From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Jun 11 09:40:40 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 JAA22038 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:40:39 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id KAA17798 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 10:18:51 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 10:18:51 -0500 Message-Id: <200006111518.KAA17798@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 #1670 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Sunday, June 11 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1670 In this digest: Re: IN> Tether Question Re: IN> Tether Question Re: IN> Tether Question Re: IN> The old Eli IN> IN Rant - Introduction Re: IN> The old Eli IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems IN> Rant 2 - The Joys IN> A Thank You Re: IN> Tether Question Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> Rant 2 - The Joys Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 00:35:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Douglas Muir Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question Apropos of the Word of Nuclear Testing... As Walter pointed out, it has become rather rare lately. IMC there was a Demon of Nuclear Weapons who was _very_ powerful for a while, near Superior level, but who got ambushed and killed in 1984. The interesting thing is that the ambush was the result of cooperation between three celestial factions -- two separate groups of demons, and a task force of angels of Flowers (!) under the Angel of Arms Control (yes, there is one, and he's one tough bastard -- used to be a distincted servant of Michael, until he got weary of the struggle and switched over to Flowers). Another player in this little drama was Harry Truman, patron Saint of Dealing WIth the Bomb. The PCs had cause to work with Harry later, and it was a lot of fun for all concerned... Anyhow, point being, IMC nukes are the subject of considerable interest and concern on all sides, and anyone getting involved with them would be plunged into intrigue at the highest levels, and subject to a variety of sudden challenges and attacks. Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:16:51 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question >From: Douglas Muir >Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question >Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 00:35:19 -0400 (EDT) > > >Apropos of the Word of Nuclear Testing... He could work for the French secret Service :) jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:52:48 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question At 10:16 PM -0700 6/10/00, Jo Hart wrote: >>From: Douglas Muir >>Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >>To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >>Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question >>Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 00:35:19 -0400 (EDT) >> >> >>Apropos of the Word of Nuclear Testing... > >He could work for the French secret Service :) Clousou!!!!!!! - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:54:20 -0600 From: "Chris" Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli - ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rodemaker" To: Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 10:03 AM Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > > Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the > timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with > Justice or Mercy... Yes he does. APG - The Angel of Mercy - to insure all of his judgements are fair. Admitedly, not an AA, but there IS the Angel of Mercy. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 02:01:50 -0600 From: "Chris" Subject: IN> IN Rant - Introduction Hello, Generally, I lurk around on the list and keep myself up to speed on what's up and what's going on with IN. Rarely do I really find myself needing to make a reply when so many good people invariably do. I've noticed some interesting trends as of late, so I decided that I would write up some of the more interesting feelings I've gotten about IN lately. But I especially want to bring up the two most interesting discussions I've had with two very good friends of mine. I'm afraid of how long they might be when I'm done (but I will go out of my way to keep them under the 10K mark), so I'm going to split them into two posts. Rant 1 - The Problems, or Why In Nomine is looking like a worse game every time I look at it. Rant 2 - The Joys, or Why In Nomine will always look good to me. Quite different in approach, and probably some of the most valuable information I've ever gotten from my friends about my favorite game. Please let me know what you think. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 04:00:42 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 1:54 AM -0600 6/11/00, Chris wrote: > > > Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the >> timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with >> Justice or Mercy... > >Yes he does. APG - The Angel of Mercy - to insure all of his judgements are >fair. Admitedly, not an AA, but there IS the Angel of Mercy. And remember his dissonance conditions. To judge and sentence unfairly is Dissonant -- against his Word. Which means Justice is a part of his Word, if not the whole of it. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 02:19:14 -0600 From: "Chris" Subject: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Or, Why In Nomine looks worse to me every time I look at it. My good friend and I came fairly close to getting into a real knock down drag out fight on this little topic. He has several problems with the game, and I patiently listened to each one. Before I begin, let me preface this with a simple statement: He played it for as long as it was out up to about Final Trumpet. After a big break in it, this whole discussion came up. Big Problem 1 - Word Forces suck. There should be no such mechanic. If something like this needed to be on a sheet, no player should ever be trusted to earn a Word. Only the GM should track how well a Word does, but the celestial will just *know* when it's waxing or waning. Big Problem 2 - Major Inconsistencies - Too many changes to things. Canon is just too fluid and the feel of the game is suffering for it. Sometimes it's too light, and sometimes it's just plain bland, and there is no consistency of character to the major powers. New writeups are good, but they fail to address the simple fact that they had to be re-written to fit into canon and maybe, just maybe, some consistency will appear. (Not holding breath - examples - Baal suddenly being AA of Valor before Fall and his odd relationship with Michael described as good friends and as rivals (still looking for reference on those)). Big Problem 3 - Archangels and Demon Princes should not be Gods. The very idea of beings of such huge power existing is disturbing. The idea that *nothing* can realistically take them on and hope to succeed is very disappointing. The fact AA's and DP's have been mentioned as having been destroyed should indicate it can be done, but with the tricks they can perform, then how in the world was it done at all?!? With all this power and fear of crossing them, then God and Lucifer become mere foils and the War has no meaning. In his opinion, AA's and DP's should be powerful (18 Forces with, if it's *really* neccessary to use Word Forces, then no more than 21 - *ever*) with a really cool, well, schtick. It should be knowledge, experience, and being acknowledged as a Superior that makes one an AA or a DP, not huge cosmic, essentially infinite, power. With cosmic power, God and Lucifer are pointless beings with no place in the game and there is no reason to play. Big Problem 4 - The basic mechanic is far to simplistic and doesn't allow for any form of realistic control. It's just too wild to be used at all. A CD of 6 is huge, and you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting it. Just too wild. Reign it in somehow. Or better yet, dump it and do something better. Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. Big Problem 6 - Just what is the point of humans in a game where they can go squish at any time an angel or demon really wants them to, disturbance be damned? My answer: It's all in the GM's hands any way you look at it. The more I tried to support and justify some of his complaints, we eventually fell to nearly screaming and I cut it off saying, "We'll agree to disagree." He admits, he really liked it, but it's fallen apart. It's broken and he doesn't think it'll ever get fixed. I hate losing a good player over it, but what can I say at this point? Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 02:24:12 -0600 From: "Chris" Subject: IN> Rant 2 - The Joys Or, Why In Nomine will always look good to me. This discussion came up only about 30 mintues before Rant 1. This made for quite the contrast. My other friend has only played IN once, but instantly fell in love with it. My game, unfortunately, fell apart quickly because I neglected to properly explain the setting and feel. I assumed people would pick it up or just somehow *knew* what it was. Silly GM... Joy 1 - I love the simple mechanic. It's easy to learn and allows for *so* much. Joy 2 - I love the setting. It just needs an occassional boost, but it's great! Joy 3 - Flexibility. Wow, I can add just about anything I want (with GM approval, of course)! Joy 4 - You're a great GM! You know exactly what to do to make the game fun and enjoyable. I particularly like 4. But I wanted to do the first conversation as the last one as I wanted this to end on a good note. I see problems in the game and in the system and in the setting, but quite frankly, a good GM just *knows* how to cover them. At some point, I'll post my real problems with the game, and my workarounds. If you're interested. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 02:27:53 -0600 From: "Chris" Subject: IN> A Thank You There is one other thing I have to say: Thank You. Having been a GM for years, I know those two words tend to be rare, but welcomed. I just haven't seen them on this list in quite a while, and I just wanted to say them to all the writers of all the IN books and of course, the editors, and the playtesters, and to all the people who bring IN together. Without you, there wouldn't be such a great game to play, and such good people talking to one another about it. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 05:30:00 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Tether Question At 11:25 PM -0400 6/10/00, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 13:46 -0400 6/10/00, Daedalus3D@aol.com wrote: >>So, I tried to come up with all the transient Tethers I could think of that >>could be split or shared between Belial and Vapula. [...] >>In the end, I'm thinking about making the Calabite the Seneschel Remember that Vapula detests Calabim and has none as Servitors Also check LCast for the "attuned Seneschal" bit -- if it's a joint Tether, Vapula will undoubtedly want to assign one of _his_ people to chase around after the Wordboudn one. - --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: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 05:31:33 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli At 1:54 AM -0600 6/11/00, Chris wrote: >From: "David Rodemaker" >> Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the >> timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with >> Justice or Mercy... > >Yes he does. APG - The Angel of Mercy - to insure all of his judgements are >fair. Admitedly, not an AA, but there IS the Angel of Mercy. Who is detailed, as it happens, in Superiors 1. - --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: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 05:27:11 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems At 2:19 AM -0600 6/11/00, Chris wrote: > Big Problem 1 - Word Forces suck. There should be no such mechanic. If >something like this needed to be on a sheet, no player should ever be >trusted to earn a Word. Only the GM should track how well a Word does, but >the celestial will just *know* when it's waxing or waning. Word Forces are a terribly minor mechanic, and a recent one. That being said, I essentially don't use them save to figure out how much extra essence a Celestial has, since that makes a difference. And sometimes, when doing something *directly* tied to a Word, I'll add the Word Forces to the target number. It gives a real advantage to Words, and makes a Word-Bound more than just a sharply limited Servitor. > Big Problem 2 - Major Inconsistencies - Too many changes to things. >Canon is just too fluid and the feel of the game is suffering for it. >Sometimes it's too light, and sometimes it's just plain bland, and there is >no consistency of character to the major powers. New writeups are good, but >they fail to address the simple fact that they had to be re-written to fit >into canon and maybe, just maybe, some consistency will appear. (Not >holding breath - examples - Baal suddenly being AA of Valor before Fall and >his odd relationship with Michael described as good friends and as rivals >(still looking for reference on those)). The respectful rivalry between Baal and Michael has been been codified since very early in the Line. The Valor thing I'm iffy on myself. However, to a degree newer writeups need not only to reflect newly revealed Canon, but fix *broken* Canon. > Big Problem 3 - Archangels and Demon Princes should not be Gods. I totally disagree. Or, more to the point, Archangels and Demon Princes shouldn't be Gods, but *should* be completely and totally beyond the power level of Player Angels and Demons. >The very idea of beings of such huge power existing is disturbing. The idea >that *nothing* can realistically take them on and hope to succeed is very >disappointing. I'm curious as to why your friend thinks this could possibly be disappointing. Even Advanced Dungeons and Dragons pulled back from the idea of giving Gods hit points. There are things that the characters *shouldn't* be able to stop, unless it's such a totally munchkined out game that it isn't funny. >The fact AA's and DP's have been mentioned as having been destroyed >should indicate it can be done, but with the tricks they can >perform, then how in the world was it done at all?!? Not by 18 Force Angels. Oannes killed Velpher -- a Superior battling a Superior. But it weakened him so much that Belial then killed Oannes. Raphael died battling Legion, a Superior so powerful it took a suicide blast from another Superior to *weaken* it to the point that the combined forces of Heaven and Hell could defeat and destroy it. In other words, the death of a Superior is an epic, mythic event. And while every Malakite may dream of ending Malphas's corruptive existence, it would take a true Superior to put the blade to him. >With all this power and fear of crossing them, then God and Lucifer >become mere foils and the War has no meaning. That doesn't track at all. First off, God and Lucifer are defined as being so massively powerful that their mere attention causes miracles Divine and Infernal. (The d666 mechanic is a trick no Archangel or Prince can pull off). But they're also removed. As are the Archangels and Demon Princes. The game is the jousting of Demons and Angels, with a few Word-Bound and the *occasional* intercession of a Superior. >In his opinion, AA's and DP's should be powerful (18 Forces with, if >it's *really* neccessary to use Word Forces, then no more than 21 - >*ever*) with a really cool, well, schtick. It should be knowledge, >experience, and being acknowledged as a Superior that makes one an >AA or a DP, not huge cosmic, essentially infinite, power. With >cosmic power, God and Lucifer are pointless beings with no place in >the game and there is no reason to play. That's... *incredibly* prosaic. That's like saying that because Pakistan has a nuclear weapons program now, there's no point to being American or claiming America is a Superpower. This isn't a game of Power. It's a game for mankinds' souls. In fact, the very existence of the Disturbance mechanic generally *discourages* Big Power solving all problems. There's also a question of *relative* omnipotence (if you will.) To the dead bonsai tree in my apartment, I was God. I provided food, light, water and necessary prunings. When my benificence was withheld (it tasked me, I tell you), it withered away. I was its world. An 18 Force Word-Bound Angel would be effectively Omnipotent to me, though. I could do nothing to oppose it. I would live and die at its whim, if it deigned to notice me. A Superior was effectively Omnipotent to that Angel, capable of rending Forces or granting Distinctions to it. And God is Effectively (and totally) Omnipotent to that Superior. If your friend wants to go off killing Superiors and other totally Munchkinoid Tricks, tell him to play. To fight for a Word. To strengthen his Words and let them grow. Then tell him that after a few hundred years of playing, assuming you and he live that long, he can possibly become a Superior himself and go hunting. In the meantime, if the opposition that's set up for him isn't tough enough, bury him in Calabim. > Big Problem 4 - The basic mechanic is far to simplistic and doesn't >allow for any form of realistic control. It's just too wild to be used at >all. A CD of 6 is huge, and you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting it. Just >too wild. Reign it in somehow. Or better yet, dump it and do something >better. Tell him GURPS In Nomine will be out in a matter of weeks. Have him knock himself out. As for me, a mythic game deserves a simple mechanic that allows for miracles, IMHO. > Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. GM's choice. Ask Em Dresner if it's possible to play IN dark. That being said, I'd prefer a more consistant setting, light or dark. > Big Problem 6 - Just what is the point of humans in a game where they >can go squish at any time an angel or demon really wants them to, >disturbance be damned? The battle is *for* the Humans. If a Demon goes slaughtering humanity, the Demons end up losing the War, and their Superior tears them into tiny Force-bits. And some of the Angels (and most of the Demons) hate that fact, but there it is. It sounds like he doesn't want a subtle game, he wants a simple hack and slash one. And that's fine -- but his "big problems" with In Nomine all come down to "Hey -- I can kill way too much, but I can't kill enough! And there seems to be an effort on the part of the Forces of Good!" It's all right not to like the game, but his reasoning seems flawed pretty much entirely. >It's broken and he doesn't think it'll ever get fixed. I hate >losing a good player over it, but what can I say at this point? Probably nothing. This is a "religious" argument. He has decided he doesn't like In Nomine, and that's that. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 05:36:39 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Rant 2 - The Joys At 2:24 AM -0600 6/11/00, Chris wrote: >Or, Why In Nomine will always look good to me. > > This discussion came up only about 30 mintues before Rant 1. This made >for quite the contrast. My other friend has only played IN once, but >instantly fell in love with it. My game, unfortunately, fell apart quickly >because I neglected to properly explain the setting and feel. I assumed >people would pick it up or just somehow *knew* what it was. Silly GM... It happens. I have folks do some selected reading when they first start, or I take a lot of time and explain it. > Joy 1 - I love the simple mechanic. It's easy to learn and >allows for*so* much. > > Joy 2 - I love the setting. It just needs an occassional boost, but >it's great! > Joy 3 - Flexibility. Wow, I can add just about anything I want (with GM >approval, of course)! I agree with all three of those joys, and would add: Scalability. The game can be for the Destiny or Fate of the whole of Mankind, or it can be for whether or not little Jimmy goes to Heaven or Hell. > Joy 4 - You're a great GM! You know exactly what to do to make the game >fun and enjoyable. Well, I can't speak to that. But it sounds like some people enjoy IN under you. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 06:00:36 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems At 2:19 AM -0600 6/11/00, Chris wrote: >Or, Why In Nomine looks worse to me every time I look at it. > > My good friend and I came fairly close to getting into a real knock down >drag out fight on this little topic. He has several problems with the game, >and I patiently listened to each one. Before I begin, let me preface this >with a simple statement: He played it for as long as it was out up to about >Final Trumpet. Poor guy. > After a big break in it, this whole discussion came up. > > Big Problem 1 - Word Forces suck. There should be no such mechanic. They're optional. GMG, p. 24: WOrd-Forces: "A Word CAN be assigned..." (Emphasis mine, typos also mine due to wiggling baby in my lap.) This is why all the books which have Word-bound characters in them, starting with Sup2, say "Syggested Word-Forces." If the GM hates them, the GM can change the mechanic. If the GM doesn't think they should be on the player's character sheet, the GM can remove them from there. If the GM thinks BubblegumUnderSeats is a Superior-class Word, it is. > Big Problem 2 - Major Inconsistencies - Too many changes to things. Lack of Line Editor (and thus any coherent view) for the entirety of the Rev Cycle -- I came in in time to make a _few_ changes, but most of the material was already written at a time when A: there didn't seem time to revise it (ah, those Shedim of Fate!) and B: I was very new to my powers. > Big Problem 3 - Archangels and Demon Princes should not be Gods. Superiors are supposed to be things who push PCs around -- built- in plot hooks -- not things PCs can trivially kill. If you want to make Superiors more vulnerable, use the options on p. 97 of the GMG. Also observe their limitations, in the GMG around p. 99 if I recall correctly. Currently, only Makatiel is suggested to have been killed by Servitors, and even there it's not clear that they didn't have Superior help -- Oannes and Vephar were toasted by fellow Superiors, and Haagenti -- well, he ate Sloth before his Princedom, but his Sup2 writeup has some comments about how that might have happened with behind the scenes help. (Or not -- it's a rumor a GM can use, though.) Mariel was a snack afterwards. > Big Problem 4 - The basic mechanic is far to simplistic and doesn't >allow for any form of realistic control. Use GURPS IN. O:> Forthcoming. > Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. Matter of opinion -- lots of people say: "The setting is just way too dark! It should be lighter!" or "Man, it's too B&W! Make it gray!" This is why the GMG has a whole section on mucking around with the setting "contrast and brightness." > Big Problem 6 - Just what is the point of humans in a game where they >can go squish at any time an angel or demon really wants them to, >disturbance be damned? Observe the CPG. If the GM lets the point of humanity slip through the cracks... That's the GM's call. The CPG goes into humans in the In Nomine Universe. Some of the "disturbance = dissonance/damage" options from the GMG may also work on this. > My answer: It's all in the GM's hands any way you look at it. The more >I tried to support and justify some of his complaints, we eventually fell to >nearly screaming and I cut it off saying, "We'll agree to disagree." He >admits, he really liked it, but it's fallen apart. It's broken and he >doesn't think it'll ever get fixed. I hate losing a good player over it, >but what can I say at this point? That the Revelations Cycle had no one at the helm thinking anything out, neither did the APG, and we're all recovering from it. I'd just cherry- pick what I wanted from the Rev Cycle and APG and drop-kick the rest. As for the rest... Well, after being up since 330am with insomnia while the new baby was _sleeping peacefully_, I'm inclined to go into a cathartic Habbalite mode and say: "Look, you spineless monkey, if you like the setting at all, then tweak what you don't like and ignore the canon. Are you a slave to people who don't know what _you_ like or have you got the guts to make the changes _you_ want? If you can't do that, then have the backbone to cope with your shiftless lazy ways! Or are you a wimp?" (Oh, man, Habbalah are wonderful for taking a grump and expanding it to new heights, far beyond what one would really say...) Anyway, now that I've gotten the Habbalite response out of my system, basically the deal is that the GMG provides a lot of options as well as behind-the-scenes canon. All canon is mutable at the GM's whim anyway. Certain choices define how the basic game is done, and if one doesn't like those premises (such as "Superiors Are Not Killable By Mere Servitors Without Extraordinary Circumstances"), well, this one wonders why that one picked up the game in the first place... O:> But one can always talk the GM into changing those as well. My suggestion would be for him to take what he likes and run a campaign himself and see what the results of his changes are. If it's a fun game, hey, go for it. If some holes develop here and there, well, that's life too... O:> - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 06:05:49 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems At 5:27 AM -0400 6/11/00, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >[...] In the >meantime, if the opposition that's set up for him isn't tough enough, >bury him in Calabim. I like you. I've been up since 3:30 am, the baby is wiggling, and you're evil and I like you. >> Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. > >GM's choice. Ask Em Dresner if it's possible to play IN dark. Heck, read the logs where some PCs get kidnapped by the demons in Fiat... - --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: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:08:50 -0400 From: "BDP" Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems >>The very idea of beings of such huge power existing is disturbing. The idea >>that *nothing* can realistically take them on and hope to succeed is very >>disappointing. > >I'm curious as to why your friend thinks this could possibly be >disappointing. Even Advanced Dungeons and Dragons pulled back from >the idea of giving Gods hit points. There are things that the >characters *shouldn't* be able to stop, unless it's such a totally >munchkined out game that it isn't funny. On the other hand, while I would never run this as the main plot of a game, a chronicle which lasts for several years and builds up to the premise where a party of now-very-experienced PCs (who were, as per the setting of the game, amongst the most promising servitors of their Superiors to begin with, after all) joins together to take down a single enemy Superior is not necessarily Munchkin, merely Epic and Grandiose. Unless, of course, you are predefining Munchkin that way. >>The fact AA's and DP's have been mentioned as having been destroyed >>should indicate it can be done, but with the tricks they can >>perform, then how in the world was it done at all?!? > >Not by 18 Force Angels. Oannes killed Velpher -- a Superior battling >a Superior. But it weakened him so much that Belial then killed >Oannes. Raphael died battling Legion, a Superior so powerful it took >a suicide blast from another Superior to *weaken* it to the point >that the combined forces of Heaven and Hell could defeat and destroy >it. In other words, the death of a Superior is an epic, mythic event. >And while every Malakite may dream of ending Malphas's corruptive >existence, it would take a true Superior to put the blade to him. Haagenti. Sloth. Yeah, the back-written story is that "well, of course he had to have some kind of help from Kobal." Me, I find that as unsatisfying as saying that everything you don't like in Zelazny's Amber chronicles was a mistake of Corwin's addled memories. Why is it so hard to accept that Haagenti really *did* just eat his way up? >If your friend wants to go off killing Superiors and other totally >Munchkinoid Tricks, tell him to play. To fight for a Word. To >strengthen his Words and let them grow. Then tell him that after a >few hundred years of playing, assuming you and he live that long, he >can possibly become a Superior himself and go hunting. In the >meantime, if the opposition that's set up for him isn't tough enough, >bury him in Calabim. Again, since I don't know any parties involved, I have to point out that it's incredibly judgemental to slap the Munchkin label on someone without your knowing what his ultimate goal is regarding changing the unkillable-to-non-Superiors nature of Superiors. Personally, I like the idea of AAs/DPs being a different kind of entity, with a sea change in their fundamental nature. However, I also see no problem with them having some kind of weak point in that fundamental nature which, given years and years of planning to the exclusion of everything else (and assuming they don't find out while you're planning, which is unlikely but possible), you could possibly exploit. Last I checked, making a player work long and hard and go through stages of planning and strategy and character growth in order to reach a goal unreachable to NPCs was not, ipso facto, Munchkin. It's what we call an Epic. It may not be something you or I would run in our campaigns ... but to dismiss the idea automatically as Munchkinoid doesn't quite seem fair. Of course, it could also be that the original poster wasn't fairly explaining the view of the friend with whom he had this discussion. I think we all know how tough it can be to condense six hours of coffeehouse chatter into a couple of explanatory postings. ;) Ben (normally just 'zis lurker, ya know?) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:51:27 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems At 9:08 AM -0400 6/11/00, BDP wrote: > > >I'm curious as to why your friend thinks this could possibly be >>disappointing. Even Advanced Dungeons and Dragons pulled back from >>the idea of giving Gods hit points. There are things that the >>characters *shouldn't* be able to stop, unless it's such a totally >>munchkined out game that it isn't funny. > > >On the other hand, while I would never run this as the main plot of a game, >a chronicle which lasts for several years and builds up to the premise where >a party of now-very-experienced PCs (who were, as per the setting of the >game, amongst the most promising servitors of their Superiors to begin with, >after all) joins together to take down a single enemy Superior is not >necessarily Munchkin, merely Epic and Grandiose. Unless, of course, you are >predefining Munchkin that way. No, I'd concur with you. But at the same time, this becomes something of a culmination of years of Play time and experience, which would lead to several Word-Bound Players with Distinctions and a *lot* of tricks of their own. I can see a kind of Ultimate Game where it happens, but it would be on such a mythic scale that codifying the Superior wouldn't really be the point. I'd see it as being far more the players throwing all they have, and the GM stringing everything along until the players succeed. (If they get taken out, that would be entirely too anticlimactic.) But, especially given there is some known examples of this happening (with or without Superior Help being in dispute, as Beth said), I don't see a pressing need to set Superiors up as enemies to be one day knocked down. I see them as the Constants of the setting. >Haagenti. Sloth. Yeah, the back-written story is that "well, of course he >had to have some kind of help from Kobal." Me, I find that as unsatisfying >as saying that everything you don't like in Zelazny's Amber chronicles was a >mistake of Corwin's addled memories. Why is it so hard to accept that >Haagenti really *did* just eat his way up? Actually, I have no problem with that. Sloth being... well, slothful. He might not even react until he'd already been eaten down to Word-Bound level. And by then it was too late. I also think that had Haagenti tried to eat Baal, Baal would *still* be hosing off his sword, and Haagenti's remnant would be barred from All You Can Eat buffets worldwide. > >If your friend wants to go off killing Superiors and other totally >>Munchkinoid Tricks, tell him to play. To fight for a Word. To >>strengthen his Words and let them grow. Then tell him that after a >>few hundred years of playing, assuming you and he live that long, he >>can possibly become a Superior himself and go hunting. In the >>meantime, if the opposition that's set up for him isn't tough enough, >>bury him in Calabim. > > >Again, since I don't know any parties involved, I have to point out that >it's incredibly judgemental to slap the Munchkin label on someone without >your knowing what his ultimate goal is regarding changing the >unkillable-to-non-Superiors nature of Superiors. Heck yeah, it's Judgemental. As presented by the original poster, it's also the only way to possibly interpret the "Big Problems" of the game. If it's a major, Game Breaking Problem that PCs don't have a direct route to killing Superiors, to the point of a player using that as a reason he hates the game (and piling on Word Forces to boot, when in many ways Word Forces are just Reliquaries, and therefore hardly a breaking mechanic), one assumes that he has Superior-killing as a significant Campaign Goal. Which smacks of the same kind of thinking that had people reading through the original Deities and Demigods and salivating as they calculated how many +5 Warhammer Strikes it would take to knock Zeus down those four hundred hit points. IE -- combat and power becomes the point of the game. Which is, quite frankly, a Munchkin point. >Personally, I like the idea of AAs/DPs being a different kind of >entity, with a sea change in their fundamental nature. However, I >also see no problem with them having some kind of weak point in that >fundamental nature which, given years and years of planning to the >exclusion of everything else (and assuming they don't find out while >you're planning, which is unlikely but possible), you could possibly >exploit. I totally, one hundred percent agree. I don't think we need to have that weak point listed in the descriptions, though. It is, in the end, the point of an entire Campaign that assumes a *long* period of play, and therefore fully in the Gamemaster's province. >Last I checked, making a player work long and hard and go through stages of >planning and strategy and character growth in order to reach a goal >unreachable to NPCs was not, ipso facto, Munchkin. This isn't in any way what I said, either. The player in Chris's game was complaining because there was no quick and easy way to figure out how to kill Superiors. Let's say the player's wishes came true, and all Superiors had no more than 18 Forces, plus *maybe* *three* Word Forces for a maximum of 21. Let's assume said Superior had a Strength of Twelve and a Vessel/6, to boot. That's 144 Body Points. A huge number, but hardly unstoppable. A flight of Malakim with sniper rifles could be reasonably expected to gun down Baal whenever his Vessel was found, given that. And Celestial Combat? That same Flight of Malakim, if they were elite, could each have five or six Celestial Forces. And Baal would only have *Eighteen* Soul Hits. Every 18 Soul Hits that went by would cost Baal another Force. Boom. Boom. Boom. The desire to codify Superiors into defeatable opponents at the least is Hack and Slash. Munchkin is a safe bet. > It's what we call an >Epic. It may not be something you or I would run in our campaigns ... but to >dismiss the idea automatically as Munchkinoid doesn't quite seem fair. Your idea isn't Munchkinoid. The *complaints* as listed was. >Of course, it could also be that the original poster wasn't fairly >explaining the view of the friend with whom he had this discussion. I think >we all know how tough it can be to condense six hours of coffeehouse chatter >into a couple of explanatory postings. ;) Well, true enough, Ben. - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:04:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Bartley Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, David Rodemaker wrote: > I do like the idea that Eli handed out distinctions on an individual basis > rather than a hierarchical basis, *that* seems very Eli to me. The idea of > no Distinctions or Servitor attuments always seemed a little off to me... Eli has Servitor Attunements. In the main book, even. Were I GMing IN, Eli would have dozens if not hundreds of Servitor Attunements, some of which are just nonstandard and others of which require unusual amounts of effort to hand out. These last are often given as rewards, but don't confer rank and can't be treated as such since Eli will give the same Attunements to angels who haven't "earned" them but happen to be in a situation where the Attunements would be useful. Elizabeth Bartley e-bartley@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 10:13:37 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Chris wrote: > Big Problem 1 - Word Forces suck. There should be no such mechanic. Then don't use it. This is just a variation of the old problem with detailing canon -- for every GM who wants things laid out for them and gripes because they have to do it on their own, there's another who thinks everything should be left up to the GM and gripes at being "straightjacketed" when something is made explicity. I'm surprised that Word Forces is such a major gripe for you though....they have very little effect on the game, unless everyone is playing Word-bound PCs. >> Big Problem 2 - Major Inconsistencies - Too many changes to things. This has been improving lately....but probably too lately. >>>(Not> holding breath - examples - Baal suddenly being AA of Valor before Fall I did the extended Baal writeup, but someone else added that during editing. I didn't like it either. > Big Problem 3 - Archangels and Demon Princes should not be Gods. The > very idea of beings of such huge power existing is disturbing. It should be. > The idea> that *nothing* can realistically take them on and hope to succeed is very > disappointing. Depends on how you want your game to run. > The fact AA's and DP's have been mentioned as having been > destroyed should indicate it can be done, but with the tricks they can > perform, then how in the world was it done at all?!? By other Superiors. > Big Problem 4 - The basic mechanic is far to simplistic and doesn't > allow for any form of realistic control. You can always use the upcoming GURPS conversion. >>> Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. This is 100% subjective opinion and personal taste. Darken your game as you please, but it really irks me when people declare that In Nomine has a "Big Problem" because it doesn't happen to match their tastes exactly. > Big Problem 6 - Just what is the point of humans in a game where they > can go squish at any time an angel or demon really wants them to, > disturbance be damned? Disturbance shouldn't be damned -- if it is, you're not making Judgment and the Game as fearsome as they should be. >>>The more> I tried to support and justify some of his complaints, we eventually fell to > nearly screaming Sounds like one or both of you are being awfully immature. - -David ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1670 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.