From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jun 20 13:37:02 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 NAA21138 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:37:01 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id NAA16981 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:35:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:35:31 -0500 Message-Id: <200006201835.NAA16981@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 #1685 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 20 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1685 In this digest: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> Yeah, yeah, I know this one's pretty stupid... Re: IN> Legos Re: IN> A Christmas angel, how sweet ... Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books Re: IN> Legos Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books Re: IN> Weird Plot Idea-Adapting Tolkien Re: IN> Legos Re: IN> Adventure Plot Thingy II. Re: IN> Legos Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) Re: IN> Seedpack IN> IN PBEM games Re: IN> Adventure Plot Thingy II. IN> IN Lite Re: IN> IN PBEM games Re: IN> Seedpack Re: IN> Legos ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:01:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon > September, actually. I don't think the announcement has gone up on the > Web site yet, but it's been announced to the distributors. Excellently planned to hit just when I'm out of the country for weeks. :) - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:02:56 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Yeah, yeah, I know this one's pretty stupid... - --On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 8:59 PM +0000 "Erich S. Arendall" wrote: >> There is, however, a big difference between *useless* stupid and >> *useful* stupid. This was definitely the latter. Even if only for >> comic relief, this guy would make a fun addition to an >> adventure.... :) > > Indeed. Wonderful work again, Mr. Lane. Now when are you coming up > with the Malakite of Fire who holds the Word of Legos? >:) > Elohite of Creation. Has to be....I mean, if you stack 'em lopsided, the bricks just fall over... Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation (..."Jenga" is not a Word!) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:19:45 GMT From: "Erich S. Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> Legos > >> There is, however, a big difference between *useless* stupid and > >> *useful* stupid. This was definitely the latter. Even if only for > >> comic relief, this guy would make a fun addition to an > >> adventure.... :) > > > > Indeed. Wonderful work again, Mr. Lane. Now when are you coming up > > with the Malakite of Fire who holds the Word of Legos? >:) > > > > Elohite of Creation. Has to be....I mean, if you stack 'em >lopsided, the bricks just fall over... I was being a bit facetious, of course... I was really thinking more along the lines of a Kyriotate of Creation. Then the Word of Lego Mindstorms would go to a deserving Elohite of Lightning. Argh! Now I'm starting to think of which angel and superior would work best with each type of playset! ...Who would get Lego Castle Series, anyway? - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Demon of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, Impudite of The Game - ------------------------- Touched by an Impudite http://www.impudite.com Go Directly to the Blog http://www.impudite.com/abt-blog.asp ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:47:44 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> A Christmas angel, how sweet ... - --On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 7:19 PM -0700 Maurice Lane wrote: > **Well, maybe not. I like the image, though: demons > crash a bar full of Santas, start doing their thing, > and suddenly realize that everyone is pulling out > flaming swords. And _smiling_. A priceless mental image. This belongs on a commemerative plate somewhere. THANK YOU. =) Marc. Just Marc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:38:51 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon At 10:56 PM -0500 6/19/00, Andrew Hackard wrote: >At 11:37 PM 19/06/00 -0400, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >>(But then, in desperate plug for Superiors 4, coming this >>Geological Epoch to a Game Store near you, > >September, actually. I don't think the announcement has gone up on >the Web site yet, but it's been announced to the distributors. Mmm... September... just in time to pick up my spirits after the kids have ground me into the cold cold ground... good timing! - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:41:35 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon At 8:01 AM -0400 6/20/00, Emily Dresner wrote: > > September, actually. I don't think the announcement has gone up on the > > Web site yet, but it's been announced to the distributors. > >Excellently planned to hit just when I'm out of the country for weeks. :) All right, so the timing doesn't work for *everyone.* - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:53:49 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) At 4:13 PM -0700 6/20/00, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > >(Hmm, that's a little stroppy. Must be channelling David Edelstein. I'll try >to stay polite.) Stroppy? Stroppy? Stroppy! (Stroppy used to be one of my favorite words, until I realized I was the only one using it. *Clearly,* I was channeling Patrick while he was channeling David when I introduced Stroppy to the American Northeast.) >The people on this list _are_ the ones that have voted with their wallets, >Andrew. Don't tell us that IN Needs Our Dough. > >(Admittedly, I'm part of the problem. Haven't had to pay for a supplement for >abiout 2 years now, so SJG are just throwing profits away on me...) Yeah, terrible when they throw away profits on some guy who so actively and objectively playtests each supplement, clearly taking a good number of hours to really weigh them in. I haven't had to buy most supplements lately either. But then again, I tend to buy them anyhow -- in part because I want a copy of them faster than the playtest copy comes, and because I tend to (as mentioned back in the dim annals of the past) keep a copy of them at work too. I came very close (but ran into a minor problem of not having money) of buying one of the bundles because I needed second copies of those books and wanted GURPS:IN. But $80 on stuff I mostly already own is a big bite for a single paycheck. I *did* refer some friends to them, though. > > 6. Be positive. If the game fails anyway and you actively tried to prevent > > this, then you likely did the best that you could. > >Now this, while it's a little overly-optimistic, is something I can agree >with. Pointing out problems and discussing the games' future is a good thing; >becoming Cassandra and saying "I come not to praise IN NOMINE, but to bury it" >may not be as helpful. Well, Cassandra would be one thing. Marc Antony (in guise as Patrick) would be another. See, Cassandra O'Duffy no one would believe -- especially if he were wearing that slave tunic. He hasn't the figure for it. Patrick Antony, on the other hand, would use the speech to incite all of GEN CON into storming the gates, slaughtering the D&D3 Design Team and setting up a tribune government of three, including Patrick Antony, Beth and David Edelstein. This would prove unstable and there would be war, with Patrick Antony fleeing to Egypt in the company of Jo Hart and start an Asp Farm while David and Beth fight it out with Elephants. Mmmm... elephants. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 06:06:12 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon >From: Whistling in the Dark >> >At 8:01 AM -0400 6/20/00, Emily Dresner wrote: >> > September, actually. I don't think the announcement has gone up on the >> > Web site yet, but it's been announced to the distributors. >> >>Excellently planned to hit just when I'm out of the country for weeks. :) > >All right, so the timing doesn't work for *everyone.* > Don't worry. It's bound to be late :P jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 09:10:36 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books - --On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 10:38 PM -0700 Robert Knop wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Omentide wrote: > >> A constant succession of new books pleases the writers and the >> collectors but does it draw new players into the game? How >> offputting is it to a new player (or hopeful GM) to feel that she >> has to buy at least half a dozen different products to play/run >> the game 'properly'? Am I the only person on the list to have >> had some rules lawyer in a Convention game complain that I'm >> being ridiculously un-canonical because I've made things up rather >> than collecting every sourcebook and supplement for the game I'm >> running? Does this make me a lousy GM/scenario writer? The more >> complex a game becomes the more difficult it is for 'new' people >> to get into it. > > Tell those rules lawyers to just go away. If they don't like the > game you're running, they don't have to play it. > In Nomine is one of those games where you're telling a *story*. This lends itself to a more flexible "dramatic appropriateness" style of play and refereeing. I agree, if they can't cope with a story-driven mode, find another pool to swim in. Yes, we all have the kid(s) in our campaigns who do this no matter what the system - I tend to find that they're "young", mostly AD&D, Rifts, or Champions fanatics who can't cope with the idea of not using heavy weapons on a trip to the market*. Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation *And yes, there are GURPS fan-boys like this.... HIM: Man, I haven't shot at anything all night. I miss playing "GURPS Heavy Weapons", that was *fun*! ME: Uh, you know that GHW is a *suppliment*, right? HIM: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 09:17:45 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Legos - --On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 12:19 PM +0000 "Erich S. Arendall" wrote: >> >> There is, however, a big difference between *useless* stupid and >> >> *useful* stupid. This was definitely the latter. Even if only >> >> for comic relief, this guy would make a fun addition to an >> >> adventure.... :) >> > >> > Indeed. Wonderful work again, Mr. Lane. Now when are you coming >> > up with the Malakite of Fire who holds the Word of Legos? >:) >> > >> >> Elohite of Creation. Has to be....I mean, if you stack 'em >> lopsided, the bricks just fall over... > > I was being a bit facetious, of course... I was really thinking > more along the lines of a Kyriotate of Creation. Then the Word of > Lego Mindstorms would go to a deserving Elohite of Lightning. > I was making a bad joke about balance. Uh.... I'll be over here if you need me... > Argh! Now I'm starting to think of which angel and superior would > work best with each type of playset! ...Who would get Lego Castle > Series, anyway? > Blandine. Next? Marc. Just Marc. Elohite Angel of Salvation ("If there's a demon of legos, I wonder if there's a demon of static electricity...? How badly do you have to mess up to get THAT? I can see it now - Summon conditions: +3 Van de Graf Generator...") ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 09:29:54 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon At 6:06 AM -0700 6/20/00, Jo Hart wrote: >>From: Whistling in the Dark >>> >>At 8:01 AM -0400 6/20/00, Emily Dresner wrote: >>> > September, actually. I don't think the announcement has gone up on the >>> > Web site yet, but it's been announced to the distributors. >>> >>>Excellently planned to hit just when I'm out of the country for weeks. :) >> >>All right, so the timing doesn't work for *everyone.* >> > >Don't worry. It's bound to be late :P Oh, you are *so* right... Well, at least we should get to see cover art between now and then. Theoretically. - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:50:44 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > (Hmm, that's a little stroppy. Must be channelling David Edelstein. I'll try > to stay polite.) Thhhppppttttt!!! - -David (I resemble that!) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:26:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Omentide wrote: > > >Tell those rules lawyers to just go away. If they don't like the game > >you're running, they don't have to play it. > > What you say is totally valid for games run for fun, at home or in a > friend's home. However, I'm talking games at Cons. Demo games which are > designed to promote IN, not to stop people I wouldn't invite into my home > from buying the line. ... > Again, I'm talking about Convention games where some delegates might not be > aware of the way I tend to run things. Never having been to an actual gaming con (yep!), I have to profess some ignorance as to how things work there. I do know that one distributes-- either on paper or via the web-- brief descriptions of the game, telling the players the system, at least a couple of lines about the setup for the scenario, and what if anything the players bring to the table. Could not this also have a line or two about the GMs style? For, as anybody who has gamed for long knows, the GM's style and desired tone of play is at least as important as the gaming system for how the game runs, and knowing how to run the game. E.g., you could add to the description of your game, "This game is based on the In Nomine core rules and Liber Canticorum. The GM will not be referring to other books from the In Nomine line, so rules from those book may or may not be followed during this session. The GM prefers a characterization-rich, free-flowing game in which dramatic appropriateness is as important as strict adherance to all rules." That sounds a little too legalistic, but something of that nature might be stated. > >Nomine. A lot of the other books are very useful and helpful, but I > >wouldn't call them indispensible. They can enhance your game, but they > >don't enable your game. This may not be true with every game system, > >but I still do believe it is true with In Nomine. > > I guess I was trying to say something like that. Trouble is, I tend to > regard Liber Canticorum and Liber Castellorum as more or less indispensable > because they provide mechanics for 'stuff I want to do' which are missing > from the core book. Well, in your case, then those are books that you want to get. A creative GM willing to strick out a little bit on his own, coupled with players who don't care if the GM goes off from bits of the published sytem, could run even a tether-based game with only the core book. Yes, Liber Cast is extremely helpful in that case, and the GM might well want to get it, but I don't think it's absolutely crucial for the game to still be recognizably In Nomine in story, tone, and development. > What seems to be seriously missing is a handy 'players guide' containing > the basic information players (not GMs) need to know to create a character > and play within the core system. I'm not criticizing the IPG or APG here - > just that I reckon they're more use to GMs than they are to players. This function should ideally be served by the Core rules. (It *also* has GM's information.) I'm not sure I'd be so nuts about dividing the core rules into *two* books that form the core rules, for that is what would be necessary in order to produce such a player's guide. The other option would be to produce a slimmer book which is redundant with portions of the main In Nomine book, which also can be irksome to the GM who picks it up making sure he wants to know what his players know. The small-press RPG "Continuum" is designed with a player's section, followed by a GM's section. I've read, but haven't played the game, yet. Still, I can see where this organization may be annoying for GMs, who have information which might naturally flow instead scattered between two sections of the book. However, it does mean that there is a single, coherent narrative which is just for the players. I agree about the IPG and APG; they aren't core essential information, they're additional information fleshing out the core framework that comes in the main In Nomine book. - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:47:23 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Weird Plot Idea-Adapting Tolkien Charles Phipps wrote: > 2:) Middle Earth Chronicle: There are two ways to do this. You can either use IN mechanics on the Silmarillion characters, or you can map IN characters into Middle Earth. The first way, you write up the Valar as Superiors and the Maiar as servitor celestials. I'd probably do elves as races of Soldiers, with a couple of tweaks. Dwarves ditto. The second way, you decide that Yavanna = Novalis, Aule = David, etc., and then have to pick whether celestial politics has changed a LOT since the First Age, or the elvish depiction of the Valar pantheon is wrong, or the IN depiction of Heaven is wrong. I think the first way preserves the Tolkien flavor much better. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:57:05 EDT From: MarkDEddy@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Legos In a message dated 6/20/00 5:20:53 AM, witkiller@hotmail.com writes: >Argh! Now I'm starting to think of which angel and superior would work >best >with each type of playset! ...Who would get Lego Castle Series, anyway? Laurence himself, of course. It's the only hold Lilith has over him. She knows - and isn't telling. Mark (remembering comments about Good Rear Views (tm)) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:10:07 +0100 From: "Laurent" Subject: Re: IN> Adventure Plot Thingy II. > In Hell, you can change your Celestial appearance, right? Celestial appearance can not be changed easily in Canon. Walter thought about a secret song, but as he said, it's a *secret* song, and I don't think any Superior would be ready to give it away just to chase a demonling... Beth suggested hiding in a relic, which is very clever. I might use this one for my own plot, since I am facing the very same situation than Ben: my players are chasing a Balseraph who will hide in Hell. (why always Balseraphs, anyway???) Now I just thought about Dominic's... how do you call it? (English failing me)... cloak? It's hiding the AA's Celestial form, right? And I read somewhere that some of his servitors sometimes received a piece of it to be used as a relic. Can't remember where I read that, though, therefore I don't know wether it's Canon or not. Anyway, if Dominic just gives them a loan of a piece of his cloak (each), they can hide and travel "safely" through Hell. What do you think? In fact, it could even give the angels some additional powers (they wouldn't know about, obviously) if needed. Just a thing, though: you're sending 2 Malakim on a mission in Hell?!? Are you planning an Armaggedon-oriented campaign? Laurent. PS: I know I'm a bit late, but I haven't checked my email for 2 weeks... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:27:54 -0500 From: "Prodigal" Subject: Re: IN> Legos From: "Erich S. Arendall" > > Argh! Now I'm starting to think of which angel and superior would work best > with each type of playset! ...Who would get Lego Castle Series, anyway? Malakite of David. Gotta be. ;;;) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:39:49 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: Re: IN> Collecting vs. playing with few books >I do know that one distributes-- either on paper or via the web-- brief >descriptions of the game, telling the players the system, at least a couple >of lines about the setup for the scenario, and what if anything the players >bring to the table. Could not this also have a line or two about the GMs >style? For, as anybody who has gamed for long knows, the GM's style and >desired tone of play is at least as important as the gaming system for how >the game runs, and knowing how to run the game. Won't work. Not this side of the pond. Limited to 50 word description for pre-distribution in the flyer. Maybe 100 words in the programme but that doesn't get handed out till the actual Con itself by which time people will have pre-booked. Can put stuff up on the web but, having done this, not many people bother to look at it. Certainly not the people who sign up for the game on the day - on impulse or because they have nothing better to do. None of this is a major problem for me personally. Most of my GMing is done in Ireland where enough of the hard-core Con people know my style to flock to or avoid my table as a matter of course. >Well, in your case, then those are books that you want to get. We have ALL the books. We will amost certainly continue to buy ALL the books as and when they come out. >A creative >GM willing to strick out a little bit on his own, coupled with players who >don't care if the GM goes off from bits of the published sytem, could run >even a tether-based game with only the core book. Yes, Liber Cast is >extremely helpful in that case, and the GM might well want to get it, but I >don't think it's absolutely crucial for the game to still be recognizably In >Nomine in story, tone, and development. I agree totally. But the thread started out bemoaning the fact that IN sourcebooks are not coming out as thick and as fast as many would like. > > What seems to be seriously missing is a handy 'players guide' containing > > the basic information players (not GMs) need to know to create a character > > and play within the core system. I'm not criticizing the IPG or APG > here - > > just that I reckon they're more use to GMs than they are to players. > >This function should ideally be served by the Core rules. (It *also* has >GM's information.) I'm not sure I'd be so nuts about dividing the core >rules into *two* books that form the core rules, for that is what would be >necessary in order to produce such a player's guide. I don't think so. I'm thinking about the White Wolf strategy in terms of players handbooks. Also of other games which structure their books so that players know enough to play the game whilst allowing the GM to retain a bit more mystery. Having PCs discover some of the background in-game (rather than having them read it in the sourcebook) can be part of the fun. >The other option would be to produce a slimmer book which is redundant >with portions of the main In Nomine book, which also can be irksome to the >GM who picks it up making sure he wants to know what his players know. If you want to GM you need more information than you need if you just want to play. This is even more true if you want to write your own scenarios/campaigns. Running a game requires more commitment than playing one. Part of that commitment tends to be financial. I'm pretty sure that what IN needs to do is expand it's player base. A handy player-guide would help people get started as players. A couple of vignettes to set atmosphere, the core mechanics and a logically laid out section on character creation (maybe including the 'shorthand' step by step version from the IPG). Sure it's going to involve some redundancy (which makes it cheaper to produce - huge chunks of text could simply be 'lifted' from existing books), but it might well help to 'hook' more players. Some of whom will go on to buy more IN material. My own conception of such a book wouldn't include anything 'new' - nothing anyone already familiar with IN needs to see. A quick flip through a player's copy should tell you all a GM needs to know and it would certainly speed up (and reduce the frustration often associated with) character creation. Hilary Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:17:35 PDT From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area I have played in two IN campaigns and attempted in my copious spare time to run one. The first one was a disaster, full of munchkins and powergamers, and its only benefit was to introduce me to the game. The second one (PBEM) was wonderful, but the GM has disappeared and we have no idea where he is or whether or not he will ever reappear. As per earlier suggestions, I tried the SJ Games Gamefinder. It did not find a game in New Jersey. My husband and I are still loyally buying the books, but we would really love to find a game, either PBEM or tabletop, in the Central New Jersey area. Can anyone assist us? Janet Anderson dorigen@hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:19:53 -0700 From: Steven Feldon Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) >Quoth Amo Nympham: >> Quoth me: >> The current main book is something I feel I have to _apologize_ >> for when I loan it out >This is the biggest problem i've had without a doubt when trying to get new >people to play In Nomine. the main book, the _one_ book they _need_ to read >is a complete piece of layout tripe. they don't like reading it. i've gone >so far as to taking a used softcover i came accross, cutting the binding and >re-binding it to make it flow better. I've written summaries of the rules to hand to players to avoid showing them the main book. >> I'm going to use a Harsh Word. We need a Total Relaunch. >i can only wish. i think this is beyond even speculatoin and dreaming. I don't think it's beyond anything. If enough folks agree that it's a good idea, SJG will listen. I'm not sure they'll do anything about it, but if we don't speak up and say what we feel--and my post of yesterday was two months of thought about this situation squeezed into one page of text--they'll at least _listen_. They're real good folks, and they care what we think--they just have to filter that through what's good for SJG as a business. >> The major downsides of this are that it involves a) halting the line until >> 2/e can be done, done right, and very seriously playtested, >i don't think it needs to be seriously playtested, the mechanics are about >as playtested as they're gonna get, and a new mechanics system is _not_ the >answer. Sorry--here I was unclear. I don't mean the _game_ needs to be playtested. I mean the _organization_ needs to playtested. Print it out and _use_ it, and if it's not an improvement, well, let's not release it until it _is_. Because this is the Foundation of the New Thing, and it has to be Right. Also, I don't think that just because the mechanics are good doesn't mean a book doesn't need playtesting--it catches non-mechanical errors and other problems as well. >>four) pulping a lot of >> existing books and taking a loss, or getting people to buy them out, or >some > >umm.....i don't think that's practical. possible? yes. probably going to >happen with current shelf-sitting of things like Revelations (which is >becoming obsolete thanks to Superiors and PGs)? i'd hate to see it, but i >think my FLGS might just dump all the books they have sitting there that >haven't been moved in, well, as long as i've been visiting and IN's been >there. And how much good are those books doing _anyone_? If they become an impediment to a successful relaunch, they need to go. Look what's happened to Intel and Microsoft over the years trying to make the x86 and Windows backwards compatible. . . . (personal opinion, not company opinion. . . but Apple had the courage to make the jump to PowerPC even though it meant a break with the past, and it's done nothing but good for them.) >> Alternatively, offer the game only via _web_ subscriptions, with lower >> prices for the "books". >that will without a doubt kill the game. now it's only going to be picked >up by current fans, and then only those with computers. face it, without a >physical book in a store new blood isn't going to enter. which would get me >on another one of my peeves: Cover Art...but another day another rant. This offhand suggestion was out of place, because it's _not_ a suggestion on how to relaunch the game line. It's more a suggestion on how to cut expense so that the line can continue with only the N thousand current purchasers. A web relaunch might very well be a bad idea, I agree, but switching from expensive paper books to cheap digital ones might preserve the line if there's otherwise thought of it being cancelled. >Quoth Omentide: >A complete version by FTP or whatever is probably a bad idea. A 'lite' >version with 4-6 superiors (maybe some from each side), 6 or so PC's and >some NPCs, and the core mechanics to run them, a scenario and a few >adventure seeds to follow on from the scenario might work better. This >sort of thing if far from being the complete IN, is just enought to run >with and hopefully enough to get players sufficiently interested to go out >and buy stuff. It would also be an excellent MIB resourse and could be >used in various ways to promote IN. I'd recommend _not_ doing IN lite with both sides. First, it's much easier to fit just the rules for angels into a cut-down version--you need half as many choir/bands. Second, it makes for a book that can, um, go places a book with demons in it as PC's just can't. Third, you have less ambiquity about what angel's goals are: they're the good guys. It's easier to understand. Fourth, it gives people some reason to buy the main book--there's way more there. Unlike GURPS Lite, which can give away the core mechanics and the book still sells because it's got ten thousand detail mechanics in it, IN doesn't _have_ thirty-two pages of mechanics. If you give away too much of the background, you've given away the game. Just enough to be a taste and to be playable: that's what IN Lite should be. IMHO. >Quoth Maurice Lane: >I see your point, Steven. I just don't agree with it. Glad you could at least see it--I wondered how clear I was being. >In my opinion, you _can't_ come up with a filter for >IN that won't drive off current players and buyers. >For example, I like (in _IN_) silly, lighthearted >games with the contrast oscillating from Quantum Leap >to Good Omens. I like to send Demon Princes through >the Redeem-O-Matic. I like writing up incongruous >Word-Bounds and Silly Artifacts. In short, I like >goofy. And I dislike it, as a matter of personal preference. I have to admit that I was arguing my own personal position, but it's _also_ one I think is good for the game. Yes, if they picked a position and stuck to it, it likely _wouldn't_ be goofy, and that might cost you as a customer. . . but while you can run humorous D&D games, they don't leave giant "GM fiat" holes in the worlds. They sew them up. And the slowest selling D&D game world sells better than In Nomine. The World of Darkness has a clear opinion, and sells well, or at least most of the lines do. I just don't think that the openness and ambiguity that encourages the usage of IN for everything from mythic drama to slapstick is a selling quality, and what I'm trying to do here is conceive of an In Nomine that could _sell_. That we could proselytize proudly. I'm actually sorry if it doesn't sound as appealing to you, personally, or anyone reading this. But do you all think it would _sell_better_? >The issues that IN routinely deals with are complex, >and mysterious. The game should reflect that. Filling in the corners and limits of the world and deciding if David is immense, unstoppable force of nature that only barely recognizes humans as individuals or a guy wearing potholders duct-taped to his naked thighs doesn't restrict the complexity of the issues the game faces. What would V:tM be without the Humanity mechanic, or the concept of the Camarilla's Masquerade versus the Sabbat's open terror? Filling in the issues can _deepen_ the game, give the players things they know they can play against. A solid background isn't a weakness. steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:27:34 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> Seedpack > An interesting question, actually... Should a future > adventure-Cycle, if any, include a summary of major > events in the back 1-3 pages, and some seeds that > people ostensibly not-affected directly could use? > E.g., the rumor of a Malakite Falling making people > look askance at their local Virtues, and putting > all triads in the area into overdrive. It worked for WW. I say give it a try for IN. You have the same sort of effect (sort of) with the TNS for Traveller. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:47:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Knop Subject: IN> IN PBEM games On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Janet Anderson wrote: > My husband and I are still loyally buying the books, but we would really > love to find a game, either PBEM or tabletop, in the Central New Jersey > area. Can anyone assist us? How many IN PBEM games are out there? I'm running one myself, though I don't have any player openings at the moment. I know of at least three or so others. www.pbem.com is a good resource for PBEM games, but I never see any In Nomine there. If I were to create a "In Nomine PBEM resource page", would anybody be interested? - -Rob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:04:19 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Adventure Plot Thingy II. > Just a thing, though: you're sending 2 Malakim on a mission in Hell?!? Are you planning an > Armaggedon-oriented campaign? I wanna teach one of 'em a lesson in restraint. He's the whacko who shot an Impudite in the head -- three times -- when the Impudite was trying to save him from Kobal, who was having the time of his life chasing the Malakite via motorcycle. I didn't allow Malakim in my second In Nomine game, unless they were Malakim of Novalis. Or maybe, maybe, maybe Eli. > Laurent. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:13:26 +0100 From: Omentide Subject: IN> IN Lite > >Quoth Omentide: > > >A complete version by FTP or whatever is probably a bad idea. A 'lite' > >version with 4-6 superiors (maybe some from each side), 6 or so PC's and > >some NPCs, and the core mechanics to run them, a scenario and a few > >adventure seeds to follow on from the scenario might work better. This > >sort of thing if far from being the complete IN, is just enought to run > >with and hopefully enough to get players sufficiently interested to go out > >and buy stuff. It would also be an excellent MIB resourse and could be > >used in various ways to promote IN. > >I'd recommend _not_ doing IN lite with both sides. First, it's much easier >to fit just the rules for angels into a cut-down version--you need half as >many choir/bands. Second, it makes for a book that can, um, go places a >book with demons in it as PC's just can't. Third, you have less ambiquity >about what angel's goals are: they're the good guys. It's easier to >understand. Fourth, it gives people some reason to buy the main >book--there's way more there. Unlike GURPS Lite, which can give away the >core mechanics and the book still sells because it's got ten thousand detail >mechanics in it, IN doesn't _have_ thirty-two pages of mechanics. If you >give away too much of the background, you've given away the game. Just >enough to be a taste and to be playable: that's what IN Lite should be. >IMHO. You would need a little about Hell, Demons, etc, not as player options, but for the opponents, something to give the players to struggle against. I am not proposing a full write up of every chior and band, of every Archangel and demon Prince, of every Song, Attunement etc. It could be done with three choirs and three bands, a few songs and attunements, two or three Archangels, and one Demon Prince. Throw in the skill/ability resolution system. This is enough to sample, and with a scenario included which only uses the content of 'lite' (and possibly a couple of follow on adventure seeds) creates a consistent taster game and a potentially decent promotional pack. Ashley (who if this sort of idea was to be considered would be prepared to contribute). Ashley and Hilary omentide.omentide@virgin.net http://freespace.virgin.net/omentide.omentide ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:18:37 GMT From: "Erich S. Arendall" Subject: Re: IN> IN PBEM games >How many IN PBEM games are out there? I'm running one myself, though I >don't have any player openings at the moment. I know of at least three >or so others. I'm about to run one, and my player slots are full as well. I'm also supposed to be playing in one, too, but I haven't heard from they GM for a while (and he's on this list [you know who you are!]). >www.pbem.com is a good resource for PBEM games, but I never see any In >Nomine there. If I were to create a "In Nomine PBEM resource page", >would anybody be interested? I think there are quite a few IN PBEMs (more than 5?), but if my PBEM is any indication they fill up quick without need for a lot of advertising. :) I do think that a IN PBEM Resource page would be a good addition to the list of IN pages out there. In other words, I am interested. - -Erich S. Arendall "Shadow Sprite" Demon of Critical Failures at the Worst Possible Time for Players and the Best Time for GMs, Impudite of The Game - ------------------------- Touched by an Impudite http://www.impudite.com Go Directly to the Blog http://www.impudite.com/abt-blog.asp ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:21:51 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Seedpack >From: "David Rodemaker" > >It worked for WW. No it didn't. From the ones I've seen, their scenarios have been practically unplayable, railroaded, and generally unsuccessful, even if they were nicely written. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:46:33 -0500 From: Uncle Wolf Subject: Re: IN> Legos > "Erich S. Arendall" wrote: > Argh! Now I'm starting to think of which angel and superior would work best > with each type of playset! ...Who would get Lego Castle Series, anyway? Zadkiel, of course. Just take a look at the description of her Cathedral. [just don't ask about the Rapunzel tower, who is playing the part of Rapunzel, or what blackwing is playing the part of her Prince Charming. Zadkiel can protect lovers' secrets as easily as a person, place, or thing. Sometimes puts her at cross-purposes with Litheroy, the Super-Seraph, though. Tom Timberlake, Cadre Cherub of Heaven - -- "We are not always what we seem, and hardly ever what we dream." -Schmendrick Peter S. Beagle's "The Last Unicorn" ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1685 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.