completely if you are a hardline by-the-books Christian :) But everyone should read "The Passoer Plot" if they want a good laugh. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 00:47:00 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: IN> Ofanim of the Sword and the Mercurian of the Sword Attunement I'm building an Ofanite of the Sword for a friend's game, and just realized that the Mercurian of the Sword attunement is unrestricted. Is it me, or does it become obsenely hard to hit an Ofanite of the Sword who takes this attunement? Or should the resonance and this attunement not work together? - -- 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, 6 Jun 2000 00:56:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Ofanim of the Sword and the Mercurian of the Sword Attunement On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > I'm building an Ofanite of the Sword for a friend's game, and just > realized that the Mercurian of the Sword attunement is unrestricted. Ah hah... neat. > Is it me, or does it become obsenely hard to hit an Ofanite of the > Sword who takes this attunement? Or should the resonance and this > attunement not work together? IMC resonances work with everything. And, yeah, those two together would make things... tricky... If it was my campaign, I'd allow it, but I'd want the player to come up with a *good* backstory as to why he's got it. (thoughtful pause) If it's that mean a combo, you'd expect Laurence to be handing it out like popcorn to Ofanim all over the place. And if not, there'd be a reason why not... Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 01:21:18 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? Douglas Muir wrote: > My impression then and since was that you were, in general, disgruntled > with my low rating, though the reprinted material question was the > specific issue that you raised. Your impression was and is incorrect. I took specific issue with the comment about reprinted material because that's the comment that was patently untrue. Everything else is subjective, and what's the point of arguing with someone who says "I don't like this"? (I'm NOT John Wick.) >>> IIRC I posted it to one of the gaming NGs. Then I wouldn't have commented on it, since I don't read those. You posted it here on the list. > You seem to have a problem with making accurate statements. >>>Not as far as I know. Clearly. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 02:18:03 -0400 From: "EDG" Subject: IN> Oannes? Okay, quick canon trivia question, 'cos I can't find it anywhere that I have to look - to what Choir of angels did the deceased Oannes, Archangel of the Waters belong? Thanks, EDG ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 03:04:31 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Next Playtest? >>>> IIRC I posted it to one of the gaming NGs. > >Then I wouldn't have commented on it, since I don't read those. You >posted it here on the list. I just wrote, very clearly, that I posted it to _both_ the newsgroup _as well as_ the list. Are we speed-reading today? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 06:15:20 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Oannes? At 2:18 AM -0400 6/6/00, EDG wrote: >Okay, quick canon trivia question, 'cos I can't find it anywhere that I have >to look - to what Choir of angels did the deceased Oannes, Archangel of the >Waters belong? IIRC, it has not yet been stated. (I could be wrong; it could be in the APG.) For some reason, I'd been thinking of him as Ofanite -- one of the few who could keep up with Janus, around the time that Janus got _his_ Word. (That _is_ from the APG history.) (And, BTW, the IPG did have "notable people" including Word-holders.) (But not pot=holders, which is another in-joke altogether, but rather funny when one's been awake since 4:30 am.) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 06:15:19 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> [ADMIN] Take it to email! (Re: Next Playtest?) Can we PLEEEEEEEEEZE take the yes-you-did/no-you-didn't off the main list? Like, NOW. Before I start the threatened "u-n-s-u-b everyone connected" policy that I'm just _itching_ to try out at this far too early time of the day. (Did you know a baby can fuss crankily and noisily with her eyes shut tight and apparently while asleep? You do now.) - --Beth, Sleepless Djinn Princess of List Admin ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 2000 03:48:22 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Love amongst Superiors (Sorry that it's long...) On Mon, 05 June 2000, "Jo Hart" wrote: > >eh? Of course, if you just dump Paul completely > >(something that I do in my own personal theology), > > I don't think you can just dump Paul completely if you are a hardline > by-the-books Christian :) I think I know what Moe is saying here. Feel free to correct me if I get it wrong. Paul was instrumental in the spread of Christianity, no denying that. He evangelized extensively and travelled throughout the known world, spreading the Word and helping found churches. BUT... he was never a prophet, never an apostle. God only spoke to Paul once, on the road to Damascus; there are no recorded instances of this happening again. Similary, I cannot recall Paul ever healing the sick or casting out demons in the manner of the apostles. So I think Moe is saying here that Paul had his heart in the right place, but since he is not recorded as prophesying, his epistles need not be taken as the Word of God, and anything in them you disagree with you may chalk up to human misinterpretation of God. If I'm incorrect about -any- of this, please let me know. > But everyone should read "The Passoer Plot" if they want a good laugh. > > > > jo > ________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 2000 03:55:16 -0700 From: Casca Subject: Re: IN> Writing for Pyramid On Mon, 05 June 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > I just know that if it's very long, I'd far rather that you post > a URL, and maybe a short teaser or two, than the whole blessed > thing... If I did post it here, it would be in chunks. > Oh, first place to look would be: > www.sjgames.com/general/guidelines/writers > And then the Pyramid link. It says they don't accept fiction submissions. Crap! Ah well....guess I'm posting to the list, then (good for list, bad for my prospective writing career). - -- Casca "...I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphs, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying...At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke." -- Isaiah 6:2,4 _______________________________________________________ Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Many to choose from! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 08:47:51 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Writing for Pyramid At 3:55 AM -0700 6/6/00, Casca wrote: >On Mon, 05 June 2000, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > >> I just know that if it's very long, I'd far rather that you post >> a URL, and maybe a short teaser or two, than the whole blessed >> thing... > >If I did post it here, it would be in chunks. Moderately well-spaced chunks, though, eh? A whole bunch of little chunks, close together, is just as bad as one megapost for the purposes of filling up digests (with what the digest receivers may or may not be interested in), and causing _more_ digests to be sent out quickly (they're content based, IIRC, not time based; i.e., a digest is sent up when the "buffer" has X lines in it), and making people's mailboxes fill up and (for those with either # of messeges or amount of K limits)... Bounce right into _MY_ mailbox! Rule of thumb: if it's over 10K, it shouldn't be going onto the list in a way that will cause the above to happen. Because I get _reeeeeeeal_ snarky when I have umpteen jillion bounce messages in my mailbox, and if they happened because _one_ person had a one-project postfest... Ya get my drift, or do I hafta send my Habbalah around ta rough ya up? >> Oh, first place to look would be: >> www.sjgames.com/general/guidelines/writers >> And then the Pyramid link. > >It says they don't accept fiction submissions. Crap! Ah well....guess >I'm posting to the list, then (good for list, bad for my prospective >writing career). Note that while _they_ don't do fiction, the INC does -- with a few teasers, the rest could perhaps go there (once you've tracked EDG to his lair, or Graveyard Greg, IIRC?) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1661 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.